This whole “bad GOP field” assumption is like the “bush tax cuts didn’t work” assumptive question thrown at Mitt last night.
The fact is, the field was not that bad. Is not that bad. It’s also not that good, but there is not much of a bench from which to pull candidates. And the Dems had the same problem in 2008. Look at Obama’s congressional record in 2008 compared to Newt’s now. Which one has more accomplishment? Which one is more qualified?
The problem is that anyone that REALLY could do a bang up job as president is not stupid enough to run for the office. The quality of the congress is not what it was, and the governors have similar problems because so many of them, even the Republicans, have abandoned their conservative roots.
The pool is just low quality, and its gonna bite us. And only part of that “bite” is in who gets elected (as in 2008) but, more importantly, what those elected end up doing in office.
What’s bad about electing the fox to be the keeper of the hen house is what he does once elected. And Gignrich, the front runner, is the closest thing we have to a conservative, but he’s no conservative.
Fortunately, the whold bureaucracy is about to collapse of its own weight so it doesn’t matter all that much WHO is elected. The only ones that have a chance of coming out of this relatively unscathed is the preppers, not any voters.
It’s time to revisit Claire Wolfe.
“What’s bad about electing the fox to be the keeper of the hen house is what he does once elected. And Gignrich, the front runner, is the closest thing we have to a conservative, but he’s no conservative.”
Unlike Reagan and W Bush, Newt actually balanced the budget and eliminated a welfare entitlement.