Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader got two great comments to the post below. Let us revisit them (for those of you who don’t like clicking).
First, from Smitty: “So, do you think the protest vote, and general indifference toward this mummer’s farce in VA, will lead to embarrassment for Romney.”
No, your Maximum Leader does not. The Virginia primary will be an afterthought in the commentary on the events of today. Romney and Paul followed the existing rules for participating and none of the other candidates did. Romney will get a win (with some delegates going to Paul due to proportional representation) and that will be that. Commentary will focus on what happens in other states, like Ohio. There is only one embarrassing situation your Maximum Leader can imagine for Romney. That scenario is that he wins less than 60% of the vote. If it is down to a choice between Romney and Paul and Mitt doesn’t pull out at least 60% then the “win” will be embarrassing. But only moderately. The news remains somewhere else.
Of course, the Virginia GOP and Democrat parties could and probably should be embarrassed by the primary. The restrictive rules to get on the ballot are likely going to be dropped as more people get angered by their lack of choice. If Virginia is truly a “swing” state; both parties would benefit from a rules revision. Your Maximum Leader is disappointed by the rules as they stand; but he has a rough time getting worked up about changing them. On the one hand he wants it to be easier to have choices; but on the other hand if one is serious about running for office you should know what it will take well ahead of time and make a plan. (NB: many are critical of Mitt for having been running for President for the past 4 years. Your Maximum Leader doesn’t fault anyone for that. If you want the job you actually have to make and act on these types of plans. Your Maximum Leader isn’t saying that it is a good thing that you have to run for President for 4 years; he is just saying it is what it is.)
Second comment from Eric:
You may not like Mitt, but a vote for Ron Paul, is a vote endorsing Islamo-Fascism, and a soft on terrorism foreign policy. Yes, he’s good on economics. But that doesn’t make up for the fact that his foreign policy views are decidedly surrender-tarian.
Islamism is the greatest threat this country faces. And anyone who appeases Islamists are siding with our enemies. It’s unconscionable that any Republican could vote for Paul, knowing this fact.
First off, thank you Eric for your comment. Your Maximum Leader doesn’t believe he’s ever seen you comment here before. He appreciates you taking the time to comment.
Your Maximum Leader, to be honest, doesn’t like any of the candidates running for President. He doesn’t want President Obama to win a second term. He can’t stand Rick Santorum. He really cannot abide by Newt Gingrich. And he feels mostly “oh hum” about both Paul and Romney. Your Maximum Leader disagrees with Ron Paul on more items than one can easily enumerate in the time he has to write this post. Your Maximum Leader believes that Ron Paul’s general conceptions of economics and foreign policy are impractical, unworkable and would be disastrous if attempted. That said, Paul’s positions are consistent and more or less understandable in the context of the type of libertarianism that he has always espoused. Would Ron Paul be a good President of the United States? No, he would not. The best a conservative can hope for is that Paul’s presence in the race will cause people to give more thought to smaller government and more liberty. Those overarching themes are positive and the GOP would do well to endorse and act on them.
As for Romney. Your Maximum Leader will have to fall back on William F. Buckley Jr.’s old maxim of voting for the most electable conservative available to you. Of the four candidates we’ve got to chose from, Mitt is it. That isn’t a ringing endorsement; but it is all he’s going to get from your Maximum Leader. Your Maximum Leader will not even claim that Mitt Romney is “conservative.” He is more to the right than President Obama is and he is more electable than the other three. Your Maximum Leader isn’t sure where people get the idea that Rick Santorum (who cannot win re-election in his own - swing - state) and Newt Gingrich (who has never won anything except his - now former - congressional district) are more electable than Mitt Romney. Admittedly, Romney has lost elections too (famously the MA senate race to Teddy Kennedy) but in a race that will be a nail-biter it seems like you need to have a broad appeal to regular voters. Your Maximum Leader doesn’t see how Santorum or Gingrich or Paul are widely appealing. Don’t get him wrong, your Maximum Leader isn’t trying to claim that Mitt Romney is widely appealing to all voters. He is only claiming that Mitt Romney is more appealing to voters than the others.
All that said, your Maximum Leader still believes that all things being equal, President Obama will win re-election.