Passing Observations on a Presidential Race
Ryan | 16 11 2007If you're a first time visitor, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed, which will keep you up to date with all the latest New School Politics posts. Thanks for visiting!
-Ron Paul is on the rise, raising bundles of money including over $4 million (mainly over the internet) in one day which is the most raised by any candidate within a 24 hour time period. Additionally Paul has recently began to register on the polls, at about 4-4.5% in national polls and almost 7% in New Hampshire. As exciting as it is to have a true small government man getting national attention, Paul clearly has a low cealing and will not by any stretch of the imagination be on the GOP ticket.
-Mike Huckabee is also on the up and up. He is very appealing to the Christian right and also cutting into Romney’s lead in Iowa. The Governor is probably the most articulate speaker of the GOP bunch and appears very comfortable in his own skin. His numbers nationally have climbed to about 8.5% while in Iowa he is polling at an impressive 20% (about 8% behind Romney). Huckabee is a very religious candidate with a populist twist, but despite his political skill, the GOP is not quite in the position to be nominating the cultural conservative. For this reason I also discredit, to an extent, the talk of Huckabee being a smart veep option.
-Romney and McCain are both in moderately improving positions. As much as people seem to like McCain (or at least just me) when they see him in all his infinite candor, he has been exausted by national politics to the extent that getting nominated becomes difficult in the face of all those pols with blank(er) slates. Still, McCain could be a wise veep choice because of his exerience among other attributes. As a matter of fact, its likely that he’s Rudy’s first choice (Giuliani has already mentioned that he would be supporting McCain if he [Giuliani] were not running). Romney is definitely positioned as the top challenger to Giuliani. The question for him is whether the momentum he carries from (potential) Iowa, NH, and Michigan victories will be enough to overtake the national deficit he has against Rudy.
-For all the media’s efforts to find legitimate competition, there is little evidence that Mrs. Clinton should have trouble on the Democratic side. Even if she were to lose Iowa–where she is only ahead by a few percentage points at best–it is unlikely if that would be nearly enough to overturn her present standing in every other state. I have no good reason to believe, at present, that she should not win the nomination.
-Edwards is attacking Clinton more feverently recently but there is no sign that he is doing any better. There may be evidence that Obama is incurring the benefits of Edwards criticism of Clinton however. While these two trends are not definitive nationally it is apparent that Edwards’ numbers are sinking in Iowa and Obama’s numbers are augmenting in the same state.
-I stick by the predictions I first made last November.
Last 5 posts by Ryan
- For Republicans, a rock star is born - September 5th, 2008
- Campaign '08: Knocked Up - September 1st, 2008
- BREAKING: it's...it's...Palin?! - August 29th, 2008
- Scarcity, Shmarcity - June 26th, 2008
- The Greatness of Southpaws - June 26th, 2008
Popularity: 23% [?]
Sphere: Related Content
The Passing Observations on a Presidential Race by New School Politics, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Mike Huckabee's ardent support for the FairTax sets him apart
Ian | 16 11 2007Mike Huckabee’s ardent support for the FairTax sets him apart from all other viable presidential candidates. The FairTax Act of 2007 (HR 25/ S 1025) represents a prospective power shift of massive proportions in America. It lays out a practical ideal of voluntary payment of taxes, based on a substantial level of taxpayer choice that the plan affords. Since FairTax untaxes basic necessities (up to socially-accepted poverty-level spending), what is taxed is marginal, and/or desired or preferred, on a broader base of retail products and services. This is to say that the taxpayer may, under the FairTax, choose to purchase used products and avoid paying the tax. And, to the extent desired, the taxpayer may choose to self-perform certain services rather than pay for them. This will stimulate do-it-yourself education, improve citizens’ self-reliance; indeed the FairTax represents the possibility of ushering in a new can-do, citizen psychology that would accrue to greater demands for government accountability - truly, a cultural sea change.
Government is the “necessary glue” that enables the social fabric to cohere. It does this by effecting “rules” that ostensibly provide members with equitable access to wealth and resources. It also must provide ostensibly equitable enforcement of those rules in order to mitigate threats to the social fabric. It is unrealistic to believe that the structures of a national government can be supported on donations, thus the need for taxes. Naysayers love to characterize anything purporting to be a “fair tax” as an oxymoron - but it is not true. The idea of fairness has to do with equitable sharing in the cost by all members who depend upon the social fabric for food, shelter, clothing and post-necessity economic enterprise. And, because of the shift of power from politicians and special interests under an enacted FairTax, the elected will find it more difficult to both enlarge government, and implement any dual system of taxation. FairTax strategist, Dennis Calabrese, discusses how the FairTax repeals the income tax, how it does away with the IRS, and how it addresses other aspects of frequent concern to skeptics.
The FairTax has a much greater opportunity for success to operate as a “self-regulating” mechanism because of increased visibility. One finds that the current system, ostensibly regulated by the Internal Revenue Code, is in fact poorly regulated because of continually increasing complexity (the effect of tax favors from politicians, through lobbyists, to favored corporations and other special interests) stemming from the desire by those holding government position to steer public behavior using tax code “carrots.” We have seen how 100 years of this type of behavior has eroded the Nation’s currency and the purchasing power of working family incomes. “Visionist,” Tom Frey believes the current tax system will simply collapse; and economist Laurence Kotlikoff heralds - short of enactment of FairTax (or an otherwise unlikely change in spending habits) - the U.S. will shortly face an irrevocable economic breakdown. (Kotlikoff believes that passage of the FairTax can stave off the economic ruin we’re facing, but would be surprised to see it happen.)
Frey and Kotlikoff may be right on both counts, and we may not be able to successfully evoke change; but shall we not try?
Mike Huckabee believes we should.
(Permission granted to republish, in whole or part. -Ian)
If I am not mistaken both Ron Paul and Tom
Ryan | 17 11 2007If I am not mistaken both Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo also support a national sales tax. So clearly Huckabee’s support for the fair tax does not set him appart from all the other GOP candidates.