Tuesday, September 25, 2012

One question, Richard Cohen: Did Republicans really WANT a better candidate than the 2012 field offered them?

>

Former Senate Majority Leader Howard Baker -- now that's talent?

"None of these candidates [i.e., the 2012 Republican presidential field] were remotely qualified for the highest office in the land. Arguably, Romney was the exception -- and that’s the whole point. He won just by showing up."
-- Richard Cohen, in his WaPo column today,
"The Republican brain drain"

by Ken

Before we proceed with today's lesson from Brother Richard Cohen, a couple of caveats:

* About Richard Cohen himself, it's the usual: Although he normally seems to me a Village hack, he hasn't lost all his marbles, and every now and then he can size up a situation like a serious pundit.

* For the purposes of this enterprise we're going to have to accept that latterday Republican politicos like Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Howard Baker, and Bob Dole constitute "talent." For many of us this is quite a considerable stretch, but when you see who these skells are lined up against, I think you'll see the point.

This is the start of Richard Cohen's Washington Post column today, "The Republican brain drain":
In 1980 Ronald Reagan won the Republican nomination. He beat a future president, George H.W. Bush; two future Senate majority leaders, Howard Baker and Bob Dole; and two lesser-known congressmen. This year Mitt Romney won the GOP nomination. He beat a radio host, a disgraced former House speaker, a defeated Senate candidate, a former appointee of the Obama administration, a tongue-tied Texas governor, a prevaricating religious zealot who happens to serve in the House of Representatives and a cranky libertarian doctor. Where did all the talent go?

Until the Republican Party can answer this question, it makes no sense to continue to carp about Mitt Romney and the startlingly incompetent presidential campaign he’s running. His faults as a politician are manifest. He is robotic, unknowable (his own wife asserted at the national convention that “he made me laugh” and then failed to cite a single humorous moment), ideologically incoherent and severely out of touch with the average American. He is his party’s nominee because, like the one-eyed man in the valley of the blind, he is just the best of the worst.
Okay, so maybe this isn't the most blinding insight you've ever read. But how often do you see it in an Authentic Village Values WaPo column, which is to say one written by someone not named E. J. Dionne Jr., Gene Robinson, or Harold Meyerson? (Those can all be dismissed relatively effortlessly with a wave of the hand and a bemused "Oh, that E.J./Gene/Harold [fill in the appropriate dreamer].")
The list of Republicans who looked at Iowa’s daunting demographics and did not run is more distinguished than those who did. At one time or another, Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain (who was forced to drop out) were front-runners. Can you think of any two people less qualified for the presidency? How about Ron Paul, another front-runner, or Mad Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry, the cement-mouthed governor who would eliminate three Cabinet offices, if only he could remember them? How about Rick Santorum, a fun guy, who actually beat Romney in Iowa, or Jon Huntsman, a decent man with shallow political experience — and, it seemed, aptitude?

None of these candidates were remotely qualified for the highest office in the land. Arguably, Romney was the exception — and that’s the whole point. He won just by showing up. He beat a bunch of nobodies. This is how the GOP wound up with such a weak candidate, one who espouses extreme positions he does not for a moment believe.
I know it's easy, but I can still be had with a fresh round of indiscreet bashing of the 2012 GOP presidential "field."
The list of Republicans who looked at Iowa’s daunting demographics and did not run is more distinguished than those who did. At one time or another, Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain (who was forced to drop out) were front-runners. Can you think of any two people less qualified for the presidency? How about Ron Paul, another front-runner, or Mad Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry, the cement-mouthed governor who would eliminate three Cabinet offices, if only he could remember them? How about Rick Santorum, a fun guy, who actually beat Romney in Iowa, or Jon Huntsman, a decent man with shallow political experience — and, it seemed, aptitude
"Open the window and listen," says our Richard.
You will hear the moans and groans of Republican officials and their trained pundits. But where were these people when their field of oddballs was being assembled? Why were they so silent when Hispanics and women were being told to shove it and the long-dead Darwin was being debated? More to the point, maybe, how come they put up with a primary and caucus system — Iowa first, New Hampshire second — that seemingly was designed by a sly Democrat? The answer is that they do not have the courage nor the intellectual integrity to stand up to the know-nothing (dominant) wing of the Republican Party. They have designed a system where, politically speaking, the lowest common denominator wins. We are all the poorer for it.
At the heart of the toxic presidential-choosing system, says our Richard, setting up my favorite line, "is the series of incredibly damaging primaries and caucuses that, in the crucial early stages, produce a candidate who could sweep Bavaria." (Presumably all readers know that Bavaria is known for being the ultraconservative heartland of Germany.)

He recalls the extent of the pandering ("across the board") that Willard Inc. submitted to in Iowa.
A GOP candidate has to oppose same-sex marriage, deny global warming and insist — against all evidence — that local control of education is the best. The only way around these positions is to skip the Iowa caucuses entirely. It is no place for a moderate. It is, really, no place for a thinking person.
Okay, now here's where we have to take a relatively dispassionate view of the likes of Reagan and Bush Sr. and Baker and Dole. Do you see what I mean about the caliber of the lineup against which these skells are lined up?
Contrast the candidates of yore with the collection that took the field this year. The Republican Party has had a brain drain so that now its highest intellectual achievement is — like an infant in the Terrible 2s— simply to say no to everything, especially taxes. To paraphrase Marx, rise up, GOP moderates. You have nothing to lose . . . but losing.
Just one thing, Richard. These "GOP moderates" of whom you speak. Where are they again? Because if they existed in any appreciable number, wouldn't you think that a candidate would have found his/her way into the field to give them someone to rally 'round?
#

Labels: , , ,

5 Comments:

At 6:33 PM, Blogger Dennis Jernberg said...

If some stuck-up, flip-flopping, neocon-infatuated corporate raider's the best the GOP can come up with anymore, I suspect this may be their last election as a major party now that all their brains are gone. As for where all the "GOP moderates" went: I suspect they're conservative Democrats now, or will be.

(Random nostalgia alert: "This is the dawning of the age of Bavaria...")

 
At 7:51 PM, Blogger KenInNY said...

I hear you, Dennis. The only thing is, where is the Republican Party going to go? After all, there are still plenty of people prepared to vote for the kind of "talent" it's churning out. And the core of the party is already screaming that their problem is that their candidate isn't crazy, I mean conservative, enough.

Which raises an interesting question. Assuming the Willard-PRyan ticket goes down in flames (an assumption I'm not so sure about, but let's assume it), does PRyan come out of it weaker or stronger for future Republican "leadership"?

Btw, thanks for actually reading the piece! People often don't, but it's clear that you did, and that's much appreciated.

Cheers,
Ken

 
At 9:18 PM, Anonymous me said...

Am I alone in thinking that Nixon, Reagan, GHW Bush, Dole, et al., were nowhere near "moderate"?

I always considered them far right. Sure, they're not as loony as the current crop of scumpublicans, but that doesn't make the earlier generation moderate.

The current crop of lunatics CAME FROM the earlier ones. The current crop would not exist today without them (especially Reagan). The current crop is the inevitable result of the McCarthys, the Nixons, the Reagans, that preceded them.

Many people have expressed surprise that modern repubs are so bad. Not I. I've always known what they were like, and underneath the surface, they've always been just as we see today.

 
At 2:13 PM, Anonymous robert dagg murphy said...

Ken: Don't be cautious the Republicans are going down large. Never to rise again. They in conflict with 75% of the people and the 25% who support them are all idiots who believe in virgin births and raising from the dead. Through mass communication more of the public has caught on to these negative hateful people. And they are going to show up.

PRyan is a total idiot and will go nowhere. He is so dumb he shouldn't be re-elected to congress.

We only learn more not less. We must be patient.

There will be big changes in the next four years and mostly for the better. The establishment Jews should all be tossed like Romney and a middle east piece settlement will be the result. Their will be sensible economic proposals to get the country moving again and the GOP will be unable to stop progress. The public will make this happen. Obama will do so good even MESaid will be cheering (damn this is good weed. Which brings me to the really important part.

Weed will become legal and once the Republicans start getting high the world become better than we thought that it could.

Happy election everyone.

 
At 8:41 PM, Anonymous me said...

the Republicans are going down large. Never to rise again. They in conflict with 75% of the people and the 25% who support them are all idiots

Wishful thinking. Won't happen.

I'm sorry to have to say that, but it's true. I've seen that scum party rise from the dead too many times.

After Nixon, for instance. The scumpublican party was going to bite the dust, never again to see the light of day. What happened instead? Reagan happened. Far worse than Nixon ever thought of being.

Same thing after the most hated president in history, GW Bush. The republican brand was named Mudd. Two years later, they took over the House, and hold controlling votes in the Senate.

Never count out the scums. No matter what, they'll be back. The combination of unlimited campaign money and unlimited voter stupidity will see to that. Even if the "republican" brand did die, they'd be back with some other name.

We'll be playing whack-a-mole with those assholes for decades to come.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home