Tag: Republicans

Ehem… WTF?

Exit polls found 64 percent of Tuesday’s Republican voters still support the conflict — and Romney, whose criticism of President Bush’s management of the war has been muted, outpolled McCain in that category.

But among the 34 percent who said they disapproved of the war, McCain had a wide advantage over the GOP field — even over Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the sole advocate of a U.S. withdrawal in the Republican field. [A ‘very personal victory’ for McCain in New Hampshire. CNN. January 9 2008]

The anti-war Republicans voted for a pro-war candidate?

I know, I know. Ron Paul has no chance in this world but anti-war Republicans for McCain? That is just out of this world. But yeah, yeah. I know. There are issues other than the war.

After the New Hampshire’s primaries, I think an Obama-Clinton, or a Clinton-Obama campaign is inevitable. Those combinations are most popular at the moment. That is, unless, of course, for some reason, Obama and Clinton hate each other enough that they would not work with each other. There is no doubt that there is still a long way to go but most polls for future races show first and second place for Clinton and Obama respectively or vice versa. Even a poll conducted over a month ago for South Carolina, the state which Edwards was a senator once, shows that Edwards is behind you know who.^[1] It is another story for the Republicans though.

As I have said earlier, if I cannot have Paul, I will back Romney. Having Mankiw as an adviser is too cool a factor to resist!

Oh, Mankiw is an adviser to Romney, in case you did not know:

Mitt Romney gets advice from some of my favorite economists.

Update: Several readers have asked for more details about my involvement here.

I first met Governor Romney several years ago, but only briefly at that time. Recently, I have talked with him more substantively about a range of economic policy issues. I was impressed by his intellect, open-mindedness, and overall economic philosophy.

I was honored when he asked me to serve in a more formal advisory capacity. My role will be that of an outside adviser. My teaching at Harvard will continue to be my main responsibility and the focus of my attention, and the posts on this blog will reflect those priorities. [Advisers to Mitt. Greg Mankiw’s Blog. November 29 2006]

^[1] — From the NYT:

[South Carolina’s Primaries. NYT. Extracted January 8 2008]

If in the end it is down to these two politicians, there will be no contemplation at all for me: it is Obama all the way:

DES MOINES — Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, a first-term Democratic senator trying to become the nation’s first African-American president, rolled to victory in the Iowa caucuses on Thursday night, lifted by a record turnout of voters who embraced his promise of change.

The victory by Mr. Obama, 46, amounted to a startling setback for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, 60, of New York, who just months ago presented herself as the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination. The result left uncertain the prospects for John Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina, who had staked his second bid for the White House on winning Iowa. [Obama Takes Iowa in a Big Turnout as Clinton Falters; Huckabee Victor. NYT. January 4 2008]

With Obama winning the first race, one thing may be clear: skin color does not matter!

In the Republican camp, Ron Paul performed way better then Rudy Giuliani. Looks like the libertarian is going to outlive the mayor. This is very impressive given how much financial back Mr. Giuliani has compared to Ron Paul. In other words, Guiliani is humiliated.

This blog shows why the victory over Giuliani is so sweet:

It was mid-May, and the former mayor of New York was riding high following one of the early debates among the Republican presidential candidates. The primo sound bite had been a snap to identify: Giuliani’s outraged, impassioned reply to Paul’s assertion that U.S. foreign policy, especially the periodic bombing of Iraq in the aftermath of 1991’s Gulf War, was to blame for the Sept. 11 attacks.

Giuliani, not waiting to be called upon, seized the moment by terming Paul’s comment “an extraordinary statement” and urging the Texas congressman to retract it (which Paul did not).

To give Paul his due, even in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 — when the emotional response to the assault was at its rawest — serious scholars had begun hashing over the role played by American policy in the Mideast, particularly long-standing support for Israel, in fueling Islamic extremism and hatred for the U.S. But in the format of a candidate debate — where rhetorical zingers count far more than lengthy discourse — Paul’s remark amounted to a grooved fast ball down the middle, and the consensus at the time was that Giuliani parked it.

As MSNBC’s online political note put it at the time, Giuliani may want to “hire out Paul for the campaign trail — he could be the Washington Generals to Rudy’s Globetrotters” (i.e., the patsy willing to get beaten in every game).

That was then, this is now. In Iowa, Paul, 10%; Giuliani, 4%. [Ron Paul gets some revenge. Top of the Ticket. January 4 2008]

Paul’s performance is also this: a middle finger to Fox News!

For the result itself:

IOWA RESULTS
DEMOCRATS (official)

Barack Obama – 37.6%
John Edwards – 29.7%
Hillary Clinton – 29.5%
Bill Richardson – 2.1%

REPUBLICANS (96% complete)

Mike Huckabee – 34.3%
Mitt Romney – 25.3%
Fred Thomson – 13.4%
John McCain – 13.1%
Ron Paul – 10.0%
Rudy Giuliani – 3.5%

[Huckabee and Obama take Iowa wins. BBC News. January 4 2008]

The NYT has the full result for the Iowa race.

The rise of Huckabee, is worrying. His social and economic opinion are bad news for all libertarians. If Ron Paul does not make it, I will go for Romney.

But damn! Ron Paul did well despite mounting criticism directed against him in the last few weeks.

Next stop: the “Live Free or Die” state. You cannot get anymore libertarian than that!