.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Sundries
...a sweatshop of moxie

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Jindal's Decision

Louisiana Governor, Bobby Jindal, has rejected the 98 million dollars in Stimulus money for his State. It is a principled move, but also a canny one.

In one fell swoop, I think he has checkmated Governor Palin in the 2012 stakes.

It will be interesting to see her reaction, as Alaska has long been the most massive porkers in our Union. There is only so much she can do in one term to reverse that historical course.

(I am so very embarrassed that Governor Crist of my home state of Florida campaigned for the Stimulus Bill's passage openly, never mind not rejecting it as Jindal has done. I am sick to death of RINOs)

IN THE COMMENTS: Ron is sensible, cautioning me not to jump to conclusions too early.

mmm...It's a marathon, not a sprint. This is a good move on his part, but checkmate? Perhaps a good pawn capture, but not a mate, surely. Way too early for such things, and nothing he's done has matched Palin being the VP candidate. He's yet to be tested under national fire yet.

I'm more interested in what Palin will do in the next 6 months to a year...As yet I have no real inkling outside of setting up a PAC, which is an interesting turn. If she can be ready with a compelling narrative when Barry has a more glaring miscue that even the press can't quite paste over, then we'll see.

Palin-Jindal? Possible in your view or not?

In response to the first paragraph, I think you are right about the lack of experience on the national level, but for some reason, I think he is not the kind that would be rattled by the spotlight (as Palin was, at times). He is an unusually calm person, projecting a staid competency that is very reassuring.

In response to the last question, do I think Palin-Jindal is a possible ticket in 2012 -- I suspect it would be double-jeopardy for oh so many people.

Two social and fiscal conservatives, but one almost quintessentially American, folksy, who has unbelievable amounts of star power with Republican voters; the other adding the much-needed minority clout to broaden the Party in the world's eyes and from a crucial Southern State, to boot.

I think it is a more formidable ticket than many Democrats think.

Labels: , ,

8 Comments:

  • mmm...It's a marathon, not a sprint. This is a good move on his part, but checkmate? Perhaps a good pawn capture, but not a mate, surely. Way too early for such things, and nothing he's done has matched Palin being the VP candidate. He's yet to be tested under national fire yet.

    I'm more interested in what Palin will do in the next 6 months to a year...As yet I have no real inkling outside of setting up a PAC, which is an interesting turn. If she can be ready with a compelling narrative when Barry has a more glaring miscue that even the press can't quite paste over, then we'll see.

    Palin-Jindal? Possible in your view or not?

    By Blogger Ron, at Sat Feb 21, 01:11:00 am GMT-5  

  • Doubtful. More likely the GOP puts up Palin and a senior senator in 2012 as throwaway candidates as they continue to redefine just where this party is going to go. Jindal is young enough to wait and build up a record and be one of the likely front runners in 2016.

    By Blogger BrotherDarryl, at Sat Feb 21, 02:38:00 am GMT-5  

  • BrotherDaryl I think your scenario assumes 8 years for this President as a default, which is unwarrented. Even if he does the best he can, he came in near the beginning of this crisis, and we not really see much in the way of positive results in this term. Prime soil for the opposing party!

    As for Palin being 'throwaway'...I would think her party would reject her outright for a variety of reasons, before they treat her as a throwaway candidate. She may need some polishing between now and then but if they do embrace her as the candidate, in a 'winnable' election, she will be a strong possibility even 4 years hence. Much of her future is in her hands in a way that is interesting to watch from the outside.

    By Blogger Ron, at Sat Feb 21, 07:06:00 am GMT-5  

  • There may be some local bias in this, but pay attention to Tim Pawlenty for 2012-16. Relatively young, fiscally conservative, pulls off "folksy" very easily, performed very well nationally during the bridge collapse, has been a player in the national party, and is ethically squeaky clean. One down side may be his close association with McCain in the last election, then again, it wasn't any closer than Palin's.

    Don't get me wrong, I thought Palin was a great candidate--an actually shrewd move by McCain--but she's got a lot of baggage now, deserved or not.

    On the stimulupalooza front, Pawlenty wants to reject the money but has said he's going to take it. I'm assuming that's because he knows, due to the sneaky provision in the bill, the state legislature can override him anyway. Rejecting it is just a gesture.

    If you look at LGF at all, you'll know that Jindal just let a stealth Creationist bill (as Charles Johnson calls it) pass, allowing non-science to be taught in LA science classrooms. That will come back to bite him if he tries to run nationally.

    By Anonymous Starless, at Sat Feb 21, 07:17:00 am GMT-5  

  • I think Jindal out-Obamas Obama. Young? Check [10 years younger than the aging-before-our-eyes POTUS]
    Ivy-league educated? Double check [Brown and Oxford]
    Of color? Check
    Unflappable? Check [Delivered his third child at home--heroic for any woman who's had a baby and any man who's watched the person in the catcher position]
    Fiscally conservative?
    Executive experience?
    Puts Katrina away for good?
    Great personal narrative?
    Skilled campaigner? Checkcheckcheckcheckcheck

    Jindal's got it in spades. His social conservatism is subtext for him, but an important clue to who he really is. He exudes competence and smarts. He was smart enough to not be tainted by the 'McCain Stain'. If nothing else, Louisiana will come up from 3rd world status on his watch.

    By Blogger Ruth Anne Adams, at Sat Feb 21, 08:10:00 am GMT-5  

  • Ruth Anne, most excellent!

    It should quite exciting this next election, regardless of who's there.

    You make an supurb case...I must consider.

    By Blogger Ron, at Sat Feb 21, 10:46:00 am GMT-5  

  • Ruth Anne, brava! That is most excellent.

    In many ways you and Starless have proven just what a deep field the Republicans have in 2012 and beyond. I'll add Eric Cantor into the mix, for either POTUS or VP one day, especially if he can move up in the ranks.

    I hate to base my impression on Jindal on just one chance encounter, but the thing is the man lacks the look of a President. I don't mean his Indian background -- he gives absolutely no aura off of command, never mind charisma, at all.

    Also, 2008 proved something to me in terms of that, as well as baggage.

    We are talking about the country which elected Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, AND now Barack Obama to the Presidency. The latter especially has more baggage than a Samsonite warehouse.

    Never again will I care about that, so long as it is countered by other factors which appeal to American voters (believability in the role, strength of convictions, money).

    George Bush was also not taken seriously by the powers that be, by his opposition, and lacked experience. Obama lacked experience, but had everything else.

    The problem is that in the first instance, the election was the closest in American history. The dynamics would be more complicated in 2012, since any Republican would be running against an incumbent PRESIDENT, not Vice-President.

    If Palin runs, she would need more senior presence on the ticket with her. Jindal hardly qualifies. And as I mentioned, he's probably more conservative than she is (certainly kowtows to religious pressure more -- let's not forget she signed gay partner insurance rights into law).

    So Palin-Jindal would be strong, but in 2016 and if Obama is a complete disaster.

    I have long thought that whomever had been elected in 2008, whether Obama, McCain, Hillary, would turn out to be an one-termer.

    President Obama has had a brutal first month in office. Only the press not making the most out of the various cabinet pull-outs and covering up his flubs, have saved him.

    But I am beginning to see that his on-the-job-training is constantly thwarted by his native arrogance. He is ripe for taking down by the gods, as so often happens.

    Eventually, it'll catch up to him.

    I just fear for America, since I'd rather have 8 years of Obama than an America battered and blue to make Palin or Jindal or any Republican President happen.

    We'll see.

    Cheers,
    Victoria

    By Blogger vbspurs, at Sat Feb 21, 12:50:00 pm GMT-5  

  • Rush Limbaugh keeps pounding on this idea that Republicans need to run as conservatives. And he's right to the extent that they have be principled in what government's role is. Fiscal responsibility, improve and maintain infrastructure, win wars when they need to be fought, and etc. The trouble is they need to stop falling on their swords when it comes to intractable social problems (like abortion). I have a feeling Democrats are going to start having the same sort of problem regarding gay marriage.

    That is to say, Republicans are going to need someone who can demonstrate on the campaign trail that he or she is principled but will be capable of governing from the center. This is what makes me think Pawlenty is viable for the party.

    By Anonymous Starless, at Sat Feb 21, 01:44:00 pm GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Who linked Here:

Create a Link

<< Home


 




Advertise on blogs
British Expat Blog Directory.