-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
One more point in response to Ross Douthat: all of the reasons he gives for populist conservatives being partly to blame for an eventual Romney nomination were true before there was a Tea Party. Candidates fitting Romney’s profile have been winning the Republican nomination since Tom Dewey and Dwight Eisenhower beat Robert Taft. Only two candidates preferred by movement conservatives, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, have beaten establishment Republicans for the nomination, and only Goldwater won as an insurgent.
Since then, the strongest conservative challengers to the Republican frontrunner have included a religious broadcaster (Pat Robertson in 1988), a political commentator (Pat Buchanan in 1992 and 1996), and a magazine publisher (Steve Forbes in 1996 and 2000). The man with arguably the strongest political resume in the bunch actually did become a future television personality (Mike Huckabee in 2008), like Alan Keyes before him and Sarah Palin after.
For the past 24 years, conservatives have failed to unite behind a single candidate, splitting their votes between the frontrunner and various right-wing alternatives who appealed to particular subsets of the conservative movement. Candidates beloved by the movement have failed to catch on with rank-and-file conservative voters (Jack Kemp in 1988, Phil Gramm in 1996, Fred Thompson, and, yes, Mitt Romney in 2008). Candidates hated by movement organs have actually done a bit better with the conservative grassroots (Robertson, Buchanan, Huckabee, and perhaps a good bit of the 2012 GOP field).
If these are conservative failures, they far predate the Tea Party. The movement has been more successful at pushing the party establishment to the right than in running the party itself.
View all comments (25) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/10/24/and-if-romney-does-win
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Obama’s Drone War
- A President Loses His Power
- Hannah and Her Friends
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Oldefarte| 10.24.11 @ 3:10PM
What I cannot understand is why there is no serious discussions going on concerning Ron Paul's governmental reduction plan issued recently. This should be front/center, not Cain's 9 revenue plan or Romney's flat tax ideas. Paul nailed it as to what's needed to revive this country's economy; and same should be tweeked/amended as need be, but for heaven's sake simply discuss it please!!!!!!!
Cam O. Milety| 10.24.11 @ 3:25PM
There are two problems with that. First, Paul has some good ideas but they're tainted by the fruitcake ideas (and the kind of supporters he attracts).
Second, even some of the good ideas would be so unpopular that no candidate who wanted to win would dare propose them. Ideological correctness doesn't win elections.
Red Phillips | 10.24.11 @ 5:39PM
Fruitcake ideas like following the Constitution as originally intended, sound money, scraping the unconstitutional Fed, following the foreign policy advice of George Washington, etc. Yeah, a real fruitcake.
Cam O. Milety| 10.24.11 @ 6:06PM
Paul has some good ideas. But look at your own list.
Sound money means returning to the gold standard. Paul talks about this, and his followers copy-and-paste about it, as if this is obviously a good thing. Read about the connection between the gold standard and the Great Depression to at least get a sense of why some people think this is maybe not such a good idea.
Taking foreign policy advice from George Washington? How do you write something like that without realizing how fruitcakey it sounds? Being the first President doesn't give Washington omniscient insight into the ideal foreign policy for all time.
C Bowen | 10.24.11 @ 6:15PM
Paul does not support the "gold standard" in the sense of the pseudo "gold standard" the Federales used after the Civil War (fixing the price of gold--do you really think Paul would support price fixing?) rather, just take away the monopoly the Federal Reserve has been given. Where did you here otherwise?
As to foreign policy, the remainder of the Republican field is running against every poll that says the American people are sick of these trillion dollar debt financed boondoggles.
Paul is the one chap who could win and actually implement the conservative revolution, Reagan failed so entirely to do on the domestic front.
Clint| 10.24.11 @ 7:16PM
Yup !
Dr.Ron Paul wants gold and silver to be able to freely compete, as currencies, with government established currencies (like the federal reserve notes that are currently bearing the legend “dollar”) on an even footing. He wants to do this by removing any and all tax burdens from exchanges of gold and silver.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.
Cam O. Milety| 10.24.11 @ 9:38PM
Okay, wow. I had an overly simplified idea of what Paul was advocating. I read some of what he's written and .... wow. Just .... wow.
He wants to have competing currencies in this country.
Let that sink in for a second.
Not just a couple of competing currencies. He wants to allow private currencies to compete with government-backed currencies. Digital currencies, gold-backed currencies, silver-backed currencies, currencies backed by a basket of commodities. Just throw them all out there and let them compete, all at once.
Fruitcake on steroids.
aware| 10.25.11 @ 5:37AM
You don't understand what money is.
Red Phillips | 10.24.11 @ 8:33PM
First of all Cam, I'll be glad to entertain Bryan style criticisms of the gold standard in favor of bimetallism. Heck, I'll even entertain Greenbackism. But that is not where modern critics of the gold standard are coming from. Most are shilling for the current Federal Reserve Note debt instruments as money system. No conservative worthy of the name would ever do such a thing.
"omniscient insight into the ideal foreign policy for all time."
Second, this is particularly rich since for interventionists it is always and forever 1939.
os| 10.24.11 @ 6:52PM
"Second, even some of the good ideas would be so unpopular that no candidate who wanted to win would dare propose them."
So we get more of the same...yay.
Clint| 10.25.11 @ 7:02AM
Idiots Like Chamomile Tea Boy Here, Vote.
Al Adab| 10.24.11 @ 3:42PM
You have successfuly identified the major problem with the Conservative Movwement as it stands today. We have: fiscal cons; social cons; neo cons; paleo cons; movement cons; libertarians and likely a few other subsets I can't recall. Divide and conquer. Only when the Movement unites does it have success and only when the Conservatives lead does the GOP enjoy success. Conservatives have been disappointed too many times (Nixon, Bush 41, even Bush 43) to follow moderates again. Dirksen told Tom Dewey, "Too often we have followed you to defeat." What is the point in nominating and/or electing another moderate? We get the same results and the GOP gets the blame for DEM policies.
W| 10.24.11 @ 10:48PM
Al,
If the comments here are representative of the conservative movement, then you are correct. The Cain supporters cannot take any criticism of Cain even when it is obvious his tax plan needs major revisions, and his abortion statements are contradictory. The Paul supporters here attack all others. Everybody attacks the Paul supporters. Hopefully some of the over the top attacks here are because of the bloggers's dislike of each other and everybody here will vote for the Republican nominee. I will vote for the Republican nominee.
Stefan Stackhouse| 10.25.11 @ 8:59AM
"Unite" means a big tent, it doesn't mean "everyone has to agree with me exactly and no deviation is allowed." That's your real problem right there.
By the way, that is also the reason why we no longer have a politically significant far left in this country, unlike in many other countries. We used to (Eugene Debbs polled a million votes in 1912, for example), but they splintered so much over ideological purity that they splintered into virtual oblivion.
Ken (Old Texican)| 10.24.11 @ 3:52PM
Al Adab, well spoken.
Maybe Rick Perry should simply walk on stage with an oversized fountain pen, hold it up, and say, "this is my veto pen...I'm very proficient with it."
LarryK| 10.24.11 @ 4:15PM
"Maybe Rick Perry should simply walk on stage with an oversized fountain pen, hold it up, and say, "this is my veto pen...I'm very proficient with it.""
Then everyone else will have pen envy!!
Cam O. Milety| 10.24.11 @ 4:19PM
An oversized fountain pen! Awesome idea. If debating isn't his strong suit, why not try prop comedy? How about an oversized pair of scissors to go with it? "I use these to cut through bureaucratic red tape."
Or if the Carrot Top approach doesn't work he could look to Gallagher for inspiration. Come out with a giant mallet and a watermelon. "This is what I'm going to do ... to illegal immigration!" Splat!
Or Jerry Seinfeld. "What's the deal with Obamacare? Nobody cares for it except Obama! And did you ever notice that Democrats want to take your job away and tax you more on what you don't make? Am I right?"
Don't forget the AARP crowd. Throw in some classics, like Henny Youngman. "Take Romneycare ... please!"
His commitment to the space program. "One of these days, NASA, straight to the moon!"
I think we're onto something here!
Stefan Stackhouse| 10.25.11 @ 9:01AM
You don't think they're all a bunch of clowns already? We are talking POLITICIANS here, right?
martin j smith| 10.24.11 @ 4:55PM
First off Romney has not won. Second I would like to know why his policies ( not his religion) are not getting more focus from his fellow aspirants ? Then there is the debating system itself which really bogles my mind--as to why these candidates would permit Communist News ( ? ) Nyetwork to host a debate. I mean its like having the devil host a debate of the angels. But with that there is a lot of stuff to go through and in that regard I heard of a story by the LA Times that was not particularly favorable towards Romney. That to some extent is an exception to the theory that the LEFT likes Romney. I think it will be up to voters to decide --a novell idea. There are two
things that need to happen to really give voters a better choice or view of the choices they have. More open debates allowing the candidates to question each other and allow voters to question them as well. Two to have more of a focus on foreign policy and national security.
Having one Conservative candidate is an interesting idea. It would require a Conservative convention and separate debates and a host of other things. Too complicated. Nothing is assured about Romney or anyone else. So hold those horses nelly and lets let the voters digest each candidate and decide.
Finally a note of caution to Establishment Republicans. Voters are more alert to the truth than ever. If they see thru Obama's BS which they do they will see thru yours.
Jeff Powell| 10.24.11 @ 5:11PM
Why should it surprise anyone that those who are eloquent in opposing big government would disdain participating in it? Leftists get up early each morning relishing the opportunity to control other people's lives. I've never heard of a leftist "lacking fire in the belly" to govern; that's what they live for. Conservatives of all stripes would rather be living their own lives, not directing those of their neighbors. I think this is the reason why it is so difficult to find a smart, politically-savvy and eloquent right-wing candidate for President. Unfortunately.
Red Phillips | 10.24.11 @ 5:36PM
Excellent analysis. It is important to note that two of the outsider candiates that did well, Buchanan and Huckabee, had significant populist tendencies. (Real in the case of Buchanan and arguably more percieved than real in the case of Huckabee.) The ones who failed to do well were all three-legs-of-the-stool cookie cutters - Kemp, Graham, Thompson, Romney 2008. There is a lesson here. The candidate who could unite the right has to be able to speak to less ideological populist types without spoking three-legs ideologues.
Red Phillips | 10.24.11 @ 5:37PM
Oops ... perceived.
yisong| 10.24.11 @ 9:52PM
slewing ring can also bear the larger axial load, radial load and overturning, can replace several sets of ordinary bearing combination to use function. http://www.1stbearing.com
CalMark| 10.25.11 @ 12:38AM
This is a backwards analysis.
Conservatives aren't allowed into the smoke-filled rooms from which the party is run. It's hard to get momentum behind a single candidate when you have no standing.
The Establishment hates conservatives and conservatism because it interferes with the graft-ridden "business as usual" in Washington. Ergo, they don't allow us in to screw up the beautiful setup they have with Democrats.
Stefan Stackhouse| 10.25.11 @ 9:05AM
Antigovernment politicians have trouble convincing enough people to elect them to become the head of the biggest, most oversized government in history? Gee, I wonder why? Isn't that sort of like a leading anticlerical layperson wondering why the college of cardinals never elect them to become Pope?