![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
drwexRomney's pick of Paul Ryan is all the political news these days.
I continue to see the Republican campaign through the lens of a struggle between the party/old-line wing (call this the Karl Rove party) and the outsider/new-line wing, generally called Tea Party, though it also includes the religious wing that favored Huckabee and Santorum in primary voting.
The presidential primaries were an exercise in the old guard crushing whoever the current not-Romney leading candidate was. Since that got sealed up two things have happened - one is that Rove has been very successful at folding all the non-Romney superPAC superdonors into his PAC, and two is that non-establishment Republican candidates have done well in some big primaries. Along the way, Romney continues to fail to energize the conservative non-establishment base.
At that point the Republicans have two options: (1) rely on the "anybody but Obama" sentiment to bring out the faithful and/or hope that Obama can't energize his base and/or the economy slides further to bring in the undecided/middle/convinceable fraction; or (2) make a direct appeal to that base. Clearly they picked plan 2. What does that mean?
A. It means that the Republicans are officially abandoning the "big tent" idea. They could easily have picked a highly conservative woman (Jan Brewer was my bet). Someone who would have balanced Romney geographically, appealed to women, and be seen as a firebrand who stood up to Obama - no more Sarah Palins, but there are solid Republican women out there. Brewer would also have shored up Romney on immigration. Giving up on a woman is conceding the whole 'war on women' argument - calculating that it doesn't matter.
Alternatively I had Marco Rubio as an outside contender. He's young, but well-respected and carries throw-weight in a swing state. He also directly appeals to Hispanic voters and again cuts at Obama on immigration (where I think he's vulnerable). Again, the calculus is that immigration doesn't matter.
Picking Ryan is equivalent to the Republicans saying: Hey, women and Hispanics? Screw you. Lump it, there is no like it here. Either you're in our tent or you're out - we're not extending the tent anymore. Ideological purity uber alles.
B. That, in turn, appeals to the core. The Republicans are counting on enough of that core coming out to carry key states. In particular, I think Ryan is a play aimed at four states they think they can flip: PA, CO, FL, and VA. I make that 71 electoral votes in those four states and Romney only needs to pick up about 35 more than he's currently counting (using 538's polling data) to win. If Ryan swings even two big states that could be enough to put Romney over the top.
Republicans don't need a nationally big showing - they need to bring out the faithful in big numbers in a few key states. All four of those states have significant conservative (social or economic) voting blocs to which Romney-Ryan can appeal.
C. Ryan drives home the message that "It's the economy, stupid!" which the Republicans are going to be harping on from now until November. That's a bit of a gamble - if the economic reports continue to trend well then Obama's numbers are going to continue to inch up as they have the past few months. However, Ryan isn't shoring up Romney on anything else - he doesn't bring foreign experience nor immigration clout nor any ability to work a big compromise. The Republicans are betting that they win it all in November and get to pass their budget, or they lose and let the Democrats eat the blame for the looming disaster in January.
D. Ryan also brings much more in the way of specifics than Romney has ever had. Romney now owns the Ryan plan, social Darwinism and all. I very much suspect that Ryan is aiming for an imperial Vice Presidency, in the Cheney mold, where he'd have a lot of authority and responsibility and would get to drive the domestic agenda. There's no way he's signing on to be a hood ornament.
I continue to see the Republican campaign through the lens of a struggle between the party/old-line wing (call this the Karl Rove party) and the outsider/new-line wing, generally called Tea Party, though it also includes the religious wing that favored Huckabee and Santorum in primary voting.
The presidential primaries were an exercise in the old guard crushing whoever the current not-Romney leading candidate was. Since that got sealed up two things have happened - one is that Rove has been very successful at folding all the non-Romney superPAC superdonors into his PAC, and two is that non-establishment Republican candidates have done well in some big primaries. Along the way, Romney continues to fail to energize the conservative non-establishment base.
At that point the Republicans have two options: (1) rely on the "anybody but Obama" sentiment to bring out the faithful and/or hope that Obama can't energize his base and/or the economy slides further to bring in the undecided/middle/convinceable fraction; or (2) make a direct appeal to that base. Clearly they picked plan 2. What does that mean?
A. It means that the Republicans are officially abandoning the "big tent" idea. They could easily have picked a highly conservative woman (Jan Brewer was my bet). Someone who would have balanced Romney geographically, appealed to women, and be seen as a firebrand who stood up to Obama - no more Sarah Palins, but there are solid Republican women out there. Brewer would also have shored up Romney on immigration. Giving up on a woman is conceding the whole 'war on women' argument - calculating that it doesn't matter.
Alternatively I had Marco Rubio as an outside contender. He's young, but well-respected and carries throw-weight in a swing state. He also directly appeals to Hispanic voters and again cuts at Obama on immigration (where I think he's vulnerable). Again, the calculus is that immigration doesn't matter.
Picking Ryan is equivalent to the Republicans saying: Hey, women and Hispanics? Screw you. Lump it, there is no like it here. Either you're in our tent or you're out - we're not extending the tent anymore. Ideological purity uber alles.
B. That, in turn, appeals to the core. The Republicans are counting on enough of that core coming out to carry key states. In particular, I think Ryan is a play aimed at four states they think they can flip: PA, CO, FL, and VA. I make that 71 electoral votes in those four states and Romney only needs to pick up about 35 more than he's currently counting (using 538's polling data) to win. If Ryan swings even two big states that could be enough to put Romney over the top.
Republicans don't need a nationally big showing - they need to bring out the faithful in big numbers in a few key states. All four of those states have significant conservative (social or economic) voting blocs to which Romney-Ryan can appeal.
C. Ryan drives home the message that "It's the economy, stupid!" which the Republicans are going to be harping on from now until November. That's a bit of a gamble - if the economic reports continue to trend well then Obama's numbers are going to continue to inch up as they have the past few months. However, Ryan isn't shoring up Romney on anything else - he doesn't bring foreign experience nor immigration clout nor any ability to work a big compromise. The Republicans are betting that they win it all in November and get to pass their budget, or they lose and let the Democrats eat the blame for the looming disaster in January.
D. Ryan also brings much more in the way of specifics than Romney has ever had. Romney now owns the Ryan plan, social Darwinism and all. I very much suspect that Ryan is aiming for an imperial Vice Presidency, in the Cheney mold, where he'd have a lot of authority and responsibility and would get to drive the domestic agenda. There's no way he's signing on to be a hood ornament.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-08-13 04:32 pm (UTC)I currently care more about our terrible economic straits than I care about my kid being able to point to someone who looks like her in Presidential power. And, while I'm unlikely to vote for either major party candidate, I was surprised by the pick of Ryan. It made me think that maybe, there's a chance that some Republicans actually get that the economy's The Thing. I'm actually interested in the election right now, and I wasn't before. (We'll see if that holds.)
Picking Ryan (a Gen Xer) is also generationally interesting. Are we through with the old guys?