Comments on: I suggest that you sit down.

By: James

James — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 18:37:00 +0000

Cameron 23: There are risks to everything. The way I see it is that either Obama is the smart pragmatic leader his is touted to be and defies the full-blown socialist agenda of the far left in favor of a moderate and measured approach, or he goes all Karl Marx on our asses and people get a taste of that bitter cup.

If the former happens, hey, no problem. If the latter happens, it will be a problem, but one that can be remedied by an electorate that decides that double digit unemployment and interest rates aren’t what they voted for. Or things could all go completely to shit, but I doubt that is in anyone’s interest or plans. Frankly, save the Marxist part, I am no longer convinced that a McCain administration would offer any reduced risk of further carnage.

In short, I see my position as one of acceptable risk and that is why I have taken it.

By: Brad

Brad — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:30:28 +0000

Question: where do you think Huckabee’s economic populism would have led him on the bailout thing, were he either the President or the nominee?

I have my own hunch (which you can probably guess from the leading question).

By: Cameron

Cameron — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:20:56 +0000

What is scary about the Huckabee wing is not so much the social conservatism but rather the economic populism. The fear is that the GOP continues throwing economic conservatism out of the window in search of the social conservative vote. I recognize that my fear mirrors the Bush years, but it sure is a scary thought to have both parties actively lunge for the populist center, leaving us fiscal conservative types without any sort of home.

The Republican party is screwed up right now. It deserves a thrashing. However I worry about he results of the eventual rebuild. Hopes have been expressed that it trends in the libertarian direction, but when I look at the GOP there aren’t many sparks of that type.

By: Brad

Brad — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:07:25 +0000

I’m unclear on that as well. If anything, you’re empowering the neocons and Rovian machinists for fear of the social cons and Huckabee-style populist evangelicals. But social cons and Huckabee-styles populists have always been overstated in their mass appeal—they make strong GOP primary challengers and occasional Senators, and a powerful inter-Republican lobby, but they certainly don’t architect policy or bleed through the corridors of power. Even at their zenith, that crowd has always had less power than both their supporters and detractors recognized, and I see no reason to assume that that’ll be less the case if they start making a lot of noise this time around. I’m saving my final line of attack on this point for my own endorsements, but the bottom line is social conservatives will undoubtedly still have power, and will make a nice thrust in the next couple of years for more, but I see no reason to assume they’d be successful, quite a lot of reasons to assume they wouldn’t. Already, the smart Republican insiders are saying “it’s the economy stupid” and preemptively taking that lesson as to why McCain is dropping fast. And frankly, if I get an election of acceptable vs. unacceptable, I’m not going to vote for unacceptable because it might become more unacceptable next time around.

By: tessellated

tessellated — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:12:57 +0000

I’m unclear how a vote for McCain staves off the Huckabee type GOP given that Palin is also on the ticket. I could see an argument being made that she is more fiscally conservative than Huckabbe — not sure I buy that — but she’s enough of a blank slate that it’s arguable. However, on the point of culture wars, she seems to relish that kind of fight much more or at least more directly than Huckabee.

By: Cameron

Cameron — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 15:57:25 +0000

Has anyone checked to see if James’s account was hacked? Perhaps he is bound and gagged in some basement somewhere helplessly looking on as his tormentor posts in his name.

I jest.

Actually, I’m somewhat intrigued by your logic. In essence, you’re saying give the masses what they yearn for and hope they’re horribly disappointing. There are a few risks of such a strategy. You’re giving them just enough rope to hang themselves. You must also recognize that they could use that rope to strangle you and usher in another era of Democratic dominance in this country. I also agree with the idea that the Republican Party needs a swift kick in the ass as further punishment for their dismal eight years in power. A big part of this centers on the Republicans getting the message and returning to their respectable ideological roots. What if they don’t? The GOP could decide that they can’t win on fiscal and economic issues and dive headlong into the culture wars. As I think I said recently, a Huckabee type GOP is a big fear of mine. It must be understood that forcing a reorganization of the GOP carries the risk that it will organize into something unpalatable. Remember that. And hope that they turn in the correct direction once they’ve been pummeled this November.

By: James

James — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 14:39:20 +0000

Why would I endorse him if I wasn’t going to vote for him, Jerrod? Hello?

By: Jerrod

Jerrod — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:44:31 +0000

Did James say he was going to vote for Obama or did he just endorse him?

By: Adam

Adam — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:38:21 +0000

The global enthusiasm for Obama may not last very long. In the end, he’s still being elected to pursue America’s interests and he almost certainly won’t want to change the general way that it’s done (which meant that America was resented by a lot of non-Americans before Bush became President). Obama can put a gloss on it but I am not sure that that can last indefinitely (and it seems that he’ll be keeping troops in Iraq and getting more into it in Afghanistan).

By: fred

fred — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:25:17 +0000

Coming from the ‘global’ side (apparently the global community and the USA are not closely related) I support James’ reasoning as well. You get to make the global population really happy and maybe even make them eat their own words too! Win-win.
The current republican party needs to be punished by people who believe in a republican party. And considering the options for punishment, Obama fits that bill alright.
It’s a completely pragmatic choice, but I am also prepared for the worst, and as Rojas suggests, there is still enough ugliness in the republican party to make it a mess and excuse Obama from failure. The sooner they start playing nice, the better.