Keeping an eye on the Republican Presidential Melee has been an emotional rollercoaster. I try to follow a simple rule: vote for the most conservative candidate. The problem with that rule is that lately, the candidates have been displaying some rather disappointing weaknesses.
Mitt Romney, who I actually wanted to vote for in the last presidential primary, is a Rockerfeller Republican, a technocrat who has changed his personal positions on so many issues in order to appeal to his constituents, that I really can't support him. The only good news about Romney is that while he won't do much for conservative principles, he will in all likelihood turn the economy around and yield to pressure from Tea Party type Congress folks to cut, cut, cut. If we win back the Senate. Yikes.
Herman Cain - Mr. Cain was brought to my attention by my boss, a staunch WASP associate pastor, back when Cain was still polling in the single digits. To be honest, he is quite appealing. He knows business, he speaks his heart, even when his opinions clearly go contrary to the conservative base (like with his opinion on abortion), but then when the backlash comes, his campaign (and he himself) suddenly lie about what was said. "Oh he made a mistake. He MEANT to say..." isn't something you can say to a foreign leader. Recently Cain made it relatively clear that he didn't know China had nuclear weapons. Huh? Seriously? This man's knowledge of foreign policy is the absolute weakest of any candidate. Considering how much our "standing" with foreign nations has improved under Obama, how we deal with foreign nations is paramount to the next presidency.
Rick Perry - Mr. Perry is my governor and I basically have two problems with him. The first is his position on illegal immigration and allowing illegal immigrants to get in-state tuition. I disagree with him on this. The problem here is that in TEXAS, he has to pander to the Hispanic block in order to get elected. If he suddenly switches his position on a national level, he'll alienate that block here in Texas. Tough choice for the governor. Perry's other problem is that his handlers have shown some dramatic incompetence in preparing the the Governor for his debates. Here in Texas, he's come across as smooth and prepared. On a national level, he's now being forced to run as a "doer, not a talker." Give me a break. It's like the first time he's run into REAL resistance to his campaign he folds under the pressure. Not a good trait for a presidential candidate.
Newt Gingrich - of all the candidates, this man is the one I'd prefer to vote for. He's articulate, knowledgeable, goes after Obama or the press during debates, and has the ability to make Obama look like an unlettered oaf in any debates. But the truth is that Newt Gingrich has a lot of personal baggage that will be fresh for many Americans in a general election. How many wives has he had again? Newt needs to be part of the next administration - I agree. President? Probably not. I'd accept him as a VEEP though. Wouldn't a debate between him and "foot-in-his-mouth" Joe be hilarious?
Michelle Bachman - I originally liked a lot of the things Bachman was saying, but as the campaigns moved along, Ms. Bachman sank in my opinion due to her clashes with Tim Pawlenty and now Rick Perry. She's said some pretty stupid things (like the whole bit about Gardasil causing mental illness) and frankly she shares the same qualifiers that have made Barack Obama such a bad president. Being a congresscritter, senator, or community organizer does not prepare you to be President. Sorry Ms. Bachman. I appreciate you being on the side of conservatives, but it's time for you to get back in the battle lines and work for the cause there.
Rick Santorum - Who? I like Mr. Santorum. I really do. But the fact that he lost his OWN STATE'S senatorial election doesn't bode well for the man. He's also a bit too emotional. I think Mr. Santorum also has a place in the next administration. I'd like to see him there, especially in the State Department - perhaps as Deputy Secretary of State (under John Bolton as Secretary!) Santorum knows foreign policy really well, but his general appeal is so low that it just won't fly as a presidential candidate.
Ron Paul - Mr. Paul is a libertarian, and as such he's got some great ideas on domestic issues, and as such he's got some dangerous naivety on foreign policy that makes Herman Cain's total LACK of knowledge look much more appealing. Paul would have us adopt isolationist behavior which would encourage Iran and North Korea to do VERY bad things, instead of just generally light bad things. There are bad people in the world, Mr Paul, and if we don't do something about them occasionally, they'll get uppity and it's harder to deal with bad people with nuclear weapons than it is to deal with bad people with AK-47s. Trust me.
Let's face it, with a group like this, all we are really doing is trying to keep Obama out of the Oval Office and not much more. The real changes we need to our country won't come from the top contenders of THIS presidential farce. Oh no... it's going to come from us. We need to win back the Senate, strengthen our position in the House, and work to pressure whoever IS president to cut the size and scope of government to something realistic.
So who do I support? Not sure yet. All I know is that I'm not very happy with this election cycle's crop of candidates. We'll have to see where it goes from here.
0 comments:
Post a Comment