Skip to comments.The Republican Who Can Win : Someone who know Americans are more worried about jobs and savings
Posted on 06/03/2011 11:22:44 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The candidate would know Americans are more worried about their jobs and their savings than abstractions like 'big government.'
To win the presidency in 2012, the Republican candidate will require certain strengths. Among them, a credible passion for ideas other than cost-cutting and small government. He or she will have to speak in the voice of Americans who know in their bones the extraordinary character of their democracy, and that voice will have to ring out steadily. That Republican candidate will need, no less, the ability to talk about matters like Medicare and Social Security without terrorizing the electorate.
Americans already have plenty of cause for fear. They have on one side the Obama health-care plan now nearly universally acknowledged as a disaster. A plan that entails huge cuts in health care$500 billion cut from Medicarethat will nevertheless cause no pain, according to its architects. As the polls on ObamaCare show, this grand scheme appears mostly to have alarmed Americans.
From the Republican side comes an incessant barrage of doomsday messages and proclamations that the nation is imperiled by the greatest crisis in a generationnot, as we might have supposed, by our ongoing, desperate unemployment levels, but by spending on social programs. No sane person will deny the necessity of finding ways to cut the costs of these programs. But it's impossible not to hear in the clamor for boldnessfor massive cuts in entitlementsa distinctly fevered tone, and one with an unmistakable ideological tinge. Not the sort of pragmatism that inspires voter confidence.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
DOROTHY YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT.
You are in some other world that does not understand business.
Or most Americans and how they live.
You need to get out of NYC once in a while.
Translation: “The Republican who can win can only be one who does not the truth”
That should read “tell the truth”
Anyone who doesn't understand the connection between the former and the latter shouldn't be allowed to vote.
In other words a demagogue might win. Good insight Dorthy. That’s why they pay you the big bucks.
Sorry, but I call FAIL.
To win the presidency in 2012, the Republican candidate will have to place cost-cutting and small government as their first priority.
That is the monster that is killing America, and has been for over 70 years.
He’s right. Americans are more worried abou their jobs than “abstract” things like Big Government. But they are also smart enough to know that Big Government demands more of our paycheck than anything else.
So, we can keep Big Government if Big Government is willing to hold a lot of Bake Sales to pay for entitlements.
Otherwise, it can stay out of my wallet and perhaps it could start telling the welfare class to make do with less, and to do some belt-tightening, as it continuously tells the working class.
Translation: Americans are stupid.
But they do vote and the Republican candidate will have to find a way to appeal to them as Reagan did.
It is all the more CRITICAL IN 2012 that we have a TRUTH-TELLING candidate. I’d rather lose than lie, and not just for ethical reasons. Also, there’s this:
IF OBAMA WINS BECAUSE HE LIES AND THE CONSERVATIVE WON’T, then history and the voters are much more likely to blame Obama — and voters are more likely to vote for conservative reforms in the future (if it’s not too late by then ...).
Bullshit. Big government ain't no abstraction. Big government is what's driving our economy into the ground.
The GOP candidate who can tap into this sentiment against big government will gain enormous traction.
The economy will begin to turn around ONLY when people are buoyed by the knowledge that runaway government spending, and its associated Tyrannies, has been stopped dead in its tracks.
Actually, one poster above said it right...
To the author of this article, The Republican who can win can only be someone who does not/is afraid to tell the truth regarding the REAL state of our country and economy.
If this is true, no wonder this country is in trouble. Americans prefer to be in denial and vote for those who will KEEP us in denial.
That this article will validate this kind of attitude only serves to confirms that fact.
Dorothy is not talking to us or about us, but of voters who are actually as she described. There are exactly those out there who could be Republican voters in 2012, but they are not us. They are but culturally religious, or not at all, and react only to their own benefit, not patriotism, not philosphy.
The question is do we want this block of votes if it takes them to actually WIN?
Ergo, all Democrats are insane but because not a one of them will talk about cuts to entitlements and several Republicans will not go there either. But, Dorothy. It gets no simpler than this. J-O-B-S. If I was running for President I would tell the voters if they elect me and give me Republican control of both Houses I would guarantee unemployment below 7% by the end of my first term or I would not run for a second.
“After all the years of instruction, all the textbooks on U.S. rapacity and greed, all the college lectures on the evil and injustice the U.S. had supposedly visited on the world, something inside these young rose up to tell them they were Americans. That something lies in the hearts of Americans across the land and it is those hearts to which the candidate will have to speak.”
I think the author’s point is that being AGAINST something is NOT ENOUGH.
You have to be FOR something else - something better.
I think some of the commentors are missing the point of this piece - or I could be wrong.
Other than hiring people the only things the government can do about jobs is indirect - the government can remove the barriers to enterprise that various organizations have erected.
That’s smaller government...
THE SYSTEM HAS TO BE CHANGED!!
It means cutting back government jobs and promoting the private sector.
It means a reality check on future pensions. NO COLLECTING UNTIL YOU'RE 62!!!!
How about the writer take another look at all the grandparents and even great grandparents raising grandchildren and great grandchildren?
Burden, my ass.
If I had had the money I paid into Social Security since I was 14, I would have spent at least some of it on Gold and silver coins, and that, even a fraction, would be worth many multiples of what I can ever expect to get from Social Security--especially since gold was $35 an ounce then.
Someone who be more lit'rate than Dorothy...
I disagree completely. That's exactly our problem. We've become a nation of central planners.
It's not the role nor job of the dam President to create jobs or control unemployment.
If someone said it's not my role, but I'm gonna cut taxes, regulations, and other Gov't interventions, and actually look out for the well being of the American citizen, then yes.
Democrat and Republican - two wings of the same bird of prey.
While you and me and everyone else were "putting money into Social Security" we were also spending much more money on big government nonsense. This is why we have a $14T National Debt.
It is simply false to say that we who are alive and working today have paid our own way and are entitled to a pension to be paid by future workers. We have not and we aren't.
What kind of article is this? Big Government is the problem. Everything is tied together, Dorothy and you know it so don’t pretend you don’t and stop shilling for a RINO. It’s unattractive.
Americans are worried about our national debt and agree we need to cut spending, but when the talk gets specific everybody points at everyone else and says “Cut his spending. Leave mine alone.”
That is why nothing that matters will get done until most americans feel the pinch in a very serious way.
They are, by any other name, democrats to a person. The question, "Do we want this block of votes...?" is patently absurd. We can not get the voter who is so completely self absorbed that he or she thinks Obama is doing a good job. All in all, a witless article Dorothy.
“He would especially avoid painting images of the pain Americans feel at burdening their children and grandchildren. This high-minded talk, rooted in fantasy,”
It is not a “fantasy” that current projections of the near future costs and deficits of Social Security and Medicare - entitlements that Grandma and Grandpa are told are their privileged rights - will, beyond any doubt, be painful financial burdens pressed predominately on our children and grandchildren - the working age population.
Maybe she is trying to say that “Americans”, and in that predominately Grandma and Grandpa, do NOT realize, consider or even “imagine” this “pain”, or do not care about it. On any one part of that score, she could be correct; and least in a public majority sense.
So, she could be correct to say that those who need to “imagine” this pain, do not, and therefor an argument based on the facts will not appeal to them. Again, on that score, she could be right, at least as a possible majority of the Grandmas and Grandpas are concerned. They, the baby boomers are the first generation who have worked their entire lives paying into and expecting to get back from the Social Security and Medicare plans.
The truthful, painful, argument is that they can admit that pain - paying 100% of currently projected Medicare and Social Securty costs, will fall MOSTLY on their children and grandchildren - and accept budget-cutting plan changes to soften that blow, or they can stick their heads in the sand WITH the Democrats and demand that nothing change, which will deny their children and grandchildren immediate relief while possibly insuring their eventual release from it all when the plans implode entirely.
The fact is that the “Ryan plan” (as at least one reasoned idea) makes the good and truthful argument about Medicare and its looming deficits and then offers a positive outlook with elements to put more market-based incentives into the plan, and to also quits pretending the plan can continue, as is, without less drastic cuts unless those who can afford to pay more do so; keeping the plan as the safety net that everyone can fall back on as much as they might actually need to.
Then the author goes on to lift up a number of issues that I know are dear to Conservatives (myself included), particularly regarding the Justice Department under Mr. Holder, and foreign policy issues like our dropping support for Britain over the Falklands.
Yet as much as I know those are issues dear to many Conservatives, and correctly so; and as much as I wish everyone of them were an electioneering “barn burner”, I think THAT idea is fantasy - to think that they will resonate strongly enough with a currently very populist general public to be used as more of a core of a GOP POTUS candidate’s campaign, than a focus on our debt and deficits and where they come from.
It seems the RINOs actually do not want the long term deficit issues solved and the structural causes of them - big government and entitlements - reversed. They want to get elected on a platform of behaving like Democrats - distract the people using ANY other issues, kick the can down the road and let those who come later pick up the pieces.
Meanwhile, “later” is already here.
We can not get the voter who is so completely self absorbed that he or she thinks Obama is doing a good job. “ =======
I think you’re right, of course, but given the depressed effects of the economy and the heavy handed failure of Obama, there’s a chance we will get them whether we want them or not, I guess. :)
Its that government spending that is consuming the private sector and the jobs it provides.
The sooner people figure that out the sooner we are on the path to actual recovery - with jobs.
If I had a dollar for every letter I've written and phone call I'd made urging votes against this crap, not to mention the time and money in support of candidates who were against it, I would be independently wealthy. It goes back to the days of the 4 cent stamp.
I don't want a pension, I want my money back.
And I'm sick sh*tless of being called a "burden" on my children and grandchildren when I work, pay my own way, am raising two grandchildren and for all practical purposes a great-grandchild.
I know d@mned well that we are not alone--there are a lot of grandparents raising grandkids.
So someone can stuff the obamacare death panel meme "useless old burden" where they'll need a proctologist to retrieve it.
I expect I'll work until either I can't or I'm dead, but I'm just p.o.ed about being ripped off, especially when I've hit the moving target maximum for a few years, only to have my savings gone because of some cockamamie government policy change just about once a decade shutting down the industry I work in.
Now, to portray those of us who have paid our way and are supporting three (or more!) generations as "old and useless" tells me someone has an agenda to promote, one that leads to death panels to get rid of the old coots--which really works well for the socialists--because we remember when they weren't running things.
Those who have never even tasted freedom think a little sugar on their slavery is sweet, and eliminating those of us who know the difference is an essential step for the totalitarians.
To win the presidency in 2012, the Republican candidate
If the Republican candidates follow business as usual in the upcoming primary they will lose. Instead of slinging dirt at each other they should remain positive and only attack the Democrats.
Yes, you are right - the author is right in a Republican candidate has to be FOR something better in order to win. People are inspired by something positive more than they are moved by something negative - it’s basic salesmanship 101. Look at Barack Obama in 2088: he said, “Yes We Can!” and people were inspired to vote for BO.
I think the Tea Party has been somewhat successful in reviving the flame of Liberty amongst a disaffected citizenry. Harking back to the Founders vision is positive theme we can build on - if the RINOs would STFU.
That is the absolute truth. Palin, Cain, and Bachmann see this clearly. Mitt and the rest of the GOP hopefuls - not so much.
Instead of slinging dirt at each other they should remain positive and only attack the Democrats.
I agree, but with one caveat: we should expect, and even demand that our candidates tell the truth. Even if that means calling out a fellow Republican for transgressions against our conservative principles.
Even if that means calling out a fellow Republican for transgressions against our conservative principles.
If they stick to that. Just dont give the Democrats sound bites to use against the Republican candidate in the election.
This is no longer a pragmatic argument about HOW MUCH of your money it is right to take, or about whether or not the race of the looters makes a difference.
This is not going to end well.