Objective review of Republican candidates for President

[drogulus]

    The ads will try to claim that Obama engineered the gas price rise to further his environmentalist agenda. This is inaccurate as far as I can tell. What he said a few years back might indicate that he thought a price rise would bring benefits of that nature. As for taking action Obama has generally supported increased production. I think this is the responsible way to go, to support new energy initiatives while getting the most from fossil fuels now. He's walking a tightrope between the enviros and the consciousless drillers, but the important point is he's on the rope, trying for the best solution. It's typical Obama, hugely disappointing to cranks everywhere. It's only virtue as policy is that it's just about right.

[drogulus]

     The only thing I'd do differently is waste more money on Solyndra-type loans. If one pays off, it pays for the ones that didn't many times over. But they're sooooo unpopular........

     

[Todd]

This is inaccurate as far as I can tell.

Doesn't matter.  Only thing that matters is what voters perceive.  Remember, Romney's Super PAC has the dude who gave us Willie Horton, so expect all manner of advertising fun.

The only thing I'd do differently is waste more money on Solyndra-type loans. If one pays off, it pays for the ones that didn't many times over.

That's a dubious conclusion, to say the least.  Solyndra produces a product that cannot compete with readily available substitutes.  Pouring more money into firms that engage in similar business practices will never payoff.  To the extent the government engages in what amounts to venture capital investing, it should pursue a more diversified approach and dole out smaller sums to firms that actually have some type of potential advantage in the market.  Of course, once people become romantically attached to things like solar power, everything may end up looking like a good opportunity.

[Karl Henning]

If the campaign were realistic, it wouldn't be any fun. And in the mean time, Newt gets to talk. And talk. And talk.

[Ataraxia]

So whom am I not voting for?

[Todd]

Can you imagine what a realistic debate about long-term budgeting would be like?  Most people would find it deadly dull, and then no one would be happy with the conclusions.  Look at the fate of Simpson-Bowles.  Any realistic or quasi-realistic budget plan ends up being dropped.  Republicans say any taxes are big government encroachment, and Democrats say that any spending cuts are just plain mean.  Then think about a realistic, dispassionate debate on foreign policy and military spending.  I forgot, which monsters are we fighting today? 

And if our leaders could do that, where would we get routine doses of hyperbole, and how could we enjoy lurching from one fiscal year to the next?

[Karl Henning]

So whom am I not voting for?

Only you can say, Grasshopper.

[Karl Henning]

Can you imagine what a realistic debate about long-term budgeting would be like?  Most people would find it deadly dull, and then no one would be happy with the conclusions.

Word.

Say what you will about the Greek compromise; austerity is not sexy.

[eyeresist]

Say what you will about the Greek compromise; austerity is not sexy.

So why all those anorexic models then, hmm?

[drogulus]

That's a dubious conclusion, to say the least.  Solyndra produces a product that cannot compete with readily available substitutes.  Pouring more money into firms that engage in similar business practices will never payoff.  To the extent the government engages in what amounts to venture capital investing, it should pursue a more diversified approach and dole out smaller sums to firms that actually have some type of potential advantage in the market.  Of course, once people become romantically attached to things like solar power, everything may end up looking like a good opportunity.

     I'm not advocating making bad investments. Foresight still hasn't caught up to hindsight, at least not so as you can tell. I'm advocating taking the kind of chances that investing in Solyndra represents because I'm in favor of taking risks generally. That's something the government has to do.

     Then let the potshots be taken. I don't care, Obama was right. Solyndra had a good product and China undercut them. Shit happens. I say don't stop now, keep it up.

[Todd]

I'm in favor of taking risks generally. That's something the government has to do.

No, the private sector should undertake the risk.  Not taxpayers.

Solyndra had a good product and China undercut them.

Nonsense.  Solyndra had a product that could not compete.  By definition, that is a bad product.

[The new erato]

No, the private sector should undertake the risk.  Not taxpayers.

Yes, like Chinese expansion is fuleled by Chinese private sector.

[Todd]

Yes, like Chinese expansion is fuleled by Chinese private sector.

The American economy and the Chinese economy are quite different.  I'm quite skeptical that an increasing reliance on what amounts to mercantilist policies will do much other than benefit the specific industries and companies that receive government subsidies and protections.  Consumers and taxpayers will end up paying more, that's for sure.  Further, I'm not sure the US Federal Government should be pouring money into solar – the industry of the future for the last forty years.  Of course, if the US (and other countries, perhaps) should learn from China, especially as it pertains to energy policy, should the US Federal Government pursue policies to match, or perhaps exceed, China's $500 billion+ commitment to nuclear power?

[Karl Henning]

Santorum to pack it in

[Todd]

Santorum to pack it in

Here's Paul's opening!

[Karl Henning]

Hah! And here I was thinking, Now the question is settled: Of Santorum and Gingrich, which is most nearly sane?

Finally embracing reality, Rick Santorum decided to take the easy way out rather than the hard way, leaving the GOP presidential race before a potentially humiliating loss in his home state.

RTWT here.

[DavidW]

Well the race just got a heck of alot more lopsided.  I wonder if Romney will be able to defeat Obama?  I don't think he will.

[Todd]

Of Santorum and Gingrich, which is most nearly sane?

That strikes me as similar to "Which is less bad, gonorrhea or chlamydia?"

Hey, at least Gingrich won his home state.

[Karl Henning]

Not objective.

[Gurn Blanston]

Not objective.

Funny though.