Indiana governor Mitch Daniels’s announcement that he can’t play in the presidential primaries because his wife and daughters say he’s not allowed to is terrible news for the GOP and the country.
It’s terrible not because Daniels was obviously the best candidate or had the best chance to beat President Obama. It’s terrible because Daniels would have elevated the debate on entitlement reform and the budget in a way that no one else currently in the race seems able to.
Advertisement
Oh, the “Tea Parties” will have plenty of candidates. Minnesota representative Michele Bachmann, the founder and head of the House Tea Party Caucus, will almost surely run and do quite well. Herman Cain, the black former business executive, remains a Tea Party rock star. On the more libertarian side, there’s Rep. Ron Paul of Texas and former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson. If those two have their way, the dollar will not only be backed by gold, it will be printed on paper made from hemp.
Nearly every stripe of conservative will have at least one standard-bearer, or perhaps several (including gay Republicans, who can rally around the Fred Karger juggernaut). Except right now, no one appears equipped to defend the House GOP budget, written by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, which will likely define both the presidential and the congressional elections in 2012.
The Democrat-run Senate hasn’t passed a budget in more than 750 days, and Democratic leader Harry Reid says it would be “foolish” to try. That’s because the Democrats don’t want to muddy their attacks on Ryan’s idea of “premium support,” whereby the poor get more generous vouchers than the middle class or the wealthy to pay for Medicare coverage. By the way, the “radical” concept of premium support is not so radical. It has deep bipartisan roots, with endorsements from such Democrats as former senator John Breaux of Louisiana and former representative Dick Gephardt of Missouri.
The president’s counterproposal, splashed out in a rambling partisan attack in April, essentially reintroduces the whole “death panels” debate, albeit at a macroeconomic level, by empowering 15 presidentially appointed members of the Independent Payment Advisory Board to take the blame for throwing Grandma off a cliff.
Regardless, by rights, the 2012 presidential contest should be a choice between those two approaches, plus the parties’ wildly divergent views on spending and taxes. But no wonk on a white horse seems to be riding to the rescue.
Mitt Romney can crunch the numbers. But as his attempts to square his Massachusetts “Romneycare” with his opposition to “Obamacare” have shown, his salesmanship needs work.
Newt Gingrich should have picked up the mantle, but he opted to triangulate against Ryan. Almost immediately, triangulation morphed into self-immolation.
Obviously, Gingrich’s spontaneous human combustion had a lot to do with his own problems. If he had merely offered a modest dissent from the plan, he wouldn’t have spent the last week walking back his statements with all the grace of the barnyard dog stepping on a field of garden rakes in the Foghorn Leghorn cartoons.
Still, the Gingrich spectacle confirms one of Ryan’s original strategic aims: to “box in” the various presidential candidates on the issue of entitlement reform. But it also shows why they came up with all of those “third rail” metaphors in the first place.
So the question many are asking is, should Ryan ride to the rescue? If the election is going to be a referendum on his plan, maybe the one guy who can sell it should do just that. On Monday, House majority leader Eric Cantor called for Ryan to get in the race, saying, “Paul’s about real leadership.” Charles Krauthammer on Fox News’s Special Report said he wouldn’t just urge Ryan to run, he’d form a “posse.”
If Ryan ran, he would probably drive the other candidates farther away from his own plan while forcing them to come up with serious alternatives of their own. Many think that if he got the nomination, he would clean Obama’s clock in the debates.
It’s a lot to ask. He has three young kids and would have to get organized and funded from a cold start for a long-shot run. But politics is about moments, and this one is calling him. Unless someone suddenly rises to the challenge, the cries of “Help us, Paul Ryan, you’re our only hope!” will only get louder.
— Jonah Goldberg is editor-at-large of National Review Online and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. You can write to him by e-mail at JonahsColumn@aol.com, or via Twitter @JonahNRO.
As a disclaimer, I have been out of touch with my fellow American voters since they elected Clinton to my dismay. So my exile has lasted 27 years and counting,
From my perspective, all GOP candidates look reasonable but unexceptionable faced with the sophistry of the dependency culture and the politicians and their familiars, the bureaucrats who feed at the public purse. Is there an antidote?
Yes Mr Jonah, 'run Ryan run'.
Paul Ryan for his hard headed grasp of the economic challenges (thus a nexus of political and social problems) that face the nation with a rational and elegant plan to save not just this generation but our republic. Is this not courage?
I would also suggest that his mate should be Marco Rubio who inspires and lends that inestimable emotional ballast that the public, in its despair, most needs comfort,
Ryan was able to sell his Medicare plan to a lot of "serious" beltway types, who praised him as a courageous genius. He was able to sell it to the Republican House leadership, who needed to impress the Tea Party. But where is the evidence that he can sell it to actual voters, who seem to reflexively recoil from vouchers? (It's comical to hear panicked Republicans, in a bit of linguistic backpedaling, insist that RyanCare is simply "premium support". They're not fooling anyone, and they look weak doing it.)
Democrats are generally incompetent at messaging, but even they can figure this one out.
I also would like to see him run, if he does I will send money to him, I may even vote for him when my state primary come around.
I need to purchase the clone-Paul-Ryan dot com domain name and start the clone Ryan movement. He needs to be head of budget committee in the house, running for senate, and in Iowa running for president.
After watching Jane Corwin fumble the ball and mangle the message on entitlement reform in NY 26, and subsequently get crushed by the Mediscare blowback, the GOP needs a leader who can effortlessly and convincingly make the case.
A Ryan/Cain ticket would be a dream team - a Washington legislative insider teamed up with an effective private sector executive sharing a strongly internalized and clearly enunciated platform of practical reform that would be hard to be mangled, diluted, demagogued, co-opted or misunderstood.
I think it's a great idea. I also think the guy who proposes to fix entitlements be paired with the guy who stumped Clinton when he pitched massive government-centered entitlements.
I'd just like to tweak Jonah's sentence a bit for accuracy:
"That’s because the Democrats don’t want to muddy their attacks on Ryan’s idea of 'premium support,' whereby the poor get more generous vouchers than the middle class or the wealthy to pay for [only a portion of] Medicare coverage [leaving them exposed in a way that could easily be disastrous]."
There's not a GOP candidate now running who has Ryan's political savvy, his technical knowledge, his vision, or his ability to communicate that vision's importance to both the economic and social health of the country. Run, Ryan, run!
and regarding the advertising in the capcha: I don't need a better TV plan - I already have the best TV plan - which is no TV plan. Just say no to dish.
It doesn't have to be Ryan. Any of the candidates can become well-versed in the Ryan plan and any of the candidates can clean Obama's clock in the debates. The question is, will they support the plan and will they recognize the importance of knowing it--inside and out--and defending it vigorously.
I'm a huge Ryan fan. But we must expect any nominee to be capable of explaining and defending a plan he or she supports. We are not Democrats, who don't mind passing monumental legislation without knowing what's in it and how it works. At least, I hope we aren't...
I'm a huge fan, and I think it's time for Ryan to step up. He talks about his fear of the financial abyss we are headed for, and how it will effect the country and children he loves. Well Paul, many have gone off to war and never came back to the country and children they love, for the country and children they love.
I would work for Ryan and send money to his campaign.
That said, I think a candidate has to really *want* to run and have his whole heart in it, or that candidate will fail. Fred Thomson comes to my mind - his heart was not in it and he failed pretty quickly.
If Paul Ryan runs,it should be his idea, not a draft Ryan thing.
But I think Beth is right--if his heart's not in it, it would be a blow to his credibility to run without running to win. I agree with Mr Golberg that he is the ONLY Representative capable of explaining his budget. Maybe Ryan should answer the call to sit down with serious-minded candidates and start expalining his budget to death. Then NRO could host a symposium and vet the current candidates on exactly where they stand on Ryan's plan. Just a thought...
This reflects what I posted on a thread last night. I've seen and heard many pundits say that the Republican nominee should be able to articulate and defend the Ryan plan. Well, who better than the man himself?
I also talked about answering the call of destiny. Our nation has been a very lucky one, having great men answering that call at the right time throughout our history. This is Ryan's time. We need him. Not as the VP. At the top.
As long as we're gettin' up a posse; lets go after Rick Perry as Ryans VP. That would be a serious kick in the pants for the Democrats to deal with in 2012.