Jan
02
2012

#rsrh QotD, SSH! You’re Giving Away The Game, Walter Edition.

Walter Russell Mead, killjoy:

Unless you are a political operative or somebody angling to get an appointment in the next Republican administration, you could safely ignore every word written about the GOP contest up until this point without being any less well informed about the important things going on in the country and the world.

I say that without heat, by the way: speaking as a political operative – actually, I am offended by that term.  I am a partisan hack, damn your eyes* – I’ll be one of the first to admit that the primary season goes on for far, far, far too long.  But it’s how we set things up, and people seem to be happy to keep doing it this way… while all the time complaining bitterly about having to keep doing  it this way.  Whaddya going to do, cry in your beer?

Moe Lane

*You’d be amazed how empowering it is to be free to say that.  I know far too many people in this business who simply can’t admit that, even to themselves.  And it keeps them down.

2 Comments

  • NotSoBlueStater says:

    I believe in small government for all of the reasons the founders did. Republicans talk about small government and Democrats don’t, therefore, they Republicans seem closer to this essential truth. Problem is: They just aren’t all that close. I’m not going to join the club until there’s REAL meaning in that membership. We have a Democratic Governor in MA at a time of dwindling revenues. He talks a lot of liberal talk, but in the end, he doesn’t cry for higher taxes, believes in charter schools, and cuts spending to balance the budget. I say these things not to contradict you, but to say that while your insights about the world almost always resonate with me, every time I try on the label “Republican,” it doesn’t seem to fit.

  • Murgatroyd says:

    But it’s how we set things up, and people seem to be happy to keep doing it this way… while all the time complaining bitterly about having to keep doing it this way.

    I’ve been saying for years upon years that the primary system would work much better if we went to a system of approval balloting rather than winner-take-all voting or activist-dominated caucuses. In other words, voters would get a ballot with a list of candidates, and would be instructed: “Vote for any and all candidates of whom you approve; leave blank the boxes for those you would not wish to see nominated.” The winner would be the one with the most votes at the end of the process. (There are variations with negative votes, too, but this is the simplest.) Winner-take-all is an absurd method to use in selecting a candidate to appeal to the entire party and the entire electorate. And caucuses are just frakkin’ bizarre.

    But do they listen to me? Nooooooooooo …

RSS feed for comments on this post.


Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com