Tom Joad
06-09-2007, 02:34 PM
Like Reagan Without the New Ideas
by Jennifer Rubin
Published: June 5, 2007
This article was published in the June 10, 2007, edition of The New York Observer.
Republican angst has created an opening for Fred Thompson.
As G.O.P. voters’ concern has turned to panic—hastened by the much-criticized immigration bill—they now recognize that the Bush Presidency may rank with Hoover’s and Carter’s, and that their 2008 Presidential pick will therefore have to offer not only competency but the promise of change.
Mr. Thompson will enter the race as the focus of many conservatives’ fixation to find an unblemished candidate. On the one hand, he seems to please many conservatives: no offense offered on social issues, sound foreign policy and soothing to the ears. However, it’s not clear that Mr. Thompson has either the experience or the ideas to rescue the G.O.P. from its current plight.
His “elder statesman” screen persona obscures the fact he is the most inexperienced of the major G.O.P. contenders, with seven dimly remembered years as U.S. Senator, no area of expertise, no executive experience and no major legislative achievements bearing his name.
Nor is it apparent—not yet, at least—that he is offering any original ideas to qualify him as the “change” candidate that Republican voters could sorely use.
Classic change candidates offer personal vision, new ideas, and the hope that business will not be conducted as usual if elected. Ronald Reagan in particular offered a new vision of conservative governance and redefined his party.
But Mr. Thompson’s public pronouncements to date offer little sign that he can define and lead the party in the post-Bush era. Bashing Fidel Castro, the U.N. and the President’s immigration proposal, however artfully done, are not terribly new in conservative Republican circles. Bemoaning the tactics of Scooter Libby’s special prosecutor is hardly going to win points for intellectual ingenuity. Even Mr. Thompson’s down-home country persona may well seem trite after eight years of a ranch owner with a Texas accent.
Mr. Thompson, of course, isn’t the only candidate hobbled by the difficulty in defining his own identity. The best thing going for him continues to be the anxiety that Republican voters feel about their other choices.
John McCain was the classic change candidate in 2000, but this time he seems an odd mix of the establishment insider and the outside agitator. His Web site bulges with anecdotes and photos from his years in the military and government. However, it is hard to claim leadership of the party by poking its faithful in the eye on immigration and campaign-finance reform.
Mitt Romney’s record of executive expertise and health-care reform and his potential cross-over appeal got lost in the shuffle as he—or more likely a pack of consultants—decided to outdo all other comers in wooing the social-conservative base.
Rudy Giuliani comes closest to offering the G.O.P. a way out of the Bush years. He remains atop the field in all national polls, but the howls from social conservatives and gun advocates leave one wondering just how much deviation the party base will tolerate.
So Mr. Thompson will at least have an opportunity to prove that he is up to the task. After all, his race is literally just beginning.
But rather than just present himself as the least offensive candidate and mimic the views of the party base, he might do well to embrace the role of the candidate of change and offer a blueprint for Republican innovation and reform.
An honest assessment of the failings of the current administration would be a good starting point. If the Bush foreign-policy doctrine has been an abject failure, perhaps a Thompson doctrine can offer a better alternative than the Democrats’ neo-isolationism. If he now thinks that Mr. Bush’s comprehensive immigration proposal is a non-starter, he can start one of his own which satisfies his own base’s craving for secure borders but deals rationally with the millions of immigrants already here. A detailed set of policy prescriptions on entitlement reform, health care and energy might be a good next step.
In short, if he brings something new to the table—and not just a less-flawed version of what the other candidates are offering—he might solve the Republicans’ dilemma.
He would do well to recall Reagan’s admonition upon leaving office: “I never thought it was my style or the words I used that made a difference: It was the content. I wasn’t a great communicator, but I communicated great things.”
Unless he offers something “great”—or at least interesting—G.O.P. voters will remain unsatisfied.
http://www.observer.com/2007/reagan-without-new-ideas
Copyright © 2007 The New York Observer
by Jennifer Rubin
Published: June 5, 2007
This article was published in the June 10, 2007, edition of The New York Observer.
Republican angst has created an opening for Fred Thompson.
As G.O.P. voters’ concern has turned to panic—hastened by the much-criticized immigration bill—they now recognize that the Bush Presidency may rank with Hoover’s and Carter’s, and that their 2008 Presidential pick will therefore have to offer not only competency but the promise of change.
Mr. Thompson will enter the race as the focus of many conservatives’ fixation to find an unblemished candidate. On the one hand, he seems to please many conservatives: no offense offered on social issues, sound foreign policy and soothing to the ears. However, it’s not clear that Mr. Thompson has either the experience or the ideas to rescue the G.O.P. from its current plight.
His “elder statesman” screen persona obscures the fact he is the most inexperienced of the major G.O.P. contenders, with seven dimly remembered years as U.S. Senator, no area of expertise, no executive experience and no major legislative achievements bearing his name.
Nor is it apparent—not yet, at least—that he is offering any original ideas to qualify him as the “change” candidate that Republican voters could sorely use.
Classic change candidates offer personal vision, new ideas, and the hope that business will not be conducted as usual if elected. Ronald Reagan in particular offered a new vision of conservative governance and redefined his party.
But Mr. Thompson’s public pronouncements to date offer little sign that he can define and lead the party in the post-Bush era. Bashing Fidel Castro, the U.N. and the President’s immigration proposal, however artfully done, are not terribly new in conservative Republican circles. Bemoaning the tactics of Scooter Libby’s special prosecutor is hardly going to win points for intellectual ingenuity. Even Mr. Thompson’s down-home country persona may well seem trite after eight years of a ranch owner with a Texas accent.
Mr. Thompson, of course, isn’t the only candidate hobbled by the difficulty in defining his own identity. The best thing going for him continues to be the anxiety that Republican voters feel about their other choices.
John McCain was the classic change candidate in 2000, but this time he seems an odd mix of the establishment insider and the outside agitator. His Web site bulges with anecdotes and photos from his years in the military and government. However, it is hard to claim leadership of the party by poking its faithful in the eye on immigration and campaign-finance reform.
Mitt Romney’s record of executive expertise and health-care reform and his potential cross-over appeal got lost in the shuffle as he—or more likely a pack of consultants—decided to outdo all other comers in wooing the social-conservative base.
Rudy Giuliani comes closest to offering the G.O.P. a way out of the Bush years. He remains atop the field in all national polls, but the howls from social conservatives and gun advocates leave one wondering just how much deviation the party base will tolerate.
So Mr. Thompson will at least have an opportunity to prove that he is up to the task. After all, his race is literally just beginning.
But rather than just present himself as the least offensive candidate and mimic the views of the party base, he might do well to embrace the role of the candidate of change and offer a blueprint for Republican innovation and reform.
An honest assessment of the failings of the current administration would be a good starting point. If the Bush foreign-policy doctrine has been an abject failure, perhaps a Thompson doctrine can offer a better alternative than the Democrats’ neo-isolationism. If he now thinks that Mr. Bush’s comprehensive immigration proposal is a non-starter, he can start one of his own which satisfies his own base’s craving for secure borders but deals rationally with the millions of immigrants already here. A detailed set of policy prescriptions on entitlement reform, health care and energy might be a good next step.
In short, if he brings something new to the table—and not just a less-flawed version of what the other candidates are offering—he might solve the Republicans’ dilemma.
He would do well to recall Reagan’s admonition upon leaving office: “I never thought it was my style or the words I used that made a difference: It was the content. I wasn’t a great communicator, but I communicated great things.”
Unless he offers something “great”—or at least interesting—G.O.P. voters will remain unsatisfied.
http://www.observer.com/2007/reagan-without-new-ideas
Copyright © 2007 The New York Observer