I have one candidate left to analyse, and then I compare them all. I reach a surprising conclusion...
Jon Huntsman is the last candidate I am analysing. He did not fight the Iowa caucas, but will be fighting New Hampshire. He is easily the most electable of all the candidates - by which I mean the best placed to win the actual election, not the primaries. He doesn't have many stupid ideas, and he would probably be a safe pair of hands. This is not to say that he would do nothing - and he has even stated that he favours some kind of healthcare system (not as good as "Obamacare" but not far off). On social issues, he is anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage, but not as vociferously as most of his peers. He is a diplomat, but he is also a businessman, and as such he combines an approach that accommodates working with everyone with some actual experience on job-creation. His economic policy does favour the rich (he's a Republican with a billionnaire dad, you can't expect miracles) but he has promised to close tax loopholes, which is important.
The way Huntsman really stands out from his peers is that he has a track record in actually making progress (not least as ambassador to China) and an outlook that allows for cooperation with the other side. It's quite easy to picture Huntsman in the White House, and everything we know about him suggests he would be a fairly average president, possibly even quite a good one with all his foreign policy experience. Therefore, if you're going to support a republican, then support Huntsman.
However, why not look at the alternative? Barack Obama. A man who envisages your country as one where everyone is born equal, one where the poor can fall ill and get to see a doctor, one where your country works in the world as a mediator but without pointing guns around and making things worse. I cannot understand why any of this would fail to appeal. Obama's vision isn't about removing your American dream (where anyone can make it big) and replacing it with communism (or some other word that conjures negative images in your minds that aren't anything to do with the meaning of the word). On the contrary, he epitomises the said American dream.
Being a republican isn't supposed to be about taking important decisions away from women whilst also taking away everything in the state except that which benefits the very rich. It is supposed to be about allowing individuals to have as much freedom as possible, without letting anyone fall too far behind. The social security provision isn't only moral, it is an economic necessity. We must allow everyone in the world to have access to healthcare, or we run the risk of some little child who would one day grow up to be a great leader, or solve a great problem, dying before they get the chance. If you look at the infant mortality rates in the USA then you can imagine just how many of those little children would have been able to make a positive contribution if given the chance. The same is true of education, and other aspects of welfare. You need social security in order to maximise economic output - it isn't wishy washy liberalism, it's cold hard economics. The liberalism bit is nice too though, if you really think about it.
The thing is, the candidates all go against the very foundations of republicanism. They are trying to remove personal freedoms: choices women make, freedom of association. At the same time, they are proponents of economic policies which fail to maximise the productive potential of your economy. In fact, if you look at Barack Obama's record, it is clear that he is the candidate in this race who combines the greatest personal freedoms with the soundest economic policy.
If the Republicans nominate Huntsman, then Obama should be worried, because Huntsman is electable. If America elects Huntsman, America would do fine, but not excel. If the Republicans nominate someone like Rick Santorum, then America should be very careful not to elect him, because the consequences would be bad for true republicanism, and bad for Americans. So actually, if you are a true republican (as opposed to someone who just has a gun fetish) your best candidate is Barack Obama.
No comments:
Post a Comment