(Photo: The exact moment when Rick Perry’s Presidential ambitions died.)
Some quick observations about tonight’s debate:
Observation #1 – Anti-Government Rhetoric Is Apparently Just That – Rhetoric
If there was one universal constant – universal among both all candidates and all issues – was that government only creates problems; if everything were simply left to the free market all of our problems would be solved. I would challenge anyone that Tivo-ed the debate to find a three-minute stretch where this mantra isn’t being repeated to applause. The thing of it is, though, that I am starting to wonder if Republicans know what the words “government” and “free market” mean.
Here is a quick review of all of the proposals that the various candidates proposed as a way to get government out of the business of business:
• Having the federal government break up the six largest banks
• Raising tariffs against China, plus having the government intercede on trade agreements on businesses’ behalf
• Pledge to the young workers of America that they will have ample retirement funds waiting when they retire
• Instruct Congress to create multiple tax structures to shift the tax burden on certain industries, while allowing others to take advantage of government services without paying any taxes at all
• Totally privatizing all healthcare by having each individual state set up it’s own Medicaid bureaucracy
• Having all of healthcare set up to have “extra” options over a federally paid for system (a la Medicare)
• Revisiting all regulations created since 2008, but giving a pass to regulations from before 2008
• No more bailouts of any kind! Except for ones like the ones that bailed out the nice people from Michigan, where the debate was being held. Those were awesome bailouts. Except the way that Obama did them was terrible.
All of these items were cheered for by the anti-Government base; in fact each of these was straight faced pitched as an idea to eliminate government interference. Having certain industries subsidize others through legislative fiat was actually presented as a way to “stop Washington picking winners and losers.”
Observation #2 – A Goal is Different From a Solution
The proposed solution from just about everyone to any troubling issue was, “I think we should grow the economy.” As if the competing current strategies to getting out of the recession were growing the economy, shrinking the economy, and knitting the economy a nice cozy for the winter.
“I think we should grow the economy” was also the way everyone got away from any troubling side effect his or her position might have. For example, when arguing that the government should not artificially be keeping student or housing rates low, the candidates were asked, “So, you’re OK with the interest rates going up?” As an independent, almost any of the people on stage tonight could have come close to competing up my vote by responding “Yes. I know that it will be a bitter pill to swallow for many, but it’s something we need to do.” Instead they would reiterate their position, and pretend the unintended consequences couldn’t happen because they wanted “to grow the economy.”
Observation #3 – I’m Worried About Jim Cramer
Seriously, he needs to relax. Everything with that guy is communicated at off the charts stress levels. It’s tiring just watching him listen to a candidate respond.
Observation #4 – The GOP Can Begin Kissing the General Election’s Female Vote Goodbye
Cain was asked about the harassment scandal, of course, and the audience roundly booed the moderators. When Cain dismissed the women accusing him – after a week of getting caught in successive lies personally, finished by a complete whopper by his campaign manager – the audience gave him the biggest cheer of the night.
Wow. To my mind, going on just Presidential debate audiences, we can chalk the Republican base as cheering executions and sexual harassment, and booing soldiers who are gay. It’s as if the whole party keeps saying to itself, “Huh, Obama’s still down in the polls? We need to find a way to make sure we can’t possibly beat him next November! Think, damn it! Think!”
Observation #5 – Please Tell Me You Were Pandering
Were the candidates just pandering to an audience it thought simple? I sure hope so, because it was hard not to get the impression that the reporter/moderators knew far more about any of the issues than the candidates.
For example: When candidates were asked about what if anything the US should do with the situation in Italy, each one asked said it was not America’s problem. Which in itself is a fine enough position. But the moderators followed up asking how they would deal with the instability that non-action might cause the US dollar. When the candidates seemed to not understand, the moderators had to start explaining how the international monetary fund worked. Then they asked, were the candidates suggesting pulling out of the monetary fund? And as the candidates flailed, it was hard not to get the sense that they had no idea what the moderators were talking about. (I believe Cain’s final solution to potential international monetary fund problems was 9-9-9. This is not me making a joke.)
Observation #6 – Bachmann and Perry are Officially Toast
I can’t understand Bachmann at all. If anything, over the past year she seems to be becoming less seasoned with each passing month. Six months ago it was hard not to root for her plucky charisma, even if she did occasionally say things you assumed were making her campaign manager want to commit hari-kari. Now she seems so brittle and panicked, like she’s never been in front of an audience before. What happened? I want the old Bachmann back.
Perry though, I will say, had me fooled for a while. He didn’t look great, but he looked somewhat passable through the first part of the debate. And then the train wreck came. He claimed that a cornerstone of his Presidency would be to eliminate three specific departments of the federal government – and then couldn’t remember what all three were. Education, Commerce, and… something. No, not the EPA, but like it… The moderators, being polite and offering him more time so he could remember, just made that self-dug grave that much deeper as he finally had to admit he had “no idea.” He did remember later in the debate, and let everyone know out of context that he also wanted to eliminate the Department of Energy. The audience gave him a polite, encouraging applause that just made it worse. Of all the moments of the debate, this will be the one you’ll read about and see clips of for days. But if you didn’t see it live, you’ll never know just how painful a thing it was to watch.
finished by acomplete whopper by his campaign manager
That her son works for Politico? Other than not working for Politico and not being her son, it’s completely true.Report
Don’t worry. By 10 AM today this whopper will be an article of faith among the Retardican Right, because it allows them to discount the truth and remain safe in the echo chamber.Report
Completely true just like the spitting Tea Partiers, the Texas ANG memo, and “I can see Russia from my house”.Report
I half-watched the first half, scrolling though League posts and eventually falling asleep. The moment that stood out to me was when Romney was asked whether he would fire an executive of a newly acquired company who was accused of sexual harassment. My gut reaction was that he handled the question admirably, not just in what he said but in what appeared to be a genuine response and refusal to take a cheap shot at Cain. I wondered if it was purely strategic, since going up against Cain ultimately helps him, but he did seem to have a very human and honest reaction, something rare for him. As I thought more about it, I wondered if he should have qualified his response with something along the lines of, “Without commenting directly on Mr. Cain’s situation, I will say that I would unequivocally not tolerate sexual harassment in the work place and would fire any executive or employee who created an unsafe or unhealthy workplace.” It attempting to avoid wading into the Cain situation, he ultimately seemed to be saying not-offending-the-guy-is-preferable-to-not-allowing-sexual-harassment, a dicey position to take. Thoughts?Report
That may be right. My own thought was that right after the audience turned on the moderators and cheered Cain, I would have been afraid to say much. So maybe he was being smart.Report
Perhaps I’m in an overly righteous mood right now, but I’m tired of people not calling a spade a spade. The candidates utter platitudes all night about fixing the economy, and yet the front-runner waffles one of the easiest questions regarding right and wrong.Report
ECGach-
Well said. I realize that there are issues with making outright attacks when there is still more to learn about the Cain situation, but it should be pretty easy to say, “Uh, yea, I’d fire someone who committed sexual harassment in my place of business in a heartbeat.”Report
Definitely, it’s not savvy to pile on, but the moderators seemed to go out of there way to give him a question, the answer to which wouldn’t be a direct endorsement or rebuttal of Cain’s actions.
But I wonder, while it’s safe to stay out of that fight, maybe that was one hypothetical that gave Romney an easy way to come down strongly on something.Report
Judge not, lest you be judged, is the rule. This is nonsense, from folks who won’t vote for him anyway. It didn’t matter what he said.Report
As far as character goes? It mattered, and he demonstrated his usual spine-less-ness.
As for whether it matters politically, you’re probably right.Report
Romney refused to take their bait, and Gingrich openly mocked those jackals. It was a beautiful thing.
Rick Perry, RIP. As for the rest, they don’t matter any more than Al Sharpton did, when he got a seat at the Dem debates. I’d at least put Michele Bachmann up against Sharpton anyway anyday.
😉Report
But Romney is being judged. Thus far, he has presented himself as someone who would not sexually harass someone. He has passed the sexual harassment test. Cain isn’t faring so well.Report
Judge not, lest you be judged, is the rule
Makes it a bit hard to run a democratic election, eh? *grin*Report
Judge not, lest you be judged, is the rule.
Accordingly, Michell Malkin just retired from punditry to spend more time wity her family.
Poor family.Report
Mike Schilling does a driveby on Michelle Malkin for no relevant or apparent reason. Shoots, misses, vanishes back into the night. Puzzling but well done, sir. Your family must be proud. I hope you show them all your posts. She shows hers.Report
I am skeptical that you really miss the connection between judging not and Our Lady of Perpetual Outrage.Report
On number 5, nothing has been more despicable than to what length people will go to protect those in who they put their faith/trust.
You have PSU fans bending over backward to defend the “dignity” and “respect” of people like Paterno, and Herman Cain supporters/sympathizers cheering the one person on the stage tonight who is accused by multiple women of the worst kind of sexual harassment.
Ugh, it’s been a bad night.Report
Ooops, I meant number 4.Report
I knew. And agreed.Report
This numbering thing is hard!Report
I like observation #4 the best. “Huh, Obama’s still down in the polls? We need to find a way to make sure we can’t possibly beat him next November! Think, damn it! Think!” It does make you wonder sometimes.Report
See? Easy!Report
That’s what you think.Report
Now, on the actual number 5, I was definitely taken aback by the inability of anyone on stage to articulate how they might deal with Italy’s financial collapse.
Obviously, it’s a very difficult issue, and there’s not much a President can do to affect it. But still, to not even offer a shallow equivocation? For all their talk of free trade, no one on stage seems to understand the ramifications of 21st century globalization.
And yet ask any of them, except perhaps Ron Paul, if the geopolitics of a region half-way across the globe matters enough to launch endless missile strikes and two land occupations, and you’d get a resounding yes.
So foreign terrorists matter, but not foreign economies. Something’s not consistent there.Report
Megan McArdle has an apposite post up on the subject. (Normally I’m conditioned to avoid bringing up Ms. McArdle in multipartisan settings, but in this case she enthusiastically endorses Brad DeLong, so I think there’s broad enough consensus across the econoblogosphere on this one that I can say the em-word and not get written off immediately as a corporate shill.)
Briefly: any even remotely realistic attempt to mitigate financial crisis will look horrendously unfair.
Trying to mitigate the effects the Eurozone’s collapse will have on the American economy will probably involve giving a lot more money to banks — quoting DeLong, “[t]he Federal Reserve needs to buy up every single European bond owned by every single American financial institution for cash” — and that’s a great way to piss off every single populist who’s eligible to vote. To an economist — or someone who plays one on the internet, like me — this is a simple matter of counterparty risk. Try explaining that to the voting public in a thirty-second sound bite.Report
what’s the reason for not letting them fail, again?Report
Read the article?Report
Break Europe up into pieces that aren’t too large to fail!Report
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter!Report
Then confederate them loosely under something we might call the Wholly Nominal Empire.Report
That’s the problem with politicians today. They don’t speak fast enough.Report
I know if something pissed me off bad enough that I thought it should be ended, I’d have no problem whatsoever remembering its name. Shit, I’d have trouble forgetting it even after I’ve gotten rid of it!Report
For the record, I had no problem rooting against Michelle Bachman six months ago, specifically because of the plucky charisma she brought to her attempts to reduce the aggregate amount of liberty in the world for millions of citizens that weren’t white, men, or straight.Report
To be fair, I’m sure she’d find a way to reduce mine as well.Report
I’ve been on a 10-day hiatus from political news, so I didn’t realize that the Republicans were having yet another debate. Sounds like you got it right with #4–these candidates are so freaking awful that they up Obama’s chances for re-election every time they open their mouths. I guess I might not have to make those plans for moving to Canada after all.Report
@Michelle,
I’ve been on a 10-day hiatus from political news, so I didn’t realize that the Republicans were having yet another debate
So that explains why you were so unprepared last night!
(What, you’re not Michelle Bachmann? Oh, my apologies.)Report
(What, you’re not Michelle Bachmann? Oh, my apologies.)
-1
Just too cold…Report
http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/images/user_photos/1236209/3b0c9df007067a6ad9dc8fd9251056b2_original.jpg?49fa68bfReport
Ack! Sorry, can you delete that ^ (thought it would auto resize)
Just should’ve provide the link here http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/images/user_photos/1236209/3b0c9df007067a6ad9dc8fd9251056b2_original.jpg?49fa68bfReport
I don’t like Perry, never did, but I have to admit that I had to turn the debate off for a few minutes because I felt so bad for the guy. Watching him search for the third department and panicking while trying not to look like he was panicking was more embarrassing than any scene from Meet the Parents. I had to make it stop.Report
I totally agree with you here. Some things are just so cringeworthy you don’t wish them on anyone. As bad as I think Perry is, he can’t be as bad as he looked in those 5 minutes and I felt real sympathy for the guy.Report
If mentally misplacing something for a minute or two makes one unqualified to be president, 35 needs to become the maximum age.Report
“going on just Presidential debate audiences, we can chalk the Republican base as cheering executions and sexual harassment, and booing soldiers who are gay.”
That last is FUCKING BULLSHIT AND YOU FUCKING KNOW IT.Report
True. I totally made that up.
Report
“the Republican base” did not boo soldiers who are gay. One guy yells “boo” and one yells “woohoo”. You’re giving the impression that the entire crowd was going bonkers.Report
And the rest of the crown, hearing an American soldier being booed, sat on their hands. Classy stuff.Report
Ultimately this seems pretty moot. Romney seems an effortless shoe in for the nomination and he’s clearly playing things safe in the debates (and who in his position wouldn’t?).Report