Why the hurry?? We The People have a Primary to participate in. [Reader Post]

Loading

This is going to be a short post, not rife with sources or videos; just my opinion. I am detecting a pattern with certain pundits on some supposedly Conservative talk radio shows and on network and cable TV outlets. This pattern was something that I became aware of recently and after listening to Mark Levin’s radio show from last Wednesday, the 14th I was gratified to hear that I wasn’t the only one who saw this – and that I wasn’t alone in my disdain for it.

What I am referring to is this notion that certain talk show hosts and political pundits or “talking heads” are trying to peddle that is basically saying that unless we stop right now, and coalesce behind Romney, it will hurt his chances against Obama in the fall. That this year’s GOP primary process is making him and our party weaker, not stronger. These talking heads are already positioning themselves to be able to say, in the event that Romney (or whoever gets the GOP nomination) loses, this hard fought primary will be the reason.

This is utter bullsh*t. Gerald Ford said the same thing after losing to Carter in 1976, he blamed his loss, his weakness as a candidate on Reagan. He contended that had he not had to fight against Reagan he would have been able to beat Carter. My question to this is, “Why?” Ford was exactly as Reagan said he was, a weak moderate candidate who could not show enough of a contrast to win the general election. The same sort of talking heads back then parroted that same old, tired argument. The GOP establishment was furious at Reagan. Four years later, they remembered it and, I believe to try and unify the party, that is why he chose one of his opponents, George H. W. Bush as his running mate.

But like I asked, why does fighting and winning a primary race for your party’s nomination make you a weak candidate? If that were true, then why has the primary process lasted so long in our nation’s history? Why do we even have it?

Because long ago, some very smart men thought that if you wanted to hold the highest office in our land, you ought to have to let the people know your stance on the issues. You ought to have to travel to the various states and compete for the right to represent your party in the general election to become President. That you should have to persuade as many folks as you can that your platform is the best.

And lastly, that you ought to have to EARN the right to represent your party in the general election.

This notion that we have to drop the process so that we can get behind Romney, our putative front runner, is, well, it’s pure horse puckey. This idea that by having a hard fought process, we are making Obama stronger and our side weaker is completely false and wrong headed thinking. Of all the countries in the world, ours puts the process before the candidate. Ours puts the interest of the voters before the interest of the candidate. Is it a perfect system? No. Has it, at times been corrupted? Yes. But of all the systems in the world, past and present, ours is the best.

I hear people say that Santorum or Gingrich ought to bow out for the good of the party.

Why?

And I ask this question without taking into account why someone might or might not like certain candidates. Put that aside for now, and ask yourself this. If Romney is weakened by fighting a tough Primary, what does that say about him as a candidate. Now I only pick Romney, not because I do or don’t like him, but because the establishment, the talking heads have chosen him as our front runner. But remember, these same taking heads at first didn’t like ANY of the candidates. They tried to woo Mitch Daniels, and then Chris Christie into running. Then when that failed, the looked around and said, “Romney is our man!! He’s the front runner!! Everybody fall in line and decide who is going to drop out, and in what order.”

I put this to you, our loyal readers here at CH 2.0 – if a candidate is weak, then it matters not how much we get behind him. If he is too weak to garner enough votes, then he isn’t going to be strengthened by eliminating his primary opponents. If he is too weak to fight the general election, it has nothing to do with this one or that one staying in or dropping out of the primary.

No, I think that it is just the opposite. I think that the harder, tougher and more raucous the primary process is, the tougher, stronger and more hardened the eventual nominee becomes.

Then I hear the argument that the Obama campaign will use soundbites from the opponents of the eventual GOP nominee. That, too is horse puckey. First of all, Obama doesn’t need to rely on us to do his opposition research for him. There isn’t anything that is appearing in any of the millions of dollars in primary GOP ads that the Obama campaign hasn’t already thought of, dug up or decided to use. And so what if they run an ad showing Gingrich calling Santorum this or that. So what if they run an ad showing Santorum calling Romney whatever, or Ron Paul saying this or that about Newt. Do we really think that the Obama campaign is going to have to rely on this? And if they do show such an ad, that is what archives are for. You can find plenty of video of Hillary and Edwards lambasting Obama on his lack of experience from the Democratic primary in 2008. As a matter of fact, given the disaster that is the Obama Presidency, that might not be such a bad idea, but you get my point.

No, what we have to do is to keep our focus on casting our votes, if we live in a state that hasn’t yet had a primary or caucus, for the candidate that most closely lines up with our values and mores. That is what the primary process is all about and it’s about damned time that the talking heads, the pundits, the establishment learned that our vote counts, and thank you very much, but shut the hell up and let us do our thing. This is our time now. This is our process, so back off and let us do our thing. Then in a few months, the spotlight will be on two candidates, one from each party and then the brawl will begin. But for now, stop telling us what we ought to think, who we ought to vote for. We The People aren’t necessarily in a hurry to pick someone. Maybe the talking heads are so wrapped up in pushing Romney, they have forgotten that no matter what, we cannot cross the bridge that is the general election until we get to it.

Thank you for your time, I know that at the beginning of this, I promised a short article. Well, in my defense, I guess that I just needed to rant a bit.

Do chime in and let me know what you, our great readers of CH 2.0 think about this. I am interested to know if I am alone among you, a group of like minded folks that I have gotten to know since my time here at CH 2.0. Without getting corny, I value your opinions, for or against.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The longer the primary season goes on, the longer conservatism is expoused by the canidates over the media and adds as well. Don’t forget that either!

The establishment did the same thing with McCain. They wanted him and proceeded to shove out the rest of the field. Look at what happened. Even with Sarah Palin, McCain did not stand a snowball’s chance in hell of winning. Oh, they can use any excuse that they want — including blaming Palin — but it all boils down to the fact that McCain was the weak candidate and thus the loser. In 2008 it was loser vs loser and the biggest one was elected. We can do much better this time around and to hell with the party bosses.

I couldn’t agree with this article more. I live in Texas and I’ve been looking forward to making my choice. I’ve been learning about the candidates and talking about them and trying to decide who I think is the best choice. It doesn’t make me happy in the slightest that all of these talking heads are telling me my opinion doesn’t matter because Romney is going to get the nomination and voting for anyone else is just hurting his chances (somehow) in the actual election.

Maybe Romney is the inevitable nominee at this point. They sure make it sound like that’s the case. I don’t know. But I do know that all the states who haven’t yet voted deserve the chance to make their choices without the pundits telling them who they should be voting for.

I really wish that all the states would just have the primaries at the same time. The candidates would either have to get their message out before that day or risk losing the nomination because they aren’t well known. It would cause the process to start sooner but once Primary Day is over we’d know the nominee and that nominee would have plenty of time to raise money and attack their opponent.

The spinsters can frame this around the nominating process all they want but no matter who the nominee is, this election should be a referendum on Obama’s first term just like all elections are when the incumbent is running. Right now he has enjoyed a little bit of a jump in the polls which is not surprising because he has been campaigning since August without any opposition. Once the nominee is chosen, the focus should then turn to Obama’s record and whether or not people are better off than what they were 4 years ago. Most of us would have to say a big ‘no’ to the latter. The MSM and Obama will try to focus on other issues like contraceptives or whatever trivial crap they can dream up in order to keep the attention off of his record or will flat out lie about things getting better like their bogus unemployment numbers in order to help him win, but if people are having a hard time paying their bills, it shouldn’t go very far.

Tomorrow will be the first time in recent memory where my vote for the presidential candidate in the Illinois primary will actually count for something. Normally, the Republican nominee is chosen by the time they come to my bluer than blue backward state. One thing is for sure, if the Republicans can’t beat this loser in November, it will be a sad reflection on their party.

@another vet: You and me both get to cast a meaningful vote tomorrow, AV.

@Jason A Clark: Thanks, Jason.

@anticsrocks: Already done. After examining where the candidates stood on the issues, with the exception of Ron Paul on National Security, they were all on the same sheet of music- deficit reduction through spending cuts and a balanced budget ammendment, stimulate the economy through tax cuts and less regulation, a strong national defense, repeal of Obamacare etc. All of those positions are in stark contrast to Obama’s which is more spending, more taxes, higher deficits, more government control, and gutting the military. There will be a clear choice in November no matter who the nominee is.

I totally agree with you!

The GOP did the same in 2008; pushing McCain even though I personally and, I’m sure many others did not wanted McCain.
Lets call a spade a spade for a second: Romney is now running for president almost 5-6 yrs, yet he can’t muster even now a majority, voters picking ABR; that should be enough to put to rest that most conservative are not approving of Romney.He obviously is either dumb enough not to realise that or he is so obsessed with the presidency that he truly beieves that it is ‘his turn’.
Those who coronated Romney before one vote was cast did him no favor, not did they do us a favor. The hysterical behavior by many Romney supporters is getting annoying.
It’s been my observation that the establishment doesn’t give a fig about us – the conservative base – they have not shown us any difference almost between them and, liberals and, at times they treat us with contempt. The tea party supported and, elected candidates in 2010 have so far been sidelined by the insiders.
The GOP fights us or against us almost as bad as liberals and, from the looks of it, seems that they are protecting their turf.
Once again, GOP demands that we fall in line; we did it in 2008, we lost and, now theywant to repeat the same. At some point we – conservatives – need to make a stand and, I think the time is now – with the 2012 election.

@cali: I agree we need to make a stand, but not with this election. I do not want any part of helping, in any way, to help re-elect Obama.

The analogy I use is this.

If I were in a rowboat in the middle of a lake and it sprung a leak through a hole, the first thing I would do is grab anything I could to plug the leak. THEN I would begin to reverse the damage and get rid of the water.

The sucking hole in the boat = Obama and his horrendous policies.

The plug with anything I could find = it looks like it will be Romney.

The reversal of his policies = two things: 1. electing enough Conservatives to both houses of Congress to force Romney to the right and 2. focusing on the next POTUS election cycle.