I don’t know how much longer I can subject myself to the pissing contest that is the Republican presidential field. Choosing between “old guard” Republicans like Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich and Tea Party favorites like Herman Cain and “Crazy Eyes” Bachmann makes one thing come to mind: Is this really the best group of candidates the Republicans can field?
I mean, Ron Paul always runs in the same way that Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader @@names checked@@do, but for God’s sake, the GOP is really scraping the bottom of the barrel. Not that I lean toward Republican politics in the first place, but this is just a train wreck. Good for Jon Stewart, bad for the American public. What if one of these clowns actually gets elected?
Let’s go down the line, shall we? First on the list is Texas Gov. Rick Perry, whose charming drawl can no longer save him from the factual errors he has made on the campaign trail and his laughable performance in all of the Republican debates. He’s no debater, which he’s admitted himself on multiple occasions, but that doesn’t excuse him from the gaffes he has committed.
The most recent media fodder comes from last Wednesday’s Republican debate where, while stating which three government agencies he would cut, he could only name two.
Instead of moving on, he stumbled for about a minute and looked at Ron Paul for an answer. If you’re looking for someone to help you out with mainstream Republican policy, Paul might not be your best bet.
Naming the rest of his missteps wouldn’t really serve any purpose because, suffice it to say, each one has taken such a significant chunk out of his poll standings.
The University’s College Republicans secretary Nicholas Seymour @@http://directory.uoregon.edu/telecom/directory.jsp?p=findpeople%2Ffind_results&m=student&d=person&b=name&s=Nicholas+Seymour@@— speaking on his own behalf — said, “It is my opinion that Perry has no actual plans to shut down any part of the government but is instead trying to gain (or steal) support from Ron Paul, who has been doing fairly well in his debates, by suggesting solutions similar to what Paul has proposed. I personally think it is a bonehead move to try and follow Paul’s lead. Paul is a libertarian, and if you want the libertarian vote, there is no room for the moderate ideas that Perry is generally known for.”
While I generally disagree with the notion that Perry is a moderate — remember, his hunting ranch was formerly known as “Niggerhead Ranch” — I do agree with the idea that he has run out of meaningful policy to contribute and is testing the waters. Again, what I don’t understand is why he would pander to the supporters of a candidate who trails the field.
Next in the lineup is Herman Cain, former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza@@http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/primaries/candidates/herman-cain@@. This man was the ‘flavor of the week’ as the pundits said. He claims to be a Washington outsider but not by choice. He has misled voters into thinking he is a first-time politician but has run for President (in 2000) and other public offices several times. He’s just never won.
On top of this, he lacks any kind of meaningful experience in foreign policy, as evidenced by his inability to say anything concerning NATO’s involvement in Libya other than that Obama didn’t handle it correctly.
This doesn’t even touch on his oversimplified and myopic “9-9-9” tax plan@@http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/10/herman-cain-9-9-9-tax-plan-/1@@ which would cater exclusively to the rich by imposing a 9 percent federal sales tax on top of existing state tax structures. That means that in some states people would be paying up to 18 percent sales tax on everything they buy. You don’t need to know a lot about economics to realize this is a gross and extreme regressive tax that would have a detrimental effect on most Americans.
All of this is, of course, excluding the allegations of sexual misconduct that have been brought against him in the last few weeks, which most Republicans see as a diversion tactic.
“These charges women are claiming against Cain were settled many years ago, and everyone was happy until now, and why is this? These women chose this unique time to step forward, again after being passive for so many years, for only one reason: to attempt to ruin Cain’s attempt for nomination.
“It is my opinion that a candidate’s personal history plays little role in their politics and should be treated as such,” Seymour said.
While it is a very opportune time to bring these allegations to light, I think that personal morality plays a key role in what kind of person we want at the helm. Any Republican who supported the Clinton impeachment should agree wholeheartedly.
Bachmann needs little introduction, but at the risk of sounding like I’m making personal attacks on GOP hopefuls, she is a low-rent Sarah Palin with even less standing and no clue whatsoever on how to run the world’s most powerful nation. Her entire campaign is a joke and wherever she goes, her staff jumps ship. Her missteps are so numerous and her policies so outlandish that it is a testament to Republican patience that she is even allowed to continue on to the Iowa caucus.
It looks as if the Republicans’ worst fear is on the horizon. All of the not-Romney candidates are falling one-by-one, and they have nobody to blame but themselves. At this point, the only person I can see that has a chance against the former governor of Massachusetts is Newt Gingrich, who has made a huge leap in the polls and trails Romney by only about two points among voters.
Only time will tell, but if they want any chance of beating Obama in 2012, they need a strong candidate with a coherent message that isn’t “Um, oops.”