Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Blame it on Bush/Cheney

I've read some of the analysis about the Iowa Republican caucus results and, interestingly enough, the person I agree with the most is Erick Erickson at RedState. I suspect that's because, more than any pundit, he has his finger on the pulse of the not-Romney 75%.

...the reason the GOP is having such a chaotic primary fight has nothing to do with the tea party. Frankly, it has nothing to do with the bulk of the GOP not wanting Romney.

The reason this Republican primary season is so chaotic is because George W. Bush failed to have a successor. Had President Bush had a Vice President to run for President, Bush would have undoubtedly made different policy decisions, but even aside from that there would have been an ascertainable front runner coming from the Bush administration to win or lose.

I remember during the last year or so of the Bush/Cheney administration wondering who they would anoint as their successors. But it never happened. Instead, we saw a complete breakdown of their domestic policies with the crash of our economy, just as we had witnessed the same from their foreign policies.

As I've said many times before, Bush/Cheney left the Republican Party in the shambles of failure on every front. They had a choice to make after that...rethink their policies or double-down on the failures. They chose the later. Not only did they do that, they catered to their extreme base in order to obstruct everything the Democrats tried to do and to gin up enough rage to win the 2010 midterms. Those decisions are now coming back to haunt them. And neither the base nor the establishment is happy right now as the later tries to reign things in for a general election.

One more thing I agree with Erickson about:

But by God Mitt Romney may now get the political beating everyone has been expecting him to get. Newt Gingrich has nothing left to lose. He can go Newtlear against the guy he sees as having destroyed him. Newt Gingrich can unleash unmitigated hell against MItt Romney and just like the attacks on Newt were true, they’ll all be true about MItt Romney too.

This Republican self-destruction isn't over yet...not by a long shot.


  1. I think it's not so much that Bush didn't have a VP who could run for President - let's face it, neither does Obama - but that during his tenure, he did nothing to allow other Republicans to stand out. If anything, the Republicans under Bush/Cheney did more to keep the spotlight on themselves, and keep most other Republicans in line than to groom potential successors.

    The reverberations of that are still felt, in that there really weren't any solid candidates making their presence known in the intervening two years, because the decision to "lock step" on purity and opposition to Obama. It's going to be at least another 4 years - longer, really - for the Republicans to get over that.

  2. Smartypants

    Thanks so much for your blog posts, they always inspire me to work hard for the President. This story will cheer me all day. Newt is no my new BFF.

    Go Newt.....

  3. Norbrook

    I agree that Obama/Biden could be in the same position in 2016. After this election, I think both they and us need to start thinking about succession-planning. Its a critical aspect of good leadership.


    And thanks to you for all you do! I also feel uplifted all the time by your approach to focusing on what is working. As I said a while ago, the best defense of liberalism is good government. PBO has done amazing work to restore that.

    Oh, and I'm totally with you on Newt as my new BFF - as much as that also makes my stomach turn. LOL