2012 Elections

Park Geun-hye’s March to the Center

Posted on August 25, 2011. Filed under: 2012 Elections, DPRK, Policy |

Ms. Park is once again proving her inability to have any principles or definitive policy positions. Her newest policy known as “trustpolitik” draws a vague line between the supposed hawks in the Lee Myung-bak camp and doves pushing a return to the rapprochement of the failed Sunshine policy.

“An alignment policy would entail assuming a tough line against North Korea sometimes and a flexible policy open to negotiations other times.”

Defining “something” is of course the challenge and if she is claiming to take a more “aligned” approach than Lee Myung-bak did, I take it that could mean the tolerance of at least  two military attacks which is exactly what this current administration did.

Of course, she could be suggesting that she’ll be more open to aid and other financial assistance like the Roh and Kim administrations were which, as history teaches us, leads to the murder of Southern tourists, development and testing of nuclear weapons and the firing of long-range missiles.

The bottom line is that Lee Myung-bak didn’t follow a truly hawkish North Korea policy. He pussyfooted his way through without fully committing to the hawkish policies he ran on and in return, he’ll be remembered as the president that allowed North Korea to murder more than forty South Korean citizens without consequence. Sure, he and his advisers will claim that they avoided a second Korean War, but the truth is that they punted on confronting Kim Jong-il.

I guess we should remember that by the time Lee Myung-bak had arrived in office, the South Korean voters were already split on DPRK policy and now, almost five years later, they seem to be just as split with a large segment of voters nostalgic for the faux-sense of security that Sunshine offered. Park is simply capitalizing on that while offering no substance with her moderate rhetoric.

It’s a pander that she hopes will allow her to waltz in on name recognition only.

The only question that remains and considering everything that has happened with North Korea over the past decade,  do people want yet another opportunistic politician claiming to know the perfect combination for dealing with the North?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Scott Brown, Ron Paul and the Future of the GOP

Posted on February 24, 2010. Filed under: 2010 Elections, 2012 Elections, Dems, Elections, GOP, Issues, Political Parties |

The GOP and their teabagging stooges are quite angry today. Yesterday, Scott Brown broke rank and voted in favor of the Senate jobs bill (along with Collins and Snowe). This should not be a major or breaking-story because congressmen USED to vote with their constituents in mind all the time. Voting across party lines is not unusual at all, yet the Tea Party appears to have already given up on Brown. They have filled his website and Facebook page with comments like this one:

“You, Sir, are a RINO Judas. I hope you enjoy your 30 pieces of silver.”

Amazing really. One single vote and he is deemed a Judas. All of this, of course, makes the 2010 election ever more potent. It’s not just about the Dems losing control of Congress anymore. If the GOP does in fact win BIG this fall,  are these “supporters” –those responsible for this apparent conservative revival– going to react in a similar way when a freshly minted congressman decides to vote with his district or state in mind? If they do, then the GOP is going to have a major problem in 2010.

Mike Madden over at Salon has the same thing on his mind. He poses that the GOP is going to have a hard time keeping the support of their new activist base. The platform that the Tea Party wants them to run against –which is the only way they are going to do well in 2010– is one that the GOP was booted out for in 2006.

“…most of the things Republicans say they’ll do if they take power again — cutting spending, increasing transparency, ending earmarks — were exactly what helped voters sour on Republican rule in 2006. To keep the new elements of their activist base happy, GOP leaders will have to stick to their plan. “Keeping the support of tea party activists will require keeping our promises, it’s as simple as that,” one GOP aide

It’s ludicrous to assume the GOP will do any of these things and they know it. That’s their concern. If the Tea Party is this angry about Scott Brown voting with his constituents and “against” the Tea Party, then the GOP is in a lot of trouble. They’re already spitting on Steele on a regular basis using trademark bagger language.

“Michael Steele is an imperial chairman,” grumbled one GOP fundraiser to Politico.

In my opinion, a bagger-fueled 2010 GOP resurgence is going to 1) highlight the fractures between the libertarians and conservatives and 2) splinter the presidential field in 2012 leaving the Dems in a good position. I’m not sure who’ll represent the GOP in 2012, but I can assure you that Ron Paul will be a strong candidate (regardless of party) and if the GOP burns their libertarian bridges, they can both  kiss their 2012 chances goodbye.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Paul vs Obama in 2012?

Posted on February 21, 2010. Filed under: 2012 Elections, Dems, Elections, GOP |

Only a few hours ago, I made this statement in reference to the Tea Party:
If you wanted to really break it down and see what this is about, draw a line in the sand; on one side is Palin and the other is Paul. They’d follow Palin in a second.
However, I just now stumbled upon this straw poll from the CPAC:
Ron Paul CPAC
Does this prove me wrong? Not really. CPAC is not a Tea Party event and the attendees are certainly more pro-GOP establishment than the baggers are. What this does offer is a solid glimpse as to who the Dems will be up against.
Regardless of this poll, I don’t think that Paul will win the nomination. He’s way too progressive in his social policies to make it past the primaries. I also found it interesting that Huckabee and Gingrich were not on the list. As a Dem, I’m most concerned about Ron Paul (and least threatened). I think he has the best chance of challenging Obama (mostly because of his youth appeal and ability to inspire), but Nate Silver believes that Gingrich poses a huge threat. I’m not so sure I agree.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

GOP Takeover Unlikely

Posted on February 19, 2010. Filed under: 2010 Elections, 2012 Elections, Dems, Elections, GOP, Issues |

American conservatives have gotten themselves very excited over the past couple days as CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) has been underway. The message is the same it’s always been: lower taxes, less government and more national security.

As we know, they’ve also been sounding the jobless and deficit alarm a lot also. Well, not really. It’s more like they set the bank alarm off, ran away and then called the cops when a Dem walked in the door.

Short-term memories are in no shortage when it comes to the GOP and their stooge baggers, but just in case you’ve drank their tea also, take a look at this:

https://i1.wp.com/farm3.static.flickr.com/2801/4190849095_61cc1777a2_o.jpg

Calling for tax cuts might get teabaggers hard and the GOP establishment something to talk about, but it’s pretty clear that it had a terrible effect on the deficit. Maybe Bush was just a bad president and other GOPers had it right when they tried to give tax breaks?

https://i0.wp.com/www.headybrew.net/images/content/budget_deficit_or_surplus.gif

Nope, but they like to claim that it’s all about the trickle-down effect. If we give tax breaks to the wealthy, then middle-Americans will also be helped because the rich will hire them. Does that pass the smell test? Are they as innocent as they claim?

chart of the day, jobs lost in the bush and obama administrations
The point is that even though the facts are there that prove the GOP cannot effectively run an economy or the country, they still manage pass themselves off as the party of the common man. They have proven to be successful at manipulating the masses over the past year and now they’re claiming they’ll take back control of the Senate. They’re hoping for a 1994-style takeover and even throwing some names for the new “contract” around.
Unfortunately for them, there’s something called statistics and reality that seems to be in their way. Intrade is giving them a 30% chance of a takeover and Nate Silver –master statistician who predicted almost every detail of the 2008 election– has a message as well: Republicans Must Defend Seats Too. The caveat is this enthusiasm gap and unless the Dems pass something tangible through reconciliation, it might be hard. The public likes it when they see the government doing something.

Regardless of whether they takeover or not, the ball is still in the Obama’s court as he’ll have a golden opportunity to sandbag the GOP and follow in the steps of the 1948 election where Truman rain against a “do nothing” Congress.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...