Skip to comments.Remember, We're Choosing a President (Thomas Sowell: Romney most steady candidate in GOP field)
Posted on 01/07/2008 10:25:01 PM PST by AKSurprise
"The question of what kind of President each candidate would make is infinitely more important than all the "horse race" handicapping that dominates the media.
By far the best presentation as a candidate, among all the candidates in both parties, is that of Barack Obama. But if he actually believes even half of the irresponsible nonsense he talks, he would be an utter disaster in the White House.
Among the Democrats, the choice between John Edwards and Barack Obama depends on whether you prefer glib demagoguery in its plain vanilla form or spiced with a little style and color.
The choice between both of them and Hillary Clinton depends on whether you prefer male or female demagoguery.
Among the Republicans, there are misgivings about the track record of each of the candidates, especially those who have shown what Thorstein Veblen once called "a versatility of convictions."
There are fewer reasons for misgivings about Fred Thompson's track record in the Senate but more reason to be concerned about what his unfocused and lackluster conduct of his campaign might portend for his performance in the White House.
When it comes to personal temperament, Governor Romney would rate the highest for his even keel, regardless of what events are swirling around him, with Rudolph Giuliani a close second.
Temperament is far more important for a President than for a candidate. A President has to be on an even keel 24/7, for four long years, despite crises that can break out anywhere in the world at any time.
John McCain trails the pack in the temperament department, with his volatile, arrogant, and abrasive know-it-all attitude. His track record in the Senate is full of the betrayals of Republican supporters that have been the party's biggest failing over the years and its Achilles heel politically."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Well there goes my respect for Dr. Sowell.
You disagree with what he wrote so you no longer respect him?
Is there any doubt that Thomas Sowell is one of the most intelligent men on the planet?
Read the whole thing.
Sowell’s dead wrong on this one.
When during the debate Romney backed off and didn’t make the kill on McCain for supporting amnesty, he revealed a huge mortal flaw.
When blurted out he like mandates at Thompson’s pressing, he revealed another.
Romney is turning into a more disciplined and focused Huckabee, but with the same underlying problems, just better camo.
I have to admit that if we’re just comparing personalities, Romney does appear to be the sharpest and cleanest of the bunch.
Conservative intellectual icon. Is respected by Conservatives and Libertarians of all stripes; Disrespected by Liberals.
Good article. He knows what’s at stake.
I do agree that McCain has a record of Republican betrayals in between what is normally a good voting record.
Supposed "conservatives" are just falling for Romney's looks and delivery, ignoring the facts of his political history.
I am starting to think Romney will be the candidate, and I can live with him more than some of the Repub alternatives and all of the dems. But let's trash this bunk about Thompson's campaign being lackluster--the failing is in US.
We moan on and on about wanting a real conservative, someone who isn't going to jump through the media hoops, someone who has principles and sticks to them, someone who can lead.
We have him in Thompson, but man, that Romney is just so darned HANDSOME even though his "conservative credentials" are pitiful, his tears about blacks and his religion are embarrassing, and he looks good on camera...you know, the kind of thing we're supposedly tired of.
I'll support him if he's the nominee, but to his fans, please spare us the baloney about how wonderful he is. If he wins, it won't be because of a history of conservative belief and leadership, but his PROMISE that he WILL lead as a conservative.
I could support a Romney campaign. However, I feel negative about his chances in a general because people would have a problem with his faith. Which I think is stupid...
OK I don’t understand why Thompson's campaign style is “unfocused and “lackluster” instead of being an indication of his even keeled temperament which apparently is an important quality of a president. I’ve felt that Thompson’s attitude and actions during the campaign are admirable qualities. I guess I like a guy whose whole life and being is wrapped up in being President. (Al Gore or John Kerry ring a bell?!)
No, it’s just that he’s one of the “anti-Romney” reactionaries. People that have a knee-jerk emotional dislike of Romney, because he flipped (but not flopped back) on a few social issues. It’s called Romney-Derangement syndrome, and it’s pretty prevalent around here. They reject the fact that the whole point of the Conservative movement is to gain converts, not vilify them.
That’s quite an interesting paraphrase. Sowell also said that there are reasons for misgivings about the track records of the candidates, “especially those who have shown what Thorstein Veblen once called ‘a versatility of convictions.’”
You don’t think he’s including Romney in that description?
He did say that Thompson’s campaign has been lackluster and unfocused, but also said “there are fewer reasons for misgivings about Fred Thompson’s track record in the Senate”
None of the candidates fare that well in this article — Romney was called out for being the most even-keel, and Thompson was called out for having a record that is less of a concern than the records of the other candidates.
Turning that into an implied Sowell endorses Romney” seems funny to me. But everyone can read the article and decide for themselves.
Naah. It’s called recognizing bullcrap. And Joe Isuzu Romney has it oozing out of his ears.
“I guess I like a guy whose whole life and being is wrapped up in being President. (Al Gore or John Kerry ring a bell?!)”
That sentence should read: a guy whose whole life and being ISN’T wrapped up in being President.
My 3rd choice, but I could live with it. DUNCAN 2012!! or 20016
Your right, they are admirable qualities, it’s just not what needs to be done to win a modern presidential election. Thompson may be right, but he’s long-winded, and gets to the point in the most roundabout way. Romney makes his points in short, concise sound bites, which is what’s necessary in today’s media environment.
Uh, no.. That's not what Sowell says.
"Reason to be concerned" = "all but negates him"?
C'mon... Support your man, but don't be a liar about it.
Romney, for some reason know only to himself, keeps erupting in lies when the truth would suffice.
WE CAN NOT TRUST A PRESIDENT WHO LIES TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
If he does it as a candidate he will do it as an elected official. I don’t care how glib he is otherwise, and Mitt is very suave and salesmanlike.
But he can’t seem to help leaking the all too frequent whopper.
You show me a where Fred rates in the Top 3, in any major state polls, and I’ll give you that one.
This is all that Sowell said about Romney in the whole article.
“When it comes to personal temperament, Governor Romney would rate the highest for his even keel, regardless of what events are swirling around him, with Rudolph Giuliani a close second.”
And from that you read most “Viable Conservative Candidate” into it.
You have an unnatural love for Romney. Any little praise you see you twist it around to somehow make bogus claims.
What does that have to do with you misrepresenting what Thomas Sowell wrote?
it’s a problem that all senators face vs governors. Governors and mayors have to make decisions in real time while senators get to talk and talk in an empty room for hours.
I am very disappointed that Sowell would tarnish a man of Thompson’s character and solid conviction with the mainstream media’s slur against his campaigning style. Sowell should know better.
Compounding this is Sowell’s total lack of concern regarding Romney’s missing authenticity and candor. Sowell ought to know better on this acount as well.
Sowell needs to go back and have a re-think because he has the equation very wrong on the Republican side of the ledger.
On the Democratic side his critique is trenchant.
Keep your respect for Thomas Sowell even if you have a different favorite candidate.
Nothing he said is wrong or false.
Romney is quite unnerving ....
The only issue that he has not pandered on .....
Have you even read the whole thing?
Sowell as usual write clear and cogent.
I too respect Sowell, but I am kind of shocked that he's buying into Romney. I live in Boston, and I've known members of Romney's staff, and while I like him, he sure isn't my first choice for president.
Yep, that says it all.
I looked it up — here’s what Sowell had to say about Romney and Thompson only two weeks ago (hint: contrary to your assertion, he’s not making a case for one above the other — he has praise and criticism for both):
“Fred Thompson seems to have the best policy positions and the best political track record among the Republican candidates and the least effective presentation of himself.
If Senator Thompson can beat the odds and become president, he would probably be better than most of those who have been in the White House in recent times though that is not extravagant praise.
The only candidate of either party who truly looks presidential is Mitt Romney. It was unfortunate that Mike Huckabee and others have tried to make his religion an issue.
John F. Kennedy was supposed to have taken that issue out of politics and Huckabees bringing it back in ought to disqualify him for a shot at the White House, even aside from Governor Huckabees wholesale pardons of criminals and his raising taxes.
Romney and Giuliani are both articulate Republicans and it is rare for the Republicans to have two at one time. Some presidential election years they havent even had one.
If Romneys and Giulianis track records in office matched their ability to talk, either of them could unite and lead their party to victory. But that is no small if.
Huckster is the least honest candidate in the race.
However Huckabee was lying. As reported on www.politifact.com, the original bill only required that the student should have gone to an Arkansas high school for three years and graduated, and that they had to sign an affidavit to the effect that they intended to pursue citizenship.
Heres Huckabee caught lying about the AIDS Quarantine issue:
Here is him lying about the Dumond parole:
Another Huckabee lie, this time to Larry King - lied about his ethics violations:
Huckabee parole board members contradict Huckabees lies about Dumond:
Correcting Huckabees lies on his tax record:
In his press release Huckabee points out that Im anonymous. Its true that I am anonymous, but Ill tell you why. Im scared to death of how Huckabee has treated friends of mine who crossed him or simply didnt do what he wanted. Huckabee doesnt forgive and forget. He gets mad and gets even.
He also claims that my video was taken out of context. It isnt. Read my entire blog. Feel free. He said he wanted to go on the record. Well, I put him on the record. He begged for a tax increase, any tax increase, and he got it. Today he lied about it on national television and tried to brush it aside by simply saying, oh, yeah, I guess it wasnt about a Supreme Court mandate.
He lied for a reason. He knew what he was saying was wrong. He had plenty of time to think about this. My video has been out there for 2 days. He lied because he knew that what Ive been saying is true.
Mike Huckabee IS a pro-life liberal.”
And then there is the Hannity interview last Friday where he was a complete weasel on school choice and on immigration.
The man is slicker than a greased salmon!
Huckabee’s ethical issues and dishonesty will catch up with him.
Nowhere is Sowell buying into Romney.
He just said he has an even temperment.
Romneybots take that as an endorsement.
Guess Sowell missed the part about Romney and his stance on the Second Amendment ....
I read, and then re-read, the whole article. Nowhere in it do I see that Sowell calls Mitt the most viable conservative candidate. He appears to think that Mitt has the temperament that a president requires, with Rudy G. being a close second. By your reasoning, he could also be calling Rudy the second most viable conservative candidate.
See post 35. The poster has possibly unintentionally presented this as Sowell’s near-endorsement of Romney. Judging from what he wrote both here and two weeks ago, that simply isn’t the case.
I think what it is is an anti-endorsement of McCain.
Um, you're kidding, right?
No? Okay. Well, that's easy, then. How about IOWA?
As a home schooler I know what you’re talking about. Huckabee is neither a conservative nor a friend to conservatives.
Nowhere did I say Sowell stated that either. That is my own humble opinion, which I wholeheartedly believe. Look at the facts, Fred has no chance of getting the nomination, regardless of how right, and grounded he may be on the issues. Of the viable candidates Romney, McInsane, Hickabee, and Giuliani, Romney is the conservative of the pack, and has the most leadership experience.
It is high time conservatives realize it's Mitt and gather to support him! : )
What always surprises me about those poll ratings, Quinn, is that Guiliani is generally nowhere to be seen on them, usually far behind Fred, yet Rudy is treated by the MSM as a real contender.
Talk about bias!!
Thompson came in third in Iowa, and second in Wyoming. Apparently polls aren’t just out of hand before the vote — to some here and elsewhere, they’re actually more meaningful than the vote. Absurd. :)
Big stretch there feller. He gives an analysis w/o an endorsement. And, he left out the most conservative guy. That will be changing.
Oops! I meant to say Qwinn, with a “W”.
I was referring to his line about Joe Isuzu Romney.
See post 35 — Sowell is criticizing all the candidates. He notes that the discrepancy between Romney’s words and Romney’s record is a big problem.