Saturday, January 12, 2008

Horseraces, and Rudy

I've been getting flack about not posting for awhile. Well, one person mentioned it. Since he may be this blog's only reader, I feel I should post something this morning. Give my fan base a little something to chew on. Keep 'em coming back, don't you know. I don't want to end up like Earl Peckham in Peter Devries' Peckham's Marbles:


"I'm on sabbatical from the university where I've been teaching." This was bending the truth more than a little. He had left in a huff after being denied tenure, that in turn resulting from his failure to attract students to his elective seminars. His creative writing course had been a special problem. Two years before, his enrollment had dwindled to one. And last year it had fallen of a little.


So what's in the news? Well, the primary horseraces are about as interesting as can be. I'm a little afraid that the Republican race is starting to break John McCain's way. And that if it's not McCain, it will be Huckabee. Right now I'd say there is about a 75% chance that one of the two will end up being the Republican nominee. While I believe McCain would be good on the war, I think he'd be horrible on everything else. Huckabee would be horrible, period. So in that race, McCain would be preferable.

Rudy may still have a shot. He has to win Florida or he will be dead. He's still my top choice, though if Fred Thompson had performed all throughout the primary campaign the way he did in the Fox debate the other night he'd be my man. Really, where has this guy been? The Thompson we saw the other night had energy, vigor, purpose, clarity of thought. He was unapologetically conservative. He pointed out where others were not, especially Huckabee. What's more, he still came off as the straight-talking, non-politician. Here I am, this is what I think, take me or leave me. I started thinking during the debate that this may have been part of the reason he was not a star in the Senate - he couldn't bring himself low enough to succeed in that bottom-dwelling environment. He has too much pride, too much dignity, to prostitute himself the way one must to shine there. At any rate, everyone knows he was a senator but he seems like an executive. The other night he seemed like a leader. And it was hard not to be excited by his performance. But it may be too little too late. But he's got to run strong in South Carolina, perhaps he even has to win, to continue.

Romney must win Michigan to continue but even if he does I don't see it happening for him. There is something about Mitt that doesn't connect with the public. It has nothing to do with the whole flip-flopping thing but it may be related to the idea that he comes right out of central casting - he's perfect for the role of a politician. He seems nothing other than. Someone said something the other day to the effect that he's wired too high, he's too on all the time, no one can ever see the human side of him. I think I agree with that. It may not be fair - he seems to be a good, decent man, and his policy positions are acceptable to conservatives, but he excites no one.

I see on Drudge this morning that Mitt teared up yesterday in Michigan while talking about his dad. I know Hillary's ploy is credited by many for her comeback in N.H. so I'd hate to think Mitt's tears were calculated for the same effect, i.e. to show him as a sensitive guy - hey everyone, look! I can cry too! Now will you vote for me? I'm going to give Mitt the benefit of the doubt on the tears. But it still does nothing for me. Ed Muskie fought back tears forty years ago during the N.H primary and it was a disqualifier for him. Real men didn't cry back then, especially men who wanted to be president. Now we live in the age of Oprah and we have a president who tears up on a regular basis. For many people these days, especially women, a presidential candidate crying in public is a net positive, though don't ask me why. I prefer the old way (big surprise!!)

So that leaves Rudy, who I mentioned above was still my top choice. Why? I said in a post long ago that I'd get around to telling you why. Now it may be too late to matter because if he loses Florida we'll see no more of him. Sure he'll still be around on Super Tuesday but it won't matter. Florida is key.

So what is so appealing about Rudy? To put it simply, he returned New York City back to it's rightful spot as the greatest city in the world. It wasn't when he got there - it was dark, and dirty, and dangerous. The bums, pimps, whores, and dealers were in control of Times Square. You didn't dare walk too far into Central Park, and never at night. It was an inch away from being a total welfare slum. Businesses and residents were taking flight.

And look at it now. It's bright, and clean, and safe. Walt Disney rules Times Square. Central Park is a virtual paradise. Business has returned. Tourism is back. It's lost none of its hustle and bustle, none of its energy, none of its charm. It's the greatest city in the world.

And no one disputes it was Rudy Giuliani who turned it around. His vision, his policies, his tenacity. And he did it in spite of the multitude of entrenched bureaucracies and special interests who lined up vehemently against him. The city council was against him, the school board was against him, the media, the citizens groups. Everyone wanted him to fail. And he won. Not only did he win but he was able to bring some of those who were against him over to his side. Part of it was because they saw the results, but part of it was his demeanor, his temperament. What everyone else saw on 9/11 the people in NYC had seen for eight years. Rudy ability to talk calmly, honestly, and reasonably about the issues is a large part of his success. He's tenacious, yes - and that's good - but it's tenacity towards the final end of getting things done; tenacity towards getting the opposition on board. That was a necessity in New York. I don't want to use the old "he's a uniter, not a divider" line - it suggests that he might be ready to compromise on his beliefs just so he can say he's done something. Rudy is able to convince others to come along with him and do it his way.

Does that translate nationally? It could. I've been saying for over a decade that both the CIA and the State Department need to be purged. They are filled with lifetime bureaucrats with their own agendas, agendas pursued in defiance of the administrations they are supposed to be serving. George Bush has learned that. And I think Rudy knows that. He knows he can't fight the war on terror effectively with the CIA and State Dept. as currently constituted. There must be institutional change, there especially, but throughout the government as a whole. Can Rudy do it? No one knows, but he's the only one with the vision, ability, and guts enough to try. "Change" has become the catchword of this campaign on both sides. You want change? Rudy is the only one who'll deliver real change. Change for the better, as he keeps pointing out.

To put it in simpler terms, and I'm stealing this from someone else - I wish I could remember who but it was some time ago. Anyhow, let me state that the following comes almost directly from someone else. So here it is: in your lifetime, how many politicians have actually delivered on the promises they made? I don't mean that they delivered this or that new program or tweaked this or that institution. I mean how many have made large, wide-ranging, earth-shaking promises, and then gone on to do it? I count two. Ronald Reagan, who said he'd defeat the Soviets and he did; and Rudy Giuliani, who said he'd make NYC great again and he did. Based on actual performance, I think the gap between Rudy and the other candidates is enormous. He is clearly, in my book, the best man for the job.

Now though, as the war on terror has subsided in the public mind, the reasons for a Giuliani presidency don't seem so compelling. That's part of why he's fallen in the polls. Also because of the McCain and Huckabee surges, which he didn't expect, which have thrown his whole national campaign strategy into question. He seems an after-thought now. He's realized he needs something new to run on so the other day he came out with a tax cut package that I like. Maybe others will to. Perhaps a win in Florida makes him the man with momentum going into Super Tuesday. He then wins New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey and comes out of Super Tuesday as the man to beat. It's a long shot - I give him about a 15% shot at getting the nomination right now. Things have to fall perfectly for him, but he's not dead yet.

No comments: