Haven't we had enough of the media and those with ready access to
the media (i.e., "bundlers" and political pundits) telling us who is
going to win our elections? Everywhere I
turn the television and most newspaper sources are saying "the winner of South
Carolina will be Romney or Gingrich." The South Carolina primary is tomorrow and thus far the "fat lady" hasn't done
any singing. Correct me if I am wrong, but thus far Newt Gingrich has NOT WON a single state primary. Mitt Romney
has won one state primary (New Hampshire) and Rick Santorum has won one state primary (Iowa). Newt Gingrich has won NONE.
We let the media tell us who was going to win the last election --with all of the liberal bias on media coverage in the 2008 election-- and look what we got: four years of rhetoric in action, a floundering economy, lingering high unemployment, and Iran on the verge of becoming a nuclear power. Are the American people really stupid enough to let the media run the show again in this election????????????
Thankfully, voters in this election cycle seem less likely to convict a candidate based solely upon initial media releases and unproved allegations (e.g., Herman Cain). I do have to give Newt Gingrich credit for standing up to the media at the beginning of the last debate. Seems the American people were happy to see Newt throw the shame ball back into the media's lap based upon the standing ovation that he received.
Just recently, Fox News ( "fair and balanced" ) predicted that Mitt Romney would win Iowa with just over 50% of the precincts reporting. In the final certified count, released yesterday, Rick Santorum actually won Iowa. Granted the Iowa race wound up being incredibly close, but the latter is evidence that even with the best of intentions media doesn't always know and can't always get it right. Rick Santorum been had polling in the single digits --in the days leading up to the Iowa primary-- and he wound up winning Iowa. I know that predictions are best 'educated' guesses but, contrary to what seems to be widely accepted opinion, media predictions are often wrong and sometimes they are outright dangerous (e.g., CBS news incorrectly calling the 2000 Presidential Election in favor of Al Gore). The American public needs to keep the latter in mind when they are weighing the facts and deciding which of the current four candidates will be the best Republican nominee. Voters should look at the records of the candidates and make their own decisions. They should not allow the polling numbers and opinions of political analysts to make their voting decision for them.
I still keep hoping the American people will make the honest effort to get the facts in this election process.That they will vote based on who they believe will be best candidate (and eventual President) for the country. With a little bit of homework and some honest effort on the part of voters, hopefully whoever we end up sending to Washington D.C. will actually represent the will of the people. If we can't do the latter, then our government in this country will never return to a "government of the people, by the people, for the people" and we will most likely wind up falling.
Instead of listening to historical data on the significance of each early voting primary and media predictions for 'winners and losers' (based on often inaccurate polling data ... witness the recent Iowa upset): let's make our own history!
One last thought ... In the world of today, now more than ever, we must be cogent about the world at large and the threat of a nuclear Iran. The next President of the United States of America will hold the keys to our nuclear arsenal and may well be called upon to consider using them. Which of the four current candidates do you trust with the keys?
May God, our Creator, bless and inspire all the people of South Carolina going into the Republican Primary election there tomorrow ... even if the "fat lady" doesn't truly wind up singing. I've a sneaky suspicion that this Republican Primary is going to defy all of the "rules."
1/21/12 ... Well score one for Newt Gingrich. Each candidate now has one state primary win under his belt ... save for Ron Paul. I didn't hear any "fat lady" singing. Seems to me it's still anyones race, though Gingrich really needed a win to legitimize his campaign. I've often wondered if it is fair that the same states get to go first election cycle after election cycle. Doesn't seem quite fair ... by the time the primary reaches some of the later states your candidate of choice may have decided to drop out of the race and you've had no real say in the matter. I think primaries should be held on a rotating basis so that each state has an opportunity to be among the first states to vote and impact the final outcome.
I was sorry to see Michelle Bachman drop out the race, but campaigns are expensive to run. A rightly so, Bachman took her cue from a home state (Iowa) where she had spent a lot of time and money campaigning. I can't blame her for pulling out. I guess the world is ready for a black President (which I was truly happy to see, even if I don't care for his politics), but the world is not quite ready for a woman President of the United States. Michelle Bachman is a very intelligent, informed, hardworking and articulate individual. I think she tried a little too hard to come across as the staunch conservative and instead wound up coming across as rigid and inflexible.
This was not the race for a staunch conservative. The pendulum isn't going to swing back entirely the other way this election. Too many in this country still remember the George W. Bush era with 9/11, war in Iraq, and the stock market collapse. They aren't ready to embrace anything bearing the label "hard-core" conservatism, but I think that most are willing to admit that the liberal swing of the pendulum hasn't done much good this past four years either.
The answer for "who will be the best Republican candidate" will probably have to be a conservative who is willing to embrace flexibility in order to unite this country and get us back up onto our feet once again. We have real issues facing this country (e.g., floundering economy, financial system that stills needs reforms enacted to prevent another market collapse from happening again, high unemployment, rising tension in the middle east, not much movement on true energy independence from the Middle East, and now the threat of Iran as a nuclear power in our very near future) and we need a President with a proven record for getting things done.
We need a President without the baggage of bad history (personal or political), someone who is willing to roll up his sleeves on day one, embracing conservatives as well as liberals, to get things done. We need an innovator, but also someone with a record for putting ideas into action. We need someone who will surround himself with good people and be willing to listen as well as lead. We need a candidate for President who is proud of our country and its people. God willing the voters will have the end in mind when they cast their vote to determine exactly who the Republican candidate will be. We have look beyond the election fight against Obama, with the end goal of the Presidency and the country in mind.
The score is now 1-1-1 ... Iowa for Santorum, New Hampshire for Romney and South Carolina for Gingrich. The race is on: may the best man for the country win.
[ Alright ... I am done with talking politics here for awhile. I am volunteering for the campaign of the candidate I will support. I just had to have somewhere to speak my mind. All of my friends seem to be liberal and I am now living in a liberal-minded state. I am okay with agree to disagree, but many on the other side do not seem to be. Thus, I have found very few venues for enlightened, honest discussions. Thanks for bearing with me and hearing me out : ) ]
2/6/2012 ... Why do people assume that one who has an aggressive posture, coupled with an impressive deliverance in a debate setting, would naturally make a good long term President of the United States? Obama is a very charismatic orator, with rather impressive deliverance in a debate format ... Has the latter translated into an effective leader for our country these past 3+ years in terms of jobs, national debt, true energy independence and a world free from the threat of a nuclear Iran? Be careful my fellow Republicans lest your short term goals wind up being your Achilles heel ... Do you truly want what's best for our country or to win a perceived battle? And if the latter, then what makes your agenda any more desirable to independents and the rest of the country than that of the "half-time, with four more years" being offered by the Obama campaign?
It's not about class warfare ... just like it's not about a perceived victory. It's about what it takes to get our country back up on its feet again and which candidate is perceived (by the entire country) as being truly capable of delivering in that respect.
(Think, I will have to make this a post all its own?)
2/8/2012 ... Woo-hoo! Way to go Rick Santorum!! ... You knocked it out of the ballpark last night and then then some with your 3 state sweep: I LOVE IT!! A decisive win in Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado represents a widespread, broad spectrum support from middle America in my humble opinion. And I don't discount Missouri ... the fact that over 138,000 (out of 250,000 total voters) people braved the bad weather to get out and show their support for you in a non-binding primary speaks volumes ... especially when voter turnout in the entire state of Nevada (the last primary contest) was less than 50,000 voters total. More power to you in the weeks ahead, Rick Santorum. Keep your momentum going!!
I love that the American people are doing what it takes to get their own information and to think for THEMSELVES in this Presidential Primary. You aren't content to let the establishment, the political commentators, analysts and polls make your decisions for you. You've renewed my faith in the American electorate. Keep it going and God Bless!!
3/2012 Update: Rick Santorum's Plan for His First 100 Days in Office
No comments:
Post a Comment