Political junkies like me who are old enough to remember the drama of political conventions have secretly held onto a dream, a wish, for 2008--brokered conventions.
I have become convinced that the absolute best thing that could happen for American politics in 2008 is for the choice as to who will head the Republican and Democratic tickets to be made at the respective political conventions this coming summer.
For the past 15 to 20 years, political conventions have become all but obsolete, with the choices for the two Parties being made by the primary system in the various states long before the time for the conventions.
Thus, the conventions have become nothing more than a coronation, a showcase, a week-long political commercial for the already-agreed-upon candidate.
The drama is entirely gone.
This year may change all of that. Despite Hillary Clinton's desire for the Democratic National Convention of '08 to be her coronation, that is highly unlikely given her strong opposition from Barack Obama and John Edwards.
In like manner, as Rudy Giuliani's star fades and Mike Huckabee rides a tide of near-cult-worship, GOP conservatives are left unimpressed. They want to vote for Fred Thompson, but somehow the highly unrealistic expectations placed upon Thompson have tended to hurt him severely.
They may yet decide that he is their man in the long run.
But this decision may well not happen until the GOP National Convention in the summer. Fred appears likely to win South Carolina. He could win in Iowa, but at present it appears either Huckabee or Romney will win, although male voters in Iowa have recently turned away from Huckabee. In New Hampshire, John McCain appears to be surging to the head of the pack.
This could well set up a trend that will continue right up to the Convention--the primaries will be split between 3 or 4 candidates, perhaps even 5, meaning that the decision will have to be made at the Convention.
My, what drama. I love it.
If this scenario is played out, it will mean that deals will have to be made. Compromises will have to be negotiated. Behind-the-scenes power plays will be the order of the day, just like in the old days.
I am reminded of the high drama of the 1980 Republican National Convention, when nominee Ronald Reagan offered the job of running-mate to former President Gerald R. Ford as a means of healing a rift in the GOP.
At first Ford took the offer very seriously. It became the talk of the nation.
And then Ford dropped a bombshell. He told Reagan that he would accept only if Reagan would agree to make Ford a 'co-President,' sharing the duties of the office together.
Wow. The Ford ultimatum dominated the news for days. It was Walter Cronkite's dream.
Then Reagan made the only decision he could. He turned down Ford's offer for the sake of the Constitution and common sense. George H.W. Bush was chosen as his running-mate, and the two went on to beat Jimmy Carter in a landslide.
With the great fluidity of the electorate leading up to the primaries this year, and as no clear front runner is apparent, perhaps this is the year that the political convention will return to politics as a relevant and needed entity.
Showing posts with label Presidential primary season. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Presidential primary season. Show all posts
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Ratings on ALL of the Candidates
With only two weeks to go until the Iowa Caucuses, which will officially open the U.S. Presidential primary season, the Liberty Sphere will issue our final ratings on ALL of the candidates, both Republican and Democrat.
Periodically as the candidates have participated in debates around the country, The Liberty Sphere has rated the candidates on the views expressed during the those debates using our exclusive 'Liberty Scale.'
The Scale is based upon eight key issues that we deem to be key to human liberty: low taxes, secure borders (and enforcement of immigration laws), gun rights, abortion, national defense, U.S. foreign policy, the war on terror, and healthcare (specifically keeping our healthcare system private and the best in the world).
We then rate the candidates on a scale of 1 to 10 based upon these 8 key issues that impact liberty, with 10 being the highest score.
As you will note below, GOP candidates came out very well comparatively speaking on human liberty issues. The Democrats did not fare so well.
No Democrat, for example, except for Billy Richardson has definitively voiced support for gun rights. But Billy has mammoth problems in just about every other area. His policy statements call for big government solutions for every problem, the price tag of which will run into the billions of dollars. Thus, his views in essence mirror those of European-styled Socialists such as Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards.
In addition, we have stated repeatedly that we do not feel that Richardson has the intellect or the ability to be President. The job is simply way over his head.
On the flip side, every single GOP candidate supports a strong defense, low taxes, private healthcare (although some would mandate insurance through private companies), and American capitalism. The rub comes in on the issues of gun rights, foreign policy, the war on terror, and illegal immigration.
All of the GOP candidates give assent to believing in gun rights, securing our borders, and a strong defense. The issue becomes who is most believable given their past record.
In addition, U.S. foreign policy and the War on Terror are key issues in a dangerous world in which the U.S. is in the unavoidable position of being the world's only superpower. Is this the time to retreat into a cocoon and usher in an era of isolationism when there are upwards of 80 million Jihadists around the world who want to kill us and the rest of the world?
Some of the readers of the Liberty Sphere clearly will not like our final analysis of the candidates. But we will be as honest and candid in our assessment and ratings as possible. But remember, this is merely 'as we see it.' Clearly there are other points of view, and we acknowledge those.
Thus, based upon a careful observation of the Republican and Democratic candidates, here is our final list of ratings as we stand on the brink of the primary season.
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES
FRED THOMPSON is our choice as the best candidate for the office of President. He is an entirely consistent conservative and federalist, an advocate for gun rights, low taxes, private healthcare, a strong defense, a pragmatic U.S. foreign policy, the War on Terror, the sanctity of human life, and secure borders with policies that discourage illegal aliens from entering the country. He gets a perfect score of 10.
DUNCAN HUNTER is our second choice, but he has failed to get the traction and recognition it takes to win primaries, which is a shame. On the issues he is as reliably conservative as Fred Thompson, but we do not feel that he is a viable candidate, unfortunately. He also gets a perfect score of 10.
MIKE HUCKABEE has been a major disappointment as his views have come into focus only recently. While the candidate is strong on gun rights, abortion, foreign policy, the war on terror, national defense, and healthcare, he is highly suspect on taxes and illegal aliens. Because the issues of taxes and immigration are so important, his score on the Liberty Scale has suffered. He gets no higher than a 7.
RON PAUL is a mixed bag. While we fully embrace his views on gun rights, taxes, abortion, healthcare, national defense, and immigration, we find his views on U.S. foreign policy and the war on terror to be highly troublesome. For this reason we give Dr. Paul a final rating of 7.
JOHN MCCAIN has come on strong since he got his wrists slapped on the immigration debacle. He has also acknowledged that McCain-Feingold had some unintended consequences that were troublesome and needed to be corrected. On the issues of guns, abortion, taxes, healthcare, national defense, the war on terror, and foreign policy, the candidate is fairly strong. The fact that McCain is a genuine war hero takes him a long way in our book. Thus, his final rating is 7.
MITT ROMNEY is problematic because of the inconsistencies. How do we know for sure where he stands? Yet the candidate is no Socialist and supports American free enterprise and our capitalistic system. He gets a rating of 6.
RUDY GIULIANI was clearly the right man at the right time for NYC when the Twin Towers were attacked. No doubt he is a strong leader who can stand strong for America's interests around the world. We also know he is not a Socialist and expressed privately his grave concern over Hillary Clinton's socialistic policies. We give him a final rating of 6.
TOM TANCREDO, we hear, will announce today that he is dropping out of the race. He has been a great voice for immigration reform and stopping the flow of illegal aliens into the country. We saw his debate performances improve dramatically over the months, and we hate to see him go.
DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES
Unfortunately no Democrat rates above a 4. Almost without fail, the stance of the Democratic candidates on the issues are the diametric opposite of all The Liberty Sphere finds to be imperative.
BILL RICHARDSON--4. His only redeeming quality is his stance on gun rights.
JOE BIDEN--4. A liberal, no doubt, but a pragmatic one. He knows plenty about foreign policy and would place America first in an international squabble. This is his only redeeming quality.
MIKE GRAVEL--3. I gave him a 10 for NOT showing up for one of the debates. Once again, he is a liberal, but a 1960s-styled liberal who has at least a little common sense.
CHRIS DODD--2. Socialist. He gets a 2 because he has more common sense and tons more experience than the four listed below.
HILLARY CLINTON--1. Socialist.
BARACK OBAMA--1. Socialist.
JOHN EDWARDS--1. Socialist.
DENNIS KUCINICH--0. Sorry, but we can find absolutely no rational reason to give him any points on any of our key issues.
Periodically as the candidates have participated in debates around the country, The Liberty Sphere has rated the candidates on the views expressed during the those debates using our exclusive 'Liberty Scale.'
The Scale is based upon eight key issues that we deem to be key to human liberty: low taxes, secure borders (and enforcement of immigration laws), gun rights, abortion, national defense, U.S. foreign policy, the war on terror, and healthcare (specifically keeping our healthcare system private and the best in the world).
We then rate the candidates on a scale of 1 to 10 based upon these 8 key issues that impact liberty, with 10 being the highest score.
As you will note below, GOP candidates came out very well comparatively speaking on human liberty issues. The Democrats did not fare so well.
No Democrat, for example, except for Billy Richardson has definitively voiced support for gun rights. But Billy has mammoth problems in just about every other area. His policy statements call for big government solutions for every problem, the price tag of which will run into the billions of dollars. Thus, his views in essence mirror those of European-styled Socialists such as Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards.
In addition, we have stated repeatedly that we do not feel that Richardson has the intellect or the ability to be President. The job is simply way over his head.
On the flip side, every single GOP candidate supports a strong defense, low taxes, private healthcare (although some would mandate insurance through private companies), and American capitalism. The rub comes in on the issues of gun rights, foreign policy, the war on terror, and illegal immigration.
All of the GOP candidates give assent to believing in gun rights, securing our borders, and a strong defense. The issue becomes who is most believable given their past record.
In addition, U.S. foreign policy and the War on Terror are key issues in a dangerous world in which the U.S. is in the unavoidable position of being the world's only superpower. Is this the time to retreat into a cocoon and usher in an era of isolationism when there are upwards of 80 million Jihadists around the world who want to kill us and the rest of the world?
Some of the readers of the Liberty Sphere clearly will not like our final analysis of the candidates. But we will be as honest and candid in our assessment and ratings as possible. But remember, this is merely 'as we see it.' Clearly there are other points of view, and we acknowledge those.
Thus, based upon a careful observation of the Republican and Democratic candidates, here is our final list of ratings as we stand on the brink of the primary season.
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES
FRED THOMPSON is our choice as the best candidate for the office of President. He is an entirely consistent conservative and federalist, an advocate for gun rights, low taxes, private healthcare, a strong defense, a pragmatic U.S. foreign policy, the War on Terror, the sanctity of human life, and secure borders with policies that discourage illegal aliens from entering the country. He gets a perfect score of 10.
DUNCAN HUNTER is our second choice, but he has failed to get the traction and recognition it takes to win primaries, which is a shame. On the issues he is as reliably conservative as Fred Thompson, but we do not feel that he is a viable candidate, unfortunately. He also gets a perfect score of 10.
MIKE HUCKABEE has been a major disappointment as his views have come into focus only recently. While the candidate is strong on gun rights, abortion, foreign policy, the war on terror, national defense, and healthcare, he is highly suspect on taxes and illegal aliens. Because the issues of taxes and immigration are so important, his score on the Liberty Scale has suffered. He gets no higher than a 7.
RON PAUL is a mixed bag. While we fully embrace his views on gun rights, taxes, abortion, healthcare, national defense, and immigration, we find his views on U.S. foreign policy and the war on terror to be highly troublesome. For this reason we give Dr. Paul a final rating of 7.
JOHN MCCAIN has come on strong since he got his wrists slapped on the immigration debacle. He has also acknowledged that McCain-Feingold had some unintended consequences that were troublesome and needed to be corrected. On the issues of guns, abortion, taxes, healthcare, national defense, the war on terror, and foreign policy, the candidate is fairly strong. The fact that McCain is a genuine war hero takes him a long way in our book. Thus, his final rating is 7.
MITT ROMNEY is problematic because of the inconsistencies. How do we know for sure where he stands? Yet the candidate is no Socialist and supports American free enterprise and our capitalistic system. He gets a rating of 6.
RUDY GIULIANI was clearly the right man at the right time for NYC when the Twin Towers were attacked. No doubt he is a strong leader who can stand strong for America's interests around the world. We also know he is not a Socialist and expressed privately his grave concern over Hillary Clinton's socialistic policies. We give him a final rating of 6.
TOM TANCREDO, we hear, will announce today that he is dropping out of the race. He has been a great voice for immigration reform and stopping the flow of illegal aliens into the country. We saw his debate performances improve dramatically over the months, and we hate to see him go.
DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES
Unfortunately no Democrat rates above a 4. Almost without fail, the stance of the Democratic candidates on the issues are the diametric opposite of all The Liberty Sphere finds to be imperative.
BILL RICHARDSON--4. His only redeeming quality is his stance on gun rights.
JOE BIDEN--4. A liberal, no doubt, but a pragmatic one. He knows plenty about foreign policy and would place America first in an international squabble. This is his only redeeming quality.
MIKE GRAVEL--3. I gave him a 10 for NOT showing up for one of the debates. Once again, he is a liberal, but a 1960s-styled liberal who has at least a little common sense.
CHRIS DODD--2. Socialist. He gets a 2 because he has more common sense and tons more experience than the four listed below.
HILLARY CLINTON--1. Socialist.
BARACK OBAMA--1. Socialist.
JOHN EDWARDS--1. Socialist.
DENNIS KUCINICH--0. Sorry, but we can find absolutely no rational reason to give him any points on any of our key issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)