It is essentially the eve of the Iowa caucuses and it is quite possible that the difference between the winner and the fourth-place finisher will be as little as ten points.
Such a result benefits two candidates: Gov. Romney and Sen. Santorum.
For the former, a win, however small, will leave him having taken a state he had not invested his campaign in going into another state in which he has a commanding lead. Two wins in the first two contests going into South Carolina and Florida will constitute a sense of inevitability the rest of the field will be hard-pressed to overcome. Gov. Romney will be the winner in a party desperate to win come November. That means a lot.
A third place/15-18% finish for Sen. Santorum will mean that, unlike the other anti-Romneys who have sizzled and then subsequently fizzled months before any votes were cast, he is peaking at just the right time. I doubt it would be enough to launch him past the apparent Romney coalescence, but it would position him to be the beneficiary should there be a late, desperate movement among conservatives to stop Gov. Romney. (It's much more likely that, at that point, Republicans will get in line and set their sights squarely on defeating President Obama next fall, but you never know.)
Friday, December 30, 2011
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Payroll Tax Extension
Substantively the House GOP is right: a two month extension is impractical, non-stimulative policy.
Politically, they lose too much and gain nothing from holding out for a year-long extension, at least not without approving the two-month version first.
The best thing to do at this point is let Obama-Senate Democrats hang themselves with their own rope: adopting another piece of legislation that will do nothing to encourage recovery of a stagnant economy of which they are complete owners.
We tried to do the right thing. See you in November.
Friday, December 16, 2011
A More German Europe
Fears of a "Fourth Reich" are not commensurate with a desire to save the EU from impending implosion. The only way to save said Union -- for a time at least -- is for a common assumption of the overly indebted members' obligations. The country with the resources to do this is Germany, meaning a common assumption of everyone's debt is a German assumption.
Germany will not agree to this without Brussels first receiving a veto over members' budgets -- nor should they. Berlin will dictate the terms by which Brussels will enforce austerity on Greece, Spain, Portugal etc. as a precondition to Berlin underwriting all their debt.
He who pays the piper calls the tune.
The state of affairs in Europe will thus be Germany both subsidizing other nations and determining what their budgets and finance policies are to look like.
A European Union hence will be a Europe dominated in every relevant facet by Germany. It is either that or disintegration.
Those countries who would be so subservient must decide if a total loss of self-determination and sovereignty is a price worth paying for a common currency that does not even benefit them.
Germany will not agree to this without Brussels first receiving a veto over members' budgets -- nor should they. Berlin will dictate the terms by which Brussels will enforce austerity on Greece, Spain, Portugal etc. as a precondition to Berlin underwriting all their debt.
He who pays the piper calls the tune.
The state of affairs in Europe will thus be Germany both subsidizing other nations and determining what their budgets and finance policies are to look like.
A European Union hence will be a Europe dominated in every relevant facet by Germany. It is either that or disintegration.
Those countries who would be so subservient must decide if a total loss of self-determination and sovereignty is a price worth paying for a common currency that does not even benefit them.
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Egypt & the 'Arab Spring'
Popular unrest has once again boiled over in Tahrir Square, directed in like manner at Mubarak's successors as it was at Mubarak.
Indeed, the fundamentals beneath the facially disparate circumstances are the same and must cause any but the wildly optimistic (or delusional) to question whether the "Arab Spring" is not really just a continuation of a centuries-long Arab Winter.
In the Land of the Pharoahs, as with most of the Arab world, the condition is autocracy -- the strong leveraging their strength to both seize and retain power. To such an end all means are necessary.
For Mubarak the means were the "emergency laws" enacted (then never rescinded) in the confusion following Sadat's assassination. For the generals it was Mubarak's ouster, encouraged by their heartfelt promises to be a faithful caretaker until Egyptian democracy went online.
Unsurprisingly, they are now reluctant to cede power, or to step aside without at least a strong guarantee of their continued place of privilige within Egyptian state and society.
To expect the Muslim Brotherhood, or whatever name Islamists choose to call themselves, to behave differently if and when they do assume power is, at best, naive.
The hope for democracy and a pluralistic society along the Nile is frustrated by this culture of power -- of using the most power to gain power and to secure power.
Not only is this the way it has always been done, but in their efforts to preserve their power Egypt's rulers have always suppressed any and all civic elements that could possibly challenge their autocratic hold. The upshot is that any kind of meaningful civil society is absent, leaving the Egyptian people feckless before the power struggles between the military on one hand and Islamists on the other.
Democracy, pluralism, and rights of the minority simply have no weight with which to throw a punch or the wherewithal to counter those thrown by the powers that be.
If anything in the Arab world is changing, it is simply the tools of oppression changing from the hands of tyrants to those who wield Islam's sword.
The long winter continues.
Indeed, the fundamentals beneath the facially disparate circumstances are the same and must cause any but the wildly optimistic (or delusional) to question whether the "Arab Spring" is not really just a continuation of a centuries-long Arab Winter.
In the Land of the Pharoahs, as with most of the Arab world, the condition is autocracy -- the strong leveraging their strength to both seize and retain power. To such an end all means are necessary.
For Mubarak the means were the "emergency laws" enacted (then never rescinded) in the confusion following Sadat's assassination. For the generals it was Mubarak's ouster, encouraged by their heartfelt promises to be a faithful caretaker until Egyptian democracy went online.
Unsurprisingly, they are now reluctant to cede power, or to step aside without at least a strong guarantee of their continued place of privilige within Egyptian state and society.
To expect the Muslim Brotherhood, or whatever name Islamists choose to call themselves, to behave differently if and when they do assume power is, at best, naive.
The hope for democracy and a pluralistic society along the Nile is frustrated by this culture of power -- of using the most power to gain power and to secure power.
Not only is this the way it has always been done, but in their efforts to preserve their power Egypt's rulers have always suppressed any and all civic elements that could possibly challenge their autocratic hold. The upshot is that any kind of meaningful civil society is absent, leaving the Egyptian people feckless before the power struggles between the military on one hand and Islamists on the other.
Democracy, pluralism, and rights of the minority simply have no weight with which to throw a punch or the wherewithal to counter those thrown by the powers that be.
If anything in the Arab world is changing, it is simply the tools of oppression changing from the hands of tyrants to those who wield Islam's sword.
The long winter continues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)