More Electable?
Conventional wisdom has it that Mitt Romney would be the strongest Republican to run against Mr. Obama. Accordingly, Newt's victory in South Carolina should augur well for those who prefer a lesser rightward shift, if his victory translated into Newt's nomination. But is Mitt really more electable? I'm not so sure. In particular, one must wonder whether any Mormon is electable — because so many Americans see Mormonism as a cult. They happen to be right about that and they probably won't be changing their minds anytime soon.
Newt, on the other hand, benefits from the way the American political cake is already baked: about 25% of voters are, in Bob Altemeyer's terminology, "authoritarian followers" who vote for the most right wing candidate available. About another 10%, I reckon, are plutocrats and their hangers-on. And beyond that perhaps a further 10% are right wingers from the military-industrial complex. Throw in a few mental defectives who vote based on the candidates' rhetorical positions and that means the battle will be fought almost entirely over a relatively small number of independents. Up against Mitt Mr. Obama probably could shake loose a good number from those pre-baked categories but against Newt he'd probably have to rely more upon independents or on turning out his Democratic base, or both, which seems a more problematic strategy.
In any case, looking ahead it'll be all too easy to make fun of Newt or Mitt (or for that matter the other two) but the real problem is less the right wing candidates themselves than their supporters, who deserves their own fair share of ridicule. From the mainstream media — presumably due to its commercial considerations — that ridicule, however, seems strangely unforthcoming.
Posted by George Kenney on January 22, 2012 3:18 AM 
« Assassinations, Inc. | Main | Cheap Jingoism »
Comments
I am appalled that the mainstream media takes the primaries seriously at all. Aside from the one they insist is crazy, none of these people offer any significant change from the Obama administration on national security, militarism, foreign policy, domestic policy, or financial industry reform.
We are being treated to a political version of professional football where two teams owned by corporate interests compete in a structured game which is fun to watch but has no bearing on our actual lives. Instead of focusing on the contest and its ludicrous participants, we should reflect on the fact that our political system is broken and incapable of repairing itself.
[Exactly! g.]
Posted by: Charles D
|
January 22, 2012 9:04 AM
Save for Ron Paul, can one imagine a more disgraceful lineup of knaves than the Republican candidates? Paul is far from perfect, but at least he is human and not a scoundrel like the rest of them. Unfortunately, barring a minor miracle, Obama will win: after all he has done exactly what his handlers wanted — "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." If Paul were to be elected, I doubt his sanity would endure for more than a year, not to mention the fact that our bought and paid for Congress and Court would simply ignore him. However, it might catalyze — despite our traditions, and in the face of our headlong rush into the abyss — an eventual military coup. But no...what am I thinking? The Pentagon is also bought and paid for and gets to police an empire!
Posted by: Jorge | January 23, 2012 4:00 PM