Comments
Via WaPo: Rep. Paul Ryan says he’d ‘consider’ a vice presidential candidacy.
Of course, this is just Ryan being honest, yes? I always find it disingenuous when politicians say that they can’t even imagine being asked or when they dismiss the question entirely. There isn’t a politician alive, save for ex-presidents, who wouldn’t at least consider such an offer, and anyone who says otherwise is fibbing.
Categories
Tags
Agreed, it’s beyond fatuous when guys like Rubio sit there and lie through their teeth to the cameras about a prospective Veep nod. Spare us the melodrama, please.
Ryan’s a smart guy and maybe years down the road he could be ready for prime time, but if Romney tapped him as Veep it would be a monumentally poor choice. Ryan’s never even attempted much less prevailed in a statewide election. Someone needs to write that in as a RNC rule. If you’ve never won a major election you can’t be tapped as Veep. Jack Kemp, anyone? Dick Cheney? Ryan would mean less than nothing in places like Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, etc. Hell, given that the media-Democrat cabal will be using a Mediscare strategy this fall having Ryan on the ticket likely would cost net votes in Florida and Ohio, both of which have very old demographics.
Romney has three very legitimate Veep choices: Rubio, Rob Portman, Bob McDonnell. He has three lesser but still somewhat legitimate choices: Pat Toomey, Brian Sandoval, Tim Pawlenty. He has two lesser still but nevertheless barely legitimate choices: Susana Martinez, Ron Johnson. I know I just said that mere Congressmen shouldn’t even be considered, but Mike Rogers has won five or six contests in a big district in Michigan by huge margins. Michigan’s worth a lot more than Wisconsin. Romney also has one hail mary play (literally): Santorum.
Hell, given that the media-Democrat cabal will be using a Mediscare strategy this fall having Ryan on the ticket likely would cost net votes in Florida and Ohio, both of which have very old demographics.
My goodness, how do conservatives ever prevail at all? I mean, with the vast conspiracy arrayed against them, it must be so terribly difficult…
My extremely liberal, gay twenty one year old son would vote for a ticket with Paul Ryan on it in a heartbeat. He was pissed off that Ryan wouldn’t consider running at the top of the ticket. He is scared for his future, as am I, if our country doesn’t get its spending under control and he thinks Ryan is one of the few people that are actually trying to do something about it. The only problem I see with Ryan’s budget is that it doesn’t start balancing the budget for decades in the future. We’ll be Greece before that happens.
My extremely liberal, gay twenty one year old son would vote for a ticket with Paul Ryan on it in a heartbeat.
Sounds like his mom is still telling him what to do. Greece? LOL.
@Moderate Mom: I’m trying to square how anyone who is “liberal” would vote for Paul Ryan? Aren’t Ryan’s ideas the exact antithesis of liberal?
@Bennett:
I’m trying to square how anyone who is “liberal” would vote for Paul Ryan? Aren’t Ryan’s ideas the exact antithesis of liberal?
And not just “liberal” but “extremely liberal.”
@ Moderate Mom
Really? Wow. What a coincidence. My daughter who is a transgender communist feels exactly the same way. She says that after 2 more years of Obama, Greece will be a superpower compared to America. She is currently on tranquelizers because she is so freaked out by the rejection of the Ryan plan which she knows is our only hope for salvation.
Myself, I am a moderate, but I think Obama really, really sucks and liberals are probably evil and they worship Satan in their basements. But I am a moderate. I might even change my name to Moderate Anjin…
@anjin-san: My fetus is a liberal, I can tell from the smell of weed smoke coming from my girlfriend’s groin. But it too supports the Ryan Plan.
@Dazedandconfused: In between pressing wild flowers, no doubt.
I find it amusing that all of the liberal commenters on this quasi-conservative blog find it so hard to believe that someone can be quite socially liberal while also being somewhat conservative when it comes to fiscal matters in government. Is there some kind of template one can use to determine whether the badge to wear announcing their political allegiance? Please direct me to the official Conservative/Liberal questionnaire so that I might properly determine which label either my son or myself should sport. Silly me, I have always thought of myself as one of those people in the somewhat mushy middle, an Independent and someone of rather moderate views.
I also consider it strange that someone like Michael Reynolds believes that anyone that doesn’t ascribe to his particular political views is a troll, someone unworthy (unlike him) of expressing an opinion. Honey, if I had a freak flag, I would proudly let it fly. But I don’t. I’m just a boring middle-age wife, mother and small business owner that finds keeping up with politics a lot more interesting than watching whatever the latest reality show is on television. That and doing Sudoku puzzles.
I find it amusing that all of the liberal commenters on this quasi-conservative blog find it so hard to believe that someone can be quite socially liberal while also being somewhat conservative when it comes to fiscal matters in government.
Well, I think the confusion derives from the fact that you described him as “extremely liberal” not as “socially liberal and fiscally conservative”–I would submit that the two descriptions are actually rather significantly different.
I must confess, too, that I personally found the description questionable as, to be honest, while your moniker is “Moderate Mom” you come across in your comments as actually pretty firmly conservative (as defined by the general vernacular of contemporary American politics). I think these two factors lead to the hijinx above (that and the fact that it was a lazy Sunday afternoon).
BTW, while imperfect (as are most things), you might find the following of interest: The Political Compass. I will be curious if it does, in fact, classify you as moderate.
I find it amusing that all of the liberal commenters on this quasi-conservative blog […]
I find it amusing that conservative trolls on most, if not all blogs, not only have have little understanding of the Ryan plan itself; but also have a very poor grasp of the actual issues underlying the Federal budget deficit. Here’s a hint; it has nothing to do with Greece.
I find it extremely amusing that a “Moderate Mom” with a gay son isn’t absolutely horrified by the GOP’s insistence on ensuring that sexual preferences between consenting adults is tantamount to second class citizen status – if citizens at all.
Here is my score: http://www.politicalcompass.org/printablegraph?ec=-0.75&soc=-2.36
It seems I am slightly left leaning with a little bit of a libertarian bent.
Also, yes, my son would definitely describe himself as very liberal. He is definitely to the left of me on quite a few issues. He’s also a Broadcast Journalism major with a Political Science minor, and he seems to be pretty up to speed on the issues. Given the problems this country faces right now, and what appears to be an economic train wreck heading straight at us, anyone in their early twenties that is not worried about their future, much less the future of their own children, is in a state of denial.
And as a side note to James, yes, the stance of the Religious Right does horrify me and it always has. I’ve always been a supporter of gay rights – whether it be job security, marriage, adoption, etc.. That might have something to do with being around gay men at a very early age. My uncle was gay and in a long term relationship, and both of them were loved and very welcome in the family. That one of my children is gay is a gift from God, because he knew that I’d always love and support that child. Unlike President Obama, on the issue of gay marriage, I’ve already evolved, so I guess that puts me to the left of him on that particular issue.
@Moderate Mom: I am overjoyed to hear about your “evolved” opinion on the equal rights of all Americans. Consider for a second which chief executive has attempted to enshrine that concept with executive actions like bargaining a repeal of DADT and refusing to use DOJ resources to defend DOMA.
As for your concerns for “appears to be an economic train wreck heading straight at us, […]” I advise you to “evolve” a little more on the major drivers of the federal budget deficit. The fact that you are trying to bring Greece into the conversation indicates you have a very poor grasp on the issue.
Lastly, if your son is still an undergraduate, and he’s as concerned about the federal budget deficient as you say he is, then he needs to take an introductory micro and macroeconomics course. This will pay dividends if he really does wish to pursue a journalism career in pubic affairs and policy. It is the number one topic that marks the difference between him reporting on public issues, and actually understanding them.
The history of choosing young, telegenic, good-looking running mates does not bode well for the practice, and while Paul Ryan does appear to have more substance than Dan Quayle, John Edwards, or Sarah Palin, his authorship of the budget bill would make his selection as running mate an act of political suicide. But then, the GOP’s embrace of that bill in the first place was itself a pretty suicidal act. If Ryan is selected, it could be the first time such a choice threatens the party’s control of Congress, not to speak of the presidency.
@Kylopod:
and while Paul Ryan does appear to have more substance than Dan Quayle, John Edwards, or Sarah Palin
While Edwards is undoubtedly a slimeball I’m not sure I’d say he was without substance. He had been a very successful class action lawyer before going into politics. Admittedly this is a rather slimy occupation but it does require quite a lot of brains. Then he was a senator. Quayle was just some not overly intelligent rich kid while the extent of Palin’s intellect or lack of it rapidly became apparent. Ryan I understand has an undergrad degree but demonstrates a weird lack of judgement in his economic choices. He’s also a bit creepy looking but maybe that’s just me. Either way he’s not going to be the Veep nominee.
Ryan is no fiscal conservative. Fiscal conservatives do not look at the present US government fiscal situation and say “I know what will fix this! Tax cuts!”
He’s a tax-cut maniac like the rest of the True Believers. His plan balances the budget waaaay out in the future via the use of dodgy assumptions (like growth rates caused by the magical tax cuts, discretionary spending dropping to miniscule levels, cutting unspecified tax deductions). If I recall correctly, he also specifically exempts any currently-old people from sharing the pain, which is just a straight-up pander. I’m unimpressed as a 35-yr old. If I was 21? Dude! Even worse.
We do need a plan. Ryan is putting down the GOP dream plan (well, this is actually the revised version of the first, even crazier one). The Dems will do what they do best: try to start in some sort of reasonable middle (between the 40 yard lines, to use a phrase Obama has used before), and if there is a compromise solution it will end up between the center-left and the hard right. Lest this be construed as whining, look at what Obama was offering up to Boehner last year: a 4-to-1 mix of spending cuts to revenue increases. If a deal is reached at all with Obama in office, I fully expect it to be such a deal – to the Right of Simpson & Bowles’ recommendation (which also had its faults, but was something I could probably get behind).
We need to restrain spending growth (this is basically all about healthcare) and increase revenue (remember, we are well below post-WWII average revenue here). We need to do this carefully, as the recovery from the worse financial panic since the Depression is still fragile. If I were in charge, I’d expect those who made out like bandits over the past couple of decades to bear the lion’s share of the burden. I won’t be holding my breath.
As somebody who was worried about the national debt in the 1990s, none of the above pleases me. I’m still furious about what Bush the Lesser and his backers in Congress (PAUL RYAN!!) did with the fiscal situation they inherited. But that happened and there’s no going back and fixing it. We play the hand we’re dealt.
BTW, on the Ryan budget plan, I would recommend Bruce Bartlett’s recent column: The Ryan Budget Plan: More Fantasy than Reality
>While Edwards is undoubtedly a slimeball I’m not sure I’d say he was without substance.
I didn’t say Edwards was completely without substance (although even in 2004, long before the revelations about his personal life, he struck me as a lightweight), just that Ryan seems to have more substance. And by saying that, in no way am I endorsing Ryan’s proposals or remotely agreeing with the characterization of him by many pundits as a serious fiscal thinker. On the contrary, I think his proposals are fraudulent. He absolutely embodies the modern-day GOP, where the entire purpose is to further enrich the rich while claiming against all available evidence to be both tackling the deficit and advancing the interests of the average American. It isn’t an easy goal for Republicans, and I have some morbid admiration for the extent to which they’ve been able to mislead so many people about their intentions and finesse the political system to accept their rampantly unpopular policies. While Ryan would be a terrible candidate on any presidential ticket, that’s because his actual ideas are so toxic, not because he’s unskilled or vapid.
