The legacy of Lugar

As I write this, NBC has just projected that Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IN) has lost the Republican nomination for his own seat to some Tea Party asshole who I can’t be bothered to name. (OK, his name is Richard Mourdock, but you may know him as STPAWICBBTN.) Unlike other GOP veterans who retired before they could be ousted by other STPAWICBBTNs in their own states, Lugar stuck it out; this would have been his seventh term. Sadly, in the next few days, you’ll see many Tea Party-type Republicans slapping each other on the back for a successful RINO (Republican In Name Only) hunt.

Honestly, what more could they ask for in a senator? Aside from being the chamber’s expert on nuclear proliferation and its longest-serving Republican, he has executive experience (mayor of Indianapolis from 1968-1976) and business experience (currently manages a 604-acre family farm and worked in the family food machinery business before entering politics); he was an Eagle Scout; he’s been married for nearly 56 years; and he’s never not been a Republican. There’s only one reason to discount him: He works nicely with Democrats. GASP.

I could take this moment to repeat the same old talking points about how irrelevant that is when your other option is a genuine statesman. Seeing as this is Indiana, home of the centrist Bayhs (the last of whom, former Sen. Evan Bayh [D-IN], could charitably be described as the Democratic Lugar), you’d think they would have continued a strategy that was working perfectly well for them. Lugar lent the party some much-needed credibility and maturity. And his constituents knew it. Until now, apparently.

But STPAWICCBTN? What does he have to offer that every other Tea Party candidate in the country doesn’t? (He is a geologist by trade, which is pretty rare in politics, but so what?) Actually, his biggest offer is to the Indiana Democrats. They may actually run a candidate for that seat this time. And if voters start missing someone like Bayh in the absence of Lugar, that candidate might win.

It’s been proven many times for the past four years that Republicans, more so than Democrats, don’t like candidates who independents and centrists approve of. Perhaps this is because the biggest political fad of that time (the Tea Party) has favored them exclusively. But it will pass. Those same voters will ask where the people they elected have gotten them. Fads fade away, but wisdom and ability are forever.

If the worst thing you can say about Lugar is that he’s been in the Senate for six terms, or that he’s a insufficiently right-wing, he’s a much better member of Congress than most.

You brought this upon yourself

The polls in New Hampshire haven’t been closed for an hour as I begin this column. My projections are the same as everyone else’s: Former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) wins, with Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) in second and former Gov. Jon Huntsman (R-UT) in third. It was the likeliest outcome based on exit polls. Any better outcome for Huntsman was a shot in the dark at best; even third was unthinkable as early as a week ago. None of that stops me from feeling as disappointed as I am right now.

It’s conventional wisdom that New Hampshire voters have a habit of defying expectations, as they did when they chose then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) over then-Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) in 2008. That, combined with positive energy in certain cities, the obvious aptitude of the candidate and the obvious lack of aptitude of his opponents, could have combined to propel Huntsman to second or even first. But they took the safe, predictable route. If only Romney were quite so predictable.

In a lot of ways, he is. People expect him to pander to whichever audience happens to be in front of him. People expect his opponents to have plenty of great material against him and make hay of it. That, unfortunately for his party, includes the Democrats. The same goes for Paul, but you’ll have better luck trying to get my mother to change her mind about something than trying it on his Kool-Aid drinkers. Why bother with two people who are so easy to punch?

It came down to one thing: People were utterly bewildered over whether or not Huntsman was a moderate or a conservative. Some months ago, I erroneously attacked him for not running as a moderate, which I believed he was then. In truth, the majority of his record is conservative, with a couple of moderate-to-liberal items. Anyone could figure that out if they bothered to look. But they were listening for buzzwords. That’s how Romney wins: He packs his speeches with enough red meat to embarrass a Texas barbecue. It was all I could do during his victory speech not to squirt a bottle of HP sauce all over the TV screen.

Well, fine, Iowa and New Hampshire. You served me right. It was my mistake in believing that primary voters at least tried to distinguish between pandering and principle before they voted. I apologize. And thanks to a primary system that essentially gives the power of election to four states, even if the voters start doing that after Florida, it may be too late for the only candidate who can beat Obama and govern differently from him.

Yes, I mean that. Obama vacillates between kicking the can down the road and making things worse than before. With Romney, you’ll get four more years of the same, with thicker hair. And it’ll be your own fault.

Why Ron Paul is the next Barack Obama

As I write this, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) is giving her speech at the end of the Iowa caucuses, which can be summed up as “President Obama is bad and I’m not him.” Former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) and former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) are fighting it out by a razor-thin margin for first. Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), at one point virtually tied with Romney and Santorum, is third. I want to focus on him in today’s column because the phenomenon of Paul is far more compelling than the Iowa caucuses.

As an 18-year-old, I was as enamored with Obama as any newly registered Democrat. He was young; he was multiracial; he knew how to work the netroots. Paul is none of those things. His younger volunteers do all the netroots work for him, and the other two characteristics go without saying. But their shared ability to capture the youth vote runs deeper than that. In both cases, their support is less for them as potential presidents than as avatars for political causes.

There’s also the fact that both are slightly to the left of their own parties, which may contribute to their youth appeal, but not as much as the “gut factor.” If I’m honest with myself, I’ll admit that I couldn’t articulate why Obama’s “presidentiality” was any better than John McCain’s or even Hillary Clinton’s. Paul, being of the lower congressional chamber, might only have as much executive skill now as Obama did then.

While Obama has better speechwriters behind him (Paul seems like the type of person who writes all his own material), the two are both very good with buzzwords. Both pursued root-and-branch reform, albeit in the most diametrically opposite ways possible. Expanded health care. Contracted military engagement. More social liberalism on the national level. More social conservatism on the local level. It’s almost pathetically easy for any of those things to catch fire with the obvious people.

But after you have the obvious people locked down, what more do you have? You end up looking like someone who will enter the Oval Office intending to execute policy based on their base. If the right thing to do happened to differ from Paul’s preferences, could you imagine him putting the latter aside in favor of the former? Obama didn’t do so with Obamacare or the stimulus package. But they pleased the obvious ones.

At some point during the campaign period, after the initial hype wears off of your instinctive choice, you need to be able to look at them objectively and ask if he or she can govern well. If you want someone who will vote their gut, send them to the legislative branch. But the president needs to be everyone’s president, and the platform has to fit the country, not the other way around.

Disposal Day #102: Has-beens and never-wases

STORY #1: Go to hell rogue

Does anyone know where former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) has been lately? I don’t get Fox News, so I haven’t been able to check if they’re still interested in hearing from her. I haven’t given her more than a one-off mention since early October. Either way, the members of her cult of personality, which she still has for some reason, isn’t taking her absence lying down. They’re encouraging Iowa voters to “go rogue” by making her their write-in candidate.

It looks like someone has to explain why this isn’t going to work in a condescending fashion. She hasn’t filed as a candidate. She hasn’t asked anyone to make her a candidate. She’s at her greatest advantage as a commentator and fundraiser. It seems she has accepted that she has no hope of ever being elected president. Do the minions think she isn’t at least mildly annoyed by all of this? Leave the woman alone.

STORY #2: The third wheel

I actually don’t mind former Gov. Gary Johnson (L-NM). He’s a businessman, he was elected twice and he has good things to say about getting the government out of social issues. My biggest concerns with him are his support for the gold standard and that he seems too sharply ideological to get along with political opposition; nonetheless I might endorse him if my Republican choice isn’t nominated. Already he’s being touted as a potential threat to President Obama – in terms of the LGBT vote.

Really? That’s the best the above article can find to say about him? Those issues aren’t going to be paramount in this election, so how politically meaningful is this aspect of Johnson’s appeal? Even so, I don’t expect LGBT activists to risk losing even a half-hearted supporter in Obama by investing their political capital in a Libertarian. He may not make their concerns top priority, but other Democrats can influence him to do more. Don’t place any bets on Johnson becoming Washington’s answer to Lady Gaga.

Disposal Day #100: A Newt point

STORY #1: How to know you suck

Easy answer to that: Former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) makes a comeback against you. Such is the fate that has befallen former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) in Iowa polling. Since last month, he’s dropped an unbelievable 12 points, now only two points ahead of Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), and Romney has resumed first place. Admittedly, it’s hard for me to imagine any state going for Gingrich, but Iowa going for Romney is only marginally less improbable.

If a season 6 episode of The West Wing is to be believed, the quickest way to turn off Iowa voters is to denounce ethanol. But there is no indication that Gingrich even had a chance to do such a thing. Some believe his poor personal record finally caught up with him; others suggest that the flip-flopping charge is sticking to him more than it sticks to Romney, which is hilarious. Either way, my prediction that he would eventually flame out has been satisfied. I get results.

STORY #2: What we’ve learned so far

Things Gingrich revealed about his platform/ideology during last night’s Iowa debate: Some government-sponsored enterprises, like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, are good for Americans; he actually has a record of his own on getting budgets balanced; he doesn’t like courts who disagree with him and is willing to abolish a few; and, occasionally, he has a sense of humor about his own criticism. (Zany? Is that how the kids are referring to “shrill, unstable and self-absorbed” now?)

Except for the last one, all of these reveal an aspect of his character that I am far from the first person to point out: Gingrich hates being challenged. He hates it so much that he will a) portray organizations well-known for their failures as worthy of maintenance, b) make shit up and c) literally dispose of his enemies. Only when the challenge is as goofy as “zany” can he handle it. Just imagine what his performance review sessions must have been like in the eight scarcely relevant years he wasn’t in politics.

STORY #3: ZOMG

This is a Saturnalian miracle, people. Ann Coulter, who came into her own during the Gingrich Revolution, denounced him in favor of candidates who can calmly make reasoned cases for conservative policies. This is something Coulter has never done herself. Is she finally giving up on being, well, herself? Has the atmosphere of conservative optimism caught up with her at least? I am gutted, y’all. It’s the end of an era. Next she’ll dye her hair brown and wear suits and adopt a Midwestern accent!

Everything old is Newt again

It’s time once again for The Future American’s FAIL OF THE WEEK! Every Saturday, I name a person or group who has spent the past seven days behaving in a particularly idiotic way. Since it’s my belief that idiocy knows no politics, nobody is safe.

This week’s fail was brought to you by every likely Republican voter who changed their favorite from former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain to former Speaker Newt Gingrich (both R-GA) in the past week. Because of his highly dubious personal record? No, I like to think most Americans have gotten past that. Because they didn’t immediately realize that former Gov./Ambassador Jon Huntsman (R-UT) was the more logical choice? Well . . . partly. But mostly it’s because everyone seems to have forgotten that his professional record isn’t exactly stellar.

Now I’m not going to allege that Gingrich is a stupid person. Far from it, in fact, or so I’ve been told by an uncle who tends to be more conservative than I. (Hi, Ken.) Were he to continue as a speaker, commentator and writer, he would be absolutely stellar at it. That’s because speakers, commentators and writers can choose to whom they’d like to appeal. Presidents, and aspiring presidents, cannot. And Gingrich is not an aspiring president to whom I’d look for advice on consensus-building or, for that matter, successful leadership. Let’s check the log:

• The success of Gingrich’s “Contract with America” was limited to procedural changes and some policy changes with which congressional Democrats and then-President Bill Clinton were able to get behind. The largest ones, including a balanced budget amendment and congressional term limits. Some will argue that the Contract only promised debate on this legislation, but nonetheless it did not pan out in Gingrich’s favor in full, and Clinton received much of the political credit for the parts that did.
• He is the only Speaker history to be disciplined for ethics violations, specifically “tax improprieties.”
• His bizarre focus on the Monica Lewinsky scandal made him appear unserious, at best.
• His foreign policy and executive experience is sorely lacking, if not nonexistent.
• He vacillates between bipartisanship and blind ideology depending on which suits him, with no connective tissue.

And does anyone think it’s slightly pathetic that a man who could have run for president in 2000 and didn’t is trying to make a comeback three terms later? He comes off as someone who got bored after a period of silence and is trying to coast on past glories, if you can call them that.

Disposal Day #90: The party of NOT

STORY #1: Hallelujah!

I was never much concerned with the possibility of former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) deciding to run for the Republican presidential nomination. Whether or not she’d actually do it was always up in the air; however, I often found myself in the role of comforter for those who feared that she could actually win. That applies both to a general election and the primary season, and she didn’t have much of a chance in either. It seems she’s accepted that herself by deciding not to run. Thank you, Jesus.

Of course, her brand is still intact; the letter she addressed to her minions references religion, fiscal conservatism, constructionism, oil and gas, American exceptionalism and (of course) “replacing” President Obama. There’s no chance her base will leave her for someone else. But I can’t imagine they’ve been too pleased with her habit of stringing the country along until she felt like coming to a conclusion. At least the primary voters can continue on as normal.

STORY #2: What a waste

As predicted, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) says he will not be the nominee for vice-president. Maybe the nominee for nominee for vice-president, but nothing more than that. He says he is focused on his work in the Senate and has no intention of using that job as a launching pad for another, in two sentences setting him up as the anti-Obama. I’m sure those few lines made the presidential candidates openly weep at the idea of having no chance to snag him.

This may be a testament to Rubio’s political sense: He knows that if he accepted the position as the eventual nominee’s running mate, the party would be roundly attacked for putting a senator of two years on the ticket, four years after bashing the Democrats for doing the same thing. I’m sure they’ll all accept that as true. But as much as the party needs more sharpness like his, the Senate needs it more.

STORY #3: Governor Obvious

Kudos to my friend Noah in Seattle for pointing this out: Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) is totally John Goodman’s character in The West Wing. Not quite as conservative in platform, but they look and sound virtually the same and they’re realistic about the direction their career should be taking. Glen Allen Walken admitted he never wanted to be president, and neither does Christie. Those who still want to draft him are as annoying as anyone who insists that Elvis is still alive. He’s dead. Christie ’12 was never alive. Live with it. Move on with your life and the real presidential ticket to come.

A new driver for the Straight Talk Express

This, more than anything else I have encouraged at The Future American, deserves an enormous “I get results.” Former Ambassador Jon Huntsman (R-UT) is back. Back to the straight-shooting center-right guy he was when primary talk began. Back to the only candidate who genuinely excites me. (Not that way, for the perverts out there.) Most importantly, back in the press.

In the past week, Huntsman has tweeted his beliefs in evolution and climate change (a pretty bold move in his group) and called out both President Obama and fellow candidate Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX). Two of my fellow Rise of the Center bloggers, Sol and Dennis, think he knows he’s going to lose and is now being more honest about his beliefs because he can afford to do so. They add that he could be building up a following now in preparation for a more successful run later, which is also the opinion of Michael Tomasky at The Daily Beast in the top link.

I probably would have made the same assessment a month or two ago. The trend among most of the Republican candidates has been to try to out-conservative one another at all times, and the rank-and-file voters who thrive upon that sort of thing have gained considerable political clout. Besides, the centrist/moderate infrastructure is only just getting warmed up; only those of us who were already centrists pay enough attention to call it that.

On the other hand, Huntsman’s poor showing in the Iowa Straw Poll may have been just the kick in the ass he needed. Seeing as the true hardcore conservatives are leading the pack, he’s learned that it’s in his best interests to stand out. He is best equipped to capitalize on the generally center-right frame of mind that has informed American politics for decades. After so much fruitless congressional tug of war, the iron could be hot enough for him to strike.

I will not write Huntsman off for this election until he quits. When he wants to be, and he clearly now does, he can be decisive enough about his ideas to look like a man who’s running for president now, not later. And if he is building up his Republican candidacy to a different end, why another Republican candidacy in the next election cycle, as opposed to an independent candidacy in this one?

The timing has never been better for Huntsman. Non-Tea Partiers are tuned out of the GOP race. Liberals are up a creek. The current president is looking more and more like a lame duck. He can be the next one.

Disposal Day #50: Predictions for the year ahead

STORY #1: American

The 2010 midterms were the first national elections I’ve covered at The Future American, having started it in March 2009. I’m sure the 2012 elections will be even more fascinating, but these were pretty damn good. You Americans are lucky because you know exactly when to expect them. (Some have argued that this is a bad thing, forcing everyone to be in constant campaign mode, but I would respond that the system is adequate and it’s the responsibility of the politician to focus on the here and now.)

Predictions: The leading House Republicans will fail to accomplish everything on their agenda and resign themselves to bipartisanship; President Obama will achieve some major legislative successes, but not without months-long battles; the centrist/moderate infrastructure will expand to the point that winger detractors will take it seriously; former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) will be the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination.

STORY #2: Canadian

There are some murmurs of a possible election next spring – less than three years after the last one. Anyone who thinks Canadian politicians aren’t at least as in campaign mode as their American counterparts hasn’t been paying close enough attention. The lack of separation between the executive and legislative branches of government only exacerbates this, and no one appears willing to take it upon themselves to behave differently.

Predictions: Prime Minister Stephen Harper will continue to make little to no effort to improve Canada’s standing within the international community; Opposition leader Michael Ignatieff will continue to do nothing constructive to help Harper in this task; the other parties will continue to pander to their respective bases; the Green Party will pick up at least one seat; there will be an election; Canadians will be pissed off about it; I will continue to be cynical about the direction the country is taking outside of athletics.

STORY #3: International

We can sum up the majority of the news from overseas as “Geez, these people make us look serene.” Predictions: Iran and North Korea will succumb to small extents to international pressure in terms of nuclear weapons; China will do the same in terms of its currency, but will find other ways to be competitive; most Europeans will accept a gradual contraction of their welfare state; Japan will elect another prime minister; that WikiLeaks asshole will stay an asshole.

The TFA Midterm Liveblog ’10

NOTE: All times in CDT; I watched CNN.

6:21: Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Dan Coats (R-IN). And so it begins.

6:24: Required reading from Thomas Friedman; Marco Rubio (R-FL) ahead. Ew.

6:37: Bill Bennett points out that no one associates Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) with the economy. Just Democratic policies. Which she has no say over at all. And James Carville says what we’ve all been thinking about former President Bill Clinton.

6:47: The pundits suggest shifting focus from what people think of the cause of economic trouble to the effects. Agreed.

6:58: Hmmm. Nikki Haley (R-SC) currently losing for governor. Mama grizzly effect?

7:00: Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE)! Whew!

7:18: Not at all interested in this interview with DNC chair Tim Kaine.

7:32: John Kasich (R-OH) loses governor. Will he return to Fox News? I bet he will. And will Linda McMahon (R-CT) return to the WWE? I bet she will.

8:00: Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY)!

8:12: We get it, Paul. Capitalism FTW.

8:16: Aaaaand it’s a GOP House. Shocker.

8:30: Rubio’s speech ain’t that bad.

8:36: I’m starting to think Republicans care too much about small business.

9:00: Screw the rest of this. I just want to hear from Minnesota.

9:13: Why the hell was there a Citizens Against Government Waste ad running on CNN just now?

9:25: No Gov. Tom Tancredo (I-CO).

10:09: No Gov. Meg Whitman (R-CA) either. Sorry for the interruption, was on the phone with Adam. So far he hasn’t met a Republican he didn’t dislike. And future House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) wants to repeal health care form. Party of no? Of course not!

10:24: Three first female governors elected tonight, all Republicans. Speaks volumes.

10:27: At least we got one! Congrats to Gov. Lincoln Chafee (I-RI)!

11:10: I’m conceding to Mark Dayton (D-MN) for governor. Good platform, bad budget. One out of two ain’t bad.