The Super Tuesday primaries
In his blog, Steve Sailer admits, “I guess I’m supposed to provide some primary punditry … hmmhmhh….” That’s about right. Actually, I am as intensely interested in the primaries as you are, but suffer an aversion to the risk of commenting too soon.
Nevertheless, a comment or two:
I do not know what to make of the Democratic primary. Opinion polls keep suggesting that Barack Obama would fare better in November than Hillary Clinton would, but somehow I cannot quite bring myself to believe it. Somehow, “inexperienced, pleasant, mild-mannered, left-wing, black liberal with few coherent policies or ideas” does not sound like the description of an especially strong presidential candidate to me. One suspects that it soothes some Americans’ misplaced racial guilt to toy with the idea of voting for Mr. Obama, but toying and actually voting are two separate things. Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are running neck-and-neck. Apparently Mrs. Clinton’s campaign is broke, whereas Mr. Obama’s is not. We shall see what develops.
On the Republican side, John McCain appears to be running away with the nomination. Mitt Romney has retired from the race today, though, which excepting Ron Paul gives Mike Huckabee one last, clean shot at Mr. McCain. The whole rationale of the Romney campaign was to offer the nation sober, conservative competence. It is hard to imagine Romney voters breaking en masse for McCain.
It is here that we arrive at the Machiavellian ground upon which wise men are loth to tread. Mr. Romney’s classy exit might actually, paradoxically enhance the man’s slim chance of capturing the Republican presidential nomination in November. Reason: if it is true in some sense that Messrs. Huckabee and Romney split the same pool votes, then the split aids Mr. McCain as long as it continues. Suppose that Mr. Huckabee now proceeds to win just enough delegates to deny Mr. McCain the majority at the convention. Mr. Romney has delegates, too. If a deadlocked convention needs a compromise candidate, then why not Mr. Romney?
No, I don’t believe it, either. There are good reasons why a deadlocked convention should not choose Mr. Romney. The suggested rationale fits vice-presidential aspirations better than presidential, but the true explanation is probably simpler. Unlike Mr. Huckabee’s, Mr. Romney’s campaign was expensive. Presumably Mr. Romney simply decided to stop throwing good money after bad.
One speech naturally cannot outweigh years of principled error, but Mr. McCain has nevertheless given an impressive speech at CPAC today. On the other hand, Ann Coulter’s point is still salient.
If your state has not yet voted, then you might consider supporting Ron Paul.
HJH