Right now? Yes! One of my favorite blogs to visit, Riehl World View, put a post up this morning that said the following:
Funny, everyone will say Romney is done for coming in second, but Hillary is fine with third? I’ll make this short, because Iowa only proved one thing – the Republicans are in big trouble.
The energy and participation is off the charts on the Dem side. It went up on the Republican side due to the Evangelical vote. That’s great, but it isn’t enough to win a general election.
The fact is, as things stand, the Republicans don’t have a candidate that can win nationally in 2008.
This is dead on target. Obama is going to turn a lot of the established Democratic heads with the amount of younger support and independent excitement that he brings to the table in this Presidential race. And as a guy who generally does not vote for the Democrats, I’m even excited about something new coming from Barack Obama – though I’m not quite sure what his exact policies are and how they would have a direct effect (if any) on me.
It seems that the Riehl World View post is correct and that Republicans are lacking both excitement and new participation. There really is no, “Oh my God, I have to go vote for this person,” candidate on the Republican side. The only one that comes close is Ron Paul and he’s more of an old school, late 1800’s/early 1900’s conservative (we call them Libertarians today) than he is a modern-day Republican.
While on this topic, I also want to comment that if you’re paying attention and watching the Republican race you can see that the voters WANT someone to be excited about and someone to be jumping up and down over. The majority of voters were disenfranchised with Rudy Giuliani going into the race and then they discovered Mitt Romney and you saw some excitement. Then the voters learned more about Romney and how he’s more of a return to politics as usual and you saw the excitement transfer to Mike Huckabee. Now you’re seeing some of that excitement transfer to John McCain in New Hampshire, but the fact still remains that Obama is bringing new and younger voters out to voice their opinions. No one else is doing that in either party, period.
Joe,
This is exactly on point. None of the candidates on the republican side of the aisle is saying they will chart a new course. Maybe it is the 11th commandment, maybe it is just that they are out of ideas. Ron Paul is the only one saying he will pull out of Iraq but as you said his ideas of gubmint are a bit quaint if not antiquated. I have seen him speak in person as well as on the internet and I find it odd that many traditional conservatives are drawn to him because of his very libertarian bent. What really blows me away is how much money he has raised.
BTW I noticed you were looking to buy a condo. Be careful and do some research. We are in the down cycle of a real estate boom and prices will go down over the next few years, both nominally and in real terms. I would offer four sites online to peruse to get a sense of the marketplace. Keith at housing panic is a huge Ron Paul guy, he is disillusioned with the 2 party system and sees Ron Paul as some kind of outsider.
http://www.housingpanic.blogspot.com
http://www.njrereport.com
http://www.calculatedrisk.blogspot.com
http://www.bigpicture.typepad.com
I regularly check out Calculated Risk – great blog over there.
I think part of the problem is alongside what Keith at Housing Panic believes – the 2 party system doesn’t work well in today’s world. Frankly, I see Barack Obama not as a Democrat, but as an outsider – the same with Ron Paul (and Bill Richardson to some degree – he’s very earth-friendly in his policies).
It seems that the Giulianis, Clintons, and Romneys of the world are towing the tried and true party line, but with different words. There is, essentially, no change in policy – just different routes to the same end. That’s where I think Paul and Obama differ from the pack.
Huckabee has some hope to do that, but his past won’t allow him to win the general election…which is a shame because Clinton’s past is also damaged goods, but the media and internet folks won’t chastise her as much as they will the eventual Republican candidate, whoever it may be.
I’d also comment that traditional conservatives SHOULD be drawn to Paul insomuch as the term “traditional” means “true.” In today’s world, the term “traditional” conservative is widely (unfortunately) linked to the neoconservative movement and the post-Reagan conservatives. My definition of the term “traditional conservative” is more along the lines of a Pat Buchanan or a Ron Paul.
But I don’t get to write the dictionary definitions…yet!
Actually as a democrat myself (not in NJ state election matters) I really don’t see Obama as an outsider at all. He actually parrots some republican talking points and as such seems like warmed over Hillary. Yes, I don’t know what a traditional conservative is anymore. Did you ever check out John Dean’s “Conservatives Without Conscience”? He has a good definition of what Neocons are but he himself self describes his conservatism as “Goldwaterian”.
You see Pat Buchanan as traditional? I find that interesting, especially with his foreign trade positions. I find Pat to go so far to the right that he is back on the left on some issues.
As far as Huckabee and Clinton. If Huckabee gets more momentum and actually gets the nomination we might see an energized electorate among the evangelicals, however, the more rational republicans might just feel they have to pull the lever for a democrat or just not show up to the polls. Huckabee has some whacked out beliefs when it comes to women and has no real difference between him and Bush 43. So democrats may welcome him as an opponent because it will be easy to run against him by labeling him more of the same that we have had for 7 years. As for Clinton, I viscerally cannot stand the woman and I hope her Iowa placing is a sign of things to come. I welcome Edwards place in the caucus and find that Obama may well be a flash in the pan. Time will tell. I am sad that Richardson is not doing as well, but I think he is running for VP.
Depends on your definitions of “right” and “left” regarding Pat Buchanan. I use the traditional definitions – before these terms (and terms like liberal and conservative) were warped, demented, and ultimately destroyed by interest groups and extremists.