The Economic Nationalist

Sunday’s Republican debate in Florida was fine. Did you see it? The political tide may be flowing against the GOP in 2008, but if Republicans lose the White House it will not be for lack of a credible candidate to put forward.

I must finally admit that my favorite candidates Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter no longer stand a realistic chance to win the nomination. One senses that Messrs. Tancredo and Hunter have admitted this to themselves, too. (Mr. Hunter seems to be running for Secretary of Defense, now. The man has convinced me; one only hopes that he has also convinced the eventual Republican nominee.) That leaves six candidates, some naturally more likely than others but all still credible. The Economic Nationalist presently grades the six as follows, with probable Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton thrown as seventh into the mix:

1. Mike Huckabee (GOP) (A–)
2. Mitt Romney (GOP) (A–)
3. Fred Thompson (GOP) (B)
4. Ron Paul (GOP) (B)
5. Rudy Giuliani (GOP) (C)
6. Hillary Clinton (Dem.) (D+)
7. John McCain (GOP) (D–)

Mike Huckabee seems a genuinely nice man. Some people may not care about this but I care about it a lot. Moreover, speaking always in gentle language that avoids unnecessarily provoking the large free-trade wing of his own party, Mr. Huckabee has made it clear in recent speeches and debates that he firmly, fundamentally grasps the core concern of economic nationalism—regarding the loss of high-paying industrial jobs and of the ability (if I can recall the quote aright) “to feed ourselves, to fuel ourselves, and to fight for ourselves with weapons that we manufacture ourselves.” Yep. That’s it. Mr. Huckabee gets it.

Mr. Giuliani seems a genuinely mean man. It’s not what he might do to al Qaeda that worries me; it’s what he might do to anybody else who gets in his way—as he did to his ex-wives, or to Michael Milken. I do not doubt that Mr. Giuliani would make a highly competent chief executive, though. So did Andrew Jackson, whose memory we honor despite his legendary unkindliness. Mr. Giuliani is somehow cut from that old Jackson cloth.

The difference between Mr. Giuliani and Hillary Clinton is that Mrs. Clinton is much less transparent, that she’s a Democrat, that she would fail to appoint strict-constructionist judges, and that her executive experience, though real (learning at Bill Clinton’s shoulder does indeed count), is indirect. Other than that, I feel pretty similarly about both of them. Regading “Hillarycare,” that deserves an article of its own. Basically, “Hillarycare” is not the smartest approach, but Mr. Giuliani remains in denial about the massive scope of America’s health-care financing crisis. I probably prefer Mr. Giuliani’s denial to Mrs. Clinton’s flawed plan, but it’s a close call.

Some people who think Ron Paul to be nuts should take a harder look at John McCain. That’s the jar the nuts are in. Whom Mr. McCain might nuke on a bad hair day is anyone’s guess.

Regarding Ron Paul: wow! What else can you say? He is the big surprise of the 2008 presidential campaign thus far. Who would have thought that “Dr. No” could rise as far as he has? I am well aware that some ardent Ron Paul supporters read this blog. I sympathize with them. My concern about Dr. Paul regards the man’s temperament. Politics is at least partly a practical art, no matter how one wishes that it were otherwise. Ronald Reagan understood that there is a time to stand on principle and there is a time to compromise; and, unlike most politicians, Mr. Reagan knew which time was which. I have no doubt, none whatsoever, that Dr. Paul knows when to stand on principle. It’s the other that worries me a little. Dr. Paul’s reliable, trustworthy Constitutional fidelity, I appreciate very much.

It is the fact that politics is a practical art that draws me to the non-economic nationalist Mitt Romney. I do realize: Mr. Romney is wrong on trade and he is wrong on immigration, but he is hardly extreme on either point. On immigration, Mr. Romney wants smarter immigrants with greater skills. On trade, Mr. Romney wants to restore America’s industrial base, only he has different ideas on how to do it—and I for one am not so proud that I am not willing at least to listen to the advice of someone with successful business experience as deep and broad as Mr. Romney’s. And do you believe that any candidate of any party in any year since Ronald Reagan’s time stands a better chance of (in Mr. Romney’s words) “cleaning up the mess in Washington”? Mr. Romney exudes competence. If he cannot get control of federal spending, then it cannot be done.

If we get a chance to elect Mr. Romney, then the cause of economic nationalism may have to be mature enough to wait a few years. Mr. Romney is available as a candidate not later but now. He just may be too good to pass up.

Regarding the accusation that Mr. Romney flip-flops: the accusation is not entirely untrue, only 90 percent untrue. The accusation is badly overwroght. My read of Mr. Romney is that he is an honest man who very occasionally gets carried away in the heat of the rhetorical moment, saying a very few things that, on reflection, he would have done better not to have said. I also think that the man accepts new information and is capable of changing his mind accordingly. This is not flip-flopping; it’s an ability to learn, which is a good thing. Mr. Romney would make a fine president.

Fred Thompson? I am sorry. The man sounds great and I think that the country would get along okay with him as president, but I just do not believe in him. My intuition tells me that he would wilt more or less the way George Bush the elder did under relentless partisan pressure from Capitol Hill. Mr. Thompson is fine and is preferable to Mr. Giuliani or Mrs. Clinton, but we have better choices this year.

Your comments are welcome below, as always—especially from my friends the Ron Paul supporters.

HJH

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 24th, 2007 at 4:58 pm and is filed under Election 2008. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.