Sunday, June 26, 2011

Must read for njDylan and PBM


Patrick_L said...

Some thoughts

a) On fiscal and economic issues the Republican Party may have moved enough to make her mainstream, but she'll need to be careful to keep her mouth shut on social issues because she is still far-outside the national mainstream on those. I know social issues aren't going to matter greatly this election cycle, but they could still play a marginal impact with independents. If I were her handlers, I'd tell her to tone it down or avoid the topics unless directly asked. It's when speaking on those issues that she has made numerous statements that rightly earned her the reputation of being crazy.

b) Quote: “I always had this love and appreciation for Israel because I was a Christian,” she said. “It’s the foundation of our faith. All of the Bible is about Israel.”

Really? Really? Michele- please reread the Bible. You sound like a simpleton.

c) Quote: There she discovered, among other things, the work of theologian Francis Schaeffer, whose How Should We Then Live? is a popular Christian interpretation of Western intellectual and cultural history.

Uhm... “interpretation” is probably a generous description, but I'm glad they at least thought to include that qualifier.

d) Quote: Marcus went on to open two successful Christian counseling clinics.

It's sad that most Americans would probably accept that description of those clinics.

e) Quote: A freshman congressman, especially one in the minority, faces a choice. She can be an inside player and keep a low profile while building coalitions and working on legislation. Or she can play outside and use her office as a platform to advocate for her party and ideas.

Flashback, anyone, to class?

f) Quote: “He said that he would prefer to pass his agenda and be a one-term president rather than not pass his agenda and have two terms,” she told me. “Which means he is committed to his ideology.”

As opposed to being committed to his personal political career? And isn’t Bachmann committed to her ideology? I’m confused as to why this is a SCARY moment for her.

g) Did anyone else think it was weird when Michele announced her candidacy… at a debate for the party’s nomination for President? Do people generally participate in debates while not running for the Presidential nomination? I guess it made news, the point I suppose, but it was a real “Duh!” moment.

h) Judging by Huntsman’s continued moderation and soft-spoken campaign style, plus Pawlenty’s inability to catch-on anywhere’s, it’s increasingly looking like a Romney v. Bachmann fight for the nomination is possible. In which case, it will be interesting to see how Bachmann copes with Republican Party machine politics (which are already largely allied with Romney, and could move to him even more strongly because Bachmann is such an outsider). And if she survived that, she’d go up against the even more “gloves-off” Democratic attack onslaught (since the Democratic Party doesn’t have to be worried about alienating the Tea Party, like the Republican Party leadership needs to be). I also find it interesting that the Republican Party’s standard economics and fiscal policy advisers (like Mankiw, for instance) have already lined up with Romney. Who is advising Bachmann? Especially if this is going to be the issue of the election, I’d be concerned she doesn’t say off-the-cuff things that are just too crazy, even for a Republican. Though if she won the Party’s nomination, I’m sure the Party would close ranks to save her from herself.

TJE said...

Romney-Bachmann a better version of McCain-Palin?

PBM said...

I like that her view of states' rights still applies to things she disagrees with.

TJE said...

I would look forward to a Bachmann-Biden debate.

Patrick_L said...

a) Yeah, I'd say Romney-Bachmann is a better version of McCain-Palin.

b) I am already salivating for the potential of a Bachmann-Biden debate. It would be epic!