I know that some of you are junkies of the American political scene and there is something about the larger than life figures south of the border that often makes our politicians look like luke warm tapioca. Mind you, our tapioca isn't tasting all that bad as we try to make sense of the strange brew of Republican leadership hopefuls.
The candidates were in Iowa trying to say something which makes sense to the public and not doing all that well in the process. What strikes me about the Republicans is that they wear religion --conservative Christian religion for the most part -- on their sleeves, then are "outed" for their hypocrisy. One day's frontrunner is the next day's goat. Frontrunner Mitt Romney seems to be the most sane, without hint of scandal, as well as, most experienced, but his Mormonism is seen as a major impediment by the Religious Right.
Have you been trying to make sense of this race, or stumble, or whatever it might be called?
4 comments:
Can Evangelical Christians get behind Romney? Mormonism is not considered Chritianity by them, so Romney will have to emphasize his worldview and conservative social values. As Republicans demonize Obama, I guess Evangelical Christians will see Romney -- should he win the nomination -- as a better alternative than allowing the Democrats back in.
The Americans are still the most influential country in the world. The Republicans have a huge influence in international agreements, foreign policy, the environment now that they are back in control of the House. So we need to care about them.
The thing is, Mitt Romney is the same candidate as John McCain. His governorship was marked with progressivism, and when he ran for president he ran straight to the right. He was one of two possibilities in the GOP field that could have beat Obama if he had stayed a moderate. But since he swung to the right, the moderates of the US will never accept him because he flip flops for political gains. None of the republicans can beat Obama because they are all so far to the right that moderates will prefer to have a Progressive Obama over any hyper religious Republican.
A bad lot, all of them.
To be a Republican candidate is to cater to an increasingly radical, conservative base whose agenda embraces a strict, exclusionary view of the Bible and its teachings, that views climate change as a mass conspiracy, that rejects tax increases as anathema, cares little for the plight of working people and mostly for the fate of coporate interests, that views basic rights such as health care as being left up to the individual and who sees segments of the population like immigrants and those of different sexual orientations as "other."
What REALLY gets me about Republicans, though, is their claim to be "sound economic stewards." Their deification of Ronald Reagan and their regurgitation of Reaganomics is baffling in the face of historical fact. (Let's not forget that the Clinton administration was the only one to run a federal surplus since 1950, y'all.) They literally ran the country into the ground over the span of the last thirty years, and now they want another shot at it.
To win that nomination, you'd literally have to be crazy.
Thanks for the thoughtful observations from all three of you.
It may be wacky, and a little unsettling for us as neighbours, but there is high entertainment value!
Post a Comment