Thursday, January 03, 2008

New Hampshire Primary

If we view each vote not as a piece of victory, but a piece of information to those who will lead us, then helping your guy move from a 17% to an 18% share if he is going to lose to a candidate with 30% no longer looks like such a thoroughly useless exercise. My vote is my communication - to a point.

The current state of the Assistant Village Idiot's projected vote next week:

I prefer Fred Thompson on most issues, but my vote may not go that way. Unless he surges in the polls here after Iowa, I have no interest in moving him from 3% to 4% in NH. For the rest, it boils down to A) what you think are going to be the main issues over the next four years and B) whether you are looking at floor or ceiling in a candidate. I tend toward limited government, and limited goals with my vote. I might consider with some energy who might be a truly great president - that would be Fred, in my book - but I also look at "who is least likely to screw up issue X?" In the end, it is the latter question which directs my vote. I depend on the American people for American greatness. I depend on elected officials to avoid screwing things up. The Ron Paul supporters are basically claiming he offers more ceiling than any of the others. That may be true. But he also offers very little floor. It is not hard to imagine a major cock-up with Paul at the helm. Theory seems to distract him from reality.

If you are looking at floor rather than ceiling, and consider Iraq and the GWOT to be the most important issue, then McCain rather jumps out of the pack. He is least likely to seriously screw up the war on terror. If you consider the economy to be the main issue, then Romney edges McCain. McCain will veto more spending and twist more arms, but he will not fight to keep the tax cuts. I think Giuliani loses out on both those issues - offering neither the floor nor the ceiling of the others.

If you think appointing judges, SCOTUS and otherwise, is paramount, then Romney, Thompson, and McCain all offer both high floor and high ceiling. I don't know where Huckabee's floor is on anything, but he would likely be alright here. With all of them except Thompson, I do worry that their downticket judicial appointees are going to include some political appointments.

If you think national unity, and bringing us all together without the rancor of the last eight years is most important, then you are likely to vote Huckabee. I disrespectfully submit that you are also likely to buy swampland in Florida for your retirement home. The only thing that a Republican can do to get the usual progressive suspects to cease their incessant criticism is to give in to their demands. They are not the least interested in getting along.

If what you really want is someone who will verbally kick Democrat butt, then you want McCain for the war, or Thompson for everything else. Similarly, if you want to emphasize that progressives are basically children, and conservatives adults, you want the same two. As a President/VP combo, they might over time illustrate to the American middle that the MSM is biased and the netroots are just crazy. That would be worth a lot to me.

I'm noticing that Giuliani isn't scoring high on many of these. I like Rudy, and don't think he'd be terrible. I believe his move rightward is sincere, but perhaps not deep.

It is most likely that economic and judicial issues are going to be most important, which would suggest I am leaning toward Romney if Thompson isn't viable. I don't think it will play out that way. Iraq and the GWOT remain the areas that can go most wrong most quickly, and I am trading off the other areas.

I can't believe I am leaning McCain, but I am. If you vote defensively, it makes some sense.

In case anyone asks, if I were voting in the Democratic Primary I would be suicidal.


Ben Wyman said...

I'd still like to hear your thoughts on the Democratic candidates. If you had to vote, who would you vote for?

Anonymous said...

"I'd still like to hear your thoughts on the Democratic candidates. If you had to vote, who would you vote for?"

Bwah-hah! I asked that same question in the comments area over at Maggie's one day and was driven out on a rail. :)

The result was this.

If you read the above, you'll see that, at the time, I figured Hillary would be the best of the three. I'm really not looking forward to the proxy presidency of Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid.

But after Iowa, I decided to re-think things, and this time came to a different conclusion. If we make the assumptions that:

1. Despite Obama's lack of foreign policy experience, he'll be surrounded by advisers, just as all presidents are, and I think our nation will be in good hands.

2. When it comes to domestic policy, all three are peas from the same pod, but I remind us that presidents don't make laws, so platforms such as 'universal health care' are hardly a given.

So, if we scratch the above two from the list, that leaves the singular, most heinous, evil, foul thing about America that is in desperate need of a fix:


Or, more specifically, the accusations of racism that are doing more damage to our country than everything else combined.

And only one candidate has a hope in hell of doing anything about it.

And it's not that he'll necessarily do anything, himself; just his mere presence in the most powerful seat in the world will bespeak volumes. I present the argument with much more detail here.

If Fred wins the nomination, he's got my vote. But after that?

- Every time I hear Romney speak at a debate, the word "pandering" comes to mind. I mean, I really want to like the guy, but he just comes across as phony. And I really don't think this country is ready to elect a Mormon for president.

- McCain is a wimp and a traitor, pretending that being a prisoner of war 40 years ago somehow gives him some kind of 'authority' to speak of military matters, and has everyone forgotten how he turned traitor and sided with the Dems in the 'anti-torture' debate last year?

And the others are either so liberal they should be ashamed to run as Republicans, or they don't have a chance in hell.

So, if Fred's not on the ticket, I'll probably look at the bigger picture, remember all of the instances of racial accusations I mention in my article, and vote for Obama in the hopes that his mere presence in the White House will help relegate Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to the dust bin of history.

Anonymous said...

John McCain, the "maverick" who never tires of screwing over Republicans?

The man who believes that newspapers have the right to criticise politicians close to election, but private citizens do not?

The man who cares more for the power of individual Senators, than for the President's power to make appointments?

Not a viable choice.

Anonymous said...



情趣用品,A片,AIO,AV,AV女優,A漫,免費A片,日本AV,寄情築園小遊戲,情色貼圖,色情小說,情色文學,色情,色情遊戲,一葉情貼圖片區,色情網站,色情影片,微風成人, 嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,18成人,成人影城,成人圖片,成人影片,UT聊天室,聊天室,豆豆聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,080聊天室,080苗栗人聊天室,080視訊聊天室,視訊聊天室



麻將,台灣彩卷,六合彩開獎號碼,運動彩卷,六合彩,遊戲,線上遊戲,cs online,搓麻將,矽谷麻將,明星三缺一, 橘子町,麻將大悶鍋,台客麻將,公博,game,,中華職棒,麗的線上小遊戲,國士無雙麻將,麻將館,賭博遊戲,威力彩,威力彩開獎號碼,龍龍運動網,史萊姆,史萊姆好玩遊戲,史萊姆第一個家,史萊姆好玩遊戲區,樂透彩開獎號碼,遊戲天堂,天堂,好玩遊戲,遊戲基地,無料遊戲王,好玩遊戲區,麻將遊戲,好玩遊戲區,小遊戲,電玩快打

麻將,台灣彩卷,六合彩開獎號碼,運動彩卷,六合彩,線上遊戲,矽谷麻將,明星3缺一,橘子町,麻將大悶鍋,台客麻將,公博,game,,中華職棒,麗的線上小遊戲,國士無雙麻將,麻將館,賭博遊戲,威力彩,威力彩開獎號碼,龍龍運動網,史萊姆,史萊姆好玩遊戲,史萊姆第一個家,史萊姆好玩遊戲區,樂透彩開獎號碼,遊戲天堂,好玩遊戲,遊戲基地,無料遊戲王,好玩遊戲區,麻將遊戲,好玩遊戲區,小遊戲,遊戲區,電玩快打,cs online

情趣用品,情趣,A片,AIO,AV,AV女優,A漫,免費A片,情色,情色貼圖,色情小說,情色文學,色情,寄情竹園小遊戲,色情遊戲,AIO交友愛情館,色情影片,情趣內衣,情趣睡衣,性感睡衣,情趣商品,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人,18成人,成人影城,成人圖片,成人貼圖,成人圖片區,UT聊天室,聊天室,豆豆聊天室 ,哈啦聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,聊天室尋夢園,080苗栗人聊天室,080聊天室,視訊交友網,視訊