On a Candidate

Not only do I live in a swing state (Ohio), I’m also one of those independent moderates for whom each party strives to get my vote. As I’ve said before, they want my vote, but they sure don’t want my policies. Nonetheless, my choice has finally become very clear.

Unquestionably, Mitt Romney has a business acumen – which would include critical thinking skills, statistical analysis, and looking after the good of the organization’s bottom line. Mitt Romney’s business skills may even be able to bridge a divided Congress.

I also believe Mitt Romney is a good family man, and I am confident that Ann Romney would be an impressive First Lady.

Probably the best reason to vote for Mitt Romney is that no matter what he does, odds are he said it some time. In the end, I cannot vote for him.

Mitt Romney complains about dishonest, deceptive, divisive, distorted statements, misleading, and out-of context information by the Obama campaign, but practices the exact same thing – and maybe more so.

Mitt Romney is willing to adjust his sails to the prevailing political winds to gain a benefit. Even with his personal wealth, he seems willing to sell his soul to special interests.

Mitt Romney strives on tag lines as he’s not the other guy, and he can do better. H states that President Obama overemphasizes blaming the Bush administration – yet only states he can do better and remains shallow on details. He recently said more details are coming soon. Sorry, for someone who has been running for more than a year, it’s too little-too late for me.

Mitt Romney represents a party who intentionally didn’t cooperate with President Obama for their own political gain – thus intentionally punishing Americans in order to maintain a stagnant economy and receive a financial downgrade.

Mitt Romney represents a party who will unquestionably overreach if they have a majority. Look what happened in Wisconsin and Ohio. Listen to the noncompromising nature of their candidates – and Mitt Romney is selling his soul to this people.

Mitt Romney avoids his signature legislation as governor like the plague – the Massachusetts Health Care Plan.

Mitt Romney remains out of touch with mainstream America. Is the middle class really households with an annual income of $200,000-250,000?

Given his reactions to the recent events at the US embassy in Libya, he not only demonstrated his divisiveness, his actions seem more out of desperation than presidential.

In the end, I don’t trust Mitt Romney nor the current Republican Party, so he won’t get my vote – even as an anti-Obama vote. Keep in mind that I’m also a registered Republican in a very Republican region of Ohio.

Before any Romney supporters go through their “but President Obama this, but President Obama that” approach, remember this: “but” is a deflection to avoid criticism of your candidate and an excuse to defend your preference. Simply put, he is not going to get my vote.

I also won’t vote Libertarian or any other minor party of the ballot. However, this does not mean I will vote for President Obama. After all, his campaign continues to work hard at convincing me to not vote for him. At this point, the best chance he has for my vote is if I cast it as an anti-Romney vote – which could happen – but not yet.

On a Political Mood

Close observers know I post my share of political commentaries. Then again, those same people may have noticed that I have not posted on the politics in a few weeks. Let me set the stage.

  • I will vote in the Ohio Republican Primary
  • As a centrist (moderate independent), I was leaning toward John McCain, but selecting Sarah Palin closed the “not so” deal (My 10/01/2008 explanation)
  • Nope, I did not vote for President Obama, thus leaving that part of my ballot blank
  • My tendency is that no matter the party affiliation, I hope our president is successful
  • Ever since the 2008 election, the action of the GOP has pushed me away
  • The current slate of Republican candidates is (at best) a sorry bunch
  • I have not tortured myself by watching any of the televised Republican debates, but have stayed informed
  • To no avail, I cautioned the Democrats in 2008 and the Republicans in 2010 about misreading the election results and overreaching

As a swing vote, especially one in a swing state, each party wants my vote so they can declare their version of a voter mandate; however, they do not want my policies. The Democrats do not want ideas from a fiscal conservative and the Republicans do not want to hear from socially liberal ideas.

Election 2012 is shaping up as another battle of the ideologies. I have often said that current slate of candidates embarrasses traditional Republicans. Although some will also say that they will vote for President Obama in 2012, I know that most of them will still vote for the Republican candidate because that is what they do.

I know it’s still relatively early, but where does all this leave me? Although everyone must be cautious when saying never, but the chance of me voting for the GOP candidate for president in November 2012 is very slim. After all, what are the odds that the Republican will nominate a sensible slate?

On the other hand, the odds are much better than I will cast a vote for President Obama. Maybe not so much in support of the Democratic party, but as a vote against the Republicans and their obstructionist, too-far-to-the-right ways … and of course, at the expense of helping the Democratic party misread the voter mandate.

On a GOP Glimpse at 2012

Jockeying to be the Republican presidential nominee has been underway for sometime – actually starting before the last election. In a this not-long-ago post, Al (a blog friend and sensible writer at 2012), wondered about who his party would put forth to challenge President Obama. With that as a cue, and with various announcements about candidates forming exploratory committees, maybe it’s time for an independent, moderate’s perspective of the GOP field.

In one corner, we have the ideological buffoons, those specializing is pandering rhetoric to the narrow-minded in the form of snake venom and snake oil. These candidates throw ideas against the wall hoping if they stick – of course sticking is more important than truth as they invoke fear over intellect, reaction over thought, rage over calm, populism over rationalism, and party over country in the name of the country. These are the candidates also use the names of dreaded historical figures from dark, worldly regimes from history to enhance their climate of fear.

In the next corner, the rational ideologues. As ideological buffoons and their followers taunt them, but the rationale ideologues remain tall for conservative principles. Although this group speaks with a degree of sensibility that can attract independents, they lack the rants that fuel populist masses. As with anyone in the political arena, some are haunted by their self-imposed albatrosses that hang around the neck – thus questions remain if the public will allow them to shed their bird of the noose.

In which corner will you find Michelle Bachman, Halley Barbour, John Bolton, Herman Cain, Mitch Daniels, Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich, John Huntsman, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty, Mike Pence, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Donald Trump? You can decide for yourself, or you can give it your best shot to determine the few that I think may have a chance at unseating President Obama. After all, most on this list don’t because independents will have no part of them.

To many of us, and maybe most of us, the presidential campaign starts too early and takes too long; so I end this post with a quote from columnist Kathleen Parker.

Political polarization has so defined us that we are always deployed in campaign mode, never in repose. Politics is, among other things, spectacle, but there’s something dreary about the incessancy. Familiarity doesn’t only inspire contempt; it deadens the senses.

On a Governor’s Decision

Sarah Palin continues to be an intriguing personality. To some she is a popular icon, while to others she’s an ongoing reality show. To some she’s a dose of fresh air, to others a bag of wind.

Since her recent surprise resignation announcement, here are some thoughts.

  • No matter the spin or the reason, she quit
  • For someone who complains about the media, she sure likes thrusting herself into the limelight
  • Unfortunately, public scrutiny is part of being in a public figure, but obsessing the media and claiming victim are contradictory
  • She is a popular Republican at a time when the party lacks interesting people – thus the perfect opportunity to make money
  • I’m not convinced that her resignation ends a 2012 presidential bid – winning the nomination is another story
  • She has a political base, but winning elections involves expanding the base
  • To the “right-of-center” coalition she wants to build – Excuse me Governor, that’s called the Republican Party

Opinions since her resignation have covered a great range – even among Republicans. But for those who think she’s on her way to the White House, let’s do the math.

According to a nationwide USA Today poll, 67% of Republicans want Palin as “a major national political figure” and 71% would vote for her in 2012. On the contrary, 75% percent of Democrats and 55% of independents want her off the national stage.

For the sake of statistics, let’s use the following breakdown of American voters: 25% Republicans, 35% Democrats, and 40% independents. So, at best (meaning she gets all the non-negative votes) her support is (.71 * .25) + (.25 * .35) + (.45 * .40), then the quantity times 100 = 44.5% approval rating, which won’t win squat!

Both of us in this house were leaning toward John McCain and neither voted for him. His decision to offer Palin a spot on the ticket was a major mistake, as was her decision to accept. Meanwhile, when I hold my Republican ballot at the Ohio 2012 primary, she won’t get my vote. If she reappears on the November ballot, she still won’t get my vote.