This is me and Alex Knepper talking about politics a few weeks ago on IM. It should go without saying that I would never post something like this without the other person's permission! I've added links and rearranged the text into a coherent dialogue.
A: You voted for Kerry in 2004, right?
J: Yes
A: Did you think that was a particularly dirty campaign?
J: Well, I ignored the swift boat stuff.
A: Interesting. The right-wing base was obsessed with it.
J: That just didn't interest me. I voted for him because I was inclined to vote Democratic, he seemed solid and reasonable, and Bush wasn't very good. I wasn't going to be influenced by personal attacks.
A: Do you think, though, I mean, that the election was a particularly poor display of democratic campaigns at work?
J: Well, my view of a presidential race is mainly based on the debates, plus random TV interviews and speeches and stuff like that, not the ads. I thought the 2004 debates were incredibly serious and substantive, almost to a fault.
A: Who was the last Republican candidate you voted for before Romney?
J: I didn't vote for Romney.
A: Oh yeah. You voted for Gary Johnson. But you preferred Romney to Obama, no?
J: I couldn't decide. For a while, I considered voting for Romney. I wrote up a whole blog post about why I would vote for him, but I didn’t publish it. I can't bring myself to vote for someone who's against legal abortion, against gay rights, etc.
A: I really was stunned that he continued to advocate for the FMA. If he runs in 2016 will he still support the FMA? Geez
J: I voted for Joe Lhota for Mayor. That's the most significant Republican I've voted for. Lhota is pro gay rights, and abortion rights don't matter for NYC mayor. Note: when social issues are off the table, I suddenly start voting Republican — an example of how Republicans lose young voters through their unreasonable social views.
A: I’m at the point now where as long as the Democrat is basically reasonable on economics and foreign policy, even if I disagree a bit (to the right), I'd prefer to vote for the Democrat over a socially conservative Republican. These social issues are clearly being resolved in favor of the liberal position, as is usually the case in American history, and it's time to let these issues go. The longer the GOP holds onto them the more of a drag it is on their ability to do anything substantive.
J: Another reason I wouldn't say I thought Romney was definitely better: I found him appealing because he seemed really smart on economics, more so than Obama. But then I had to step back and say: OK, he can talk about economics smartly, but what is he going to do? And I thought: well, he wants to take money away from Medicaid and spend it on the military. And I just think that's wrong.
A: I was deeply disappointed when he sort of shelved Ryan's Medicare plan, and shamelessly started criticizing the Medicare cuts in Obamacare. The GOP freakin' ran ads in 2010 that juxtaposed the words 'government takeover of healthcare' with 'Obama getting in your Medicare.’
J: Romney was obviously in a bind on health care. What a weird choice for a nominee! I can't believe the Republicans nominated the governor responsible for the precursor to Obamacare.
A: Yeah, well, what was the alternative? Newt Gingrich? Rick Santorum? Herman Cain? All the serious candidates declined to run.
J: Yeah, there was no good candidate. But why was there no good candidate?
A: Because Romney blocked them from entering.
J: Oh, Romney didn't stop anyone from doing anything!
A: Ever since 2008, when I first started writing, I've been mystified by Romney's appeal.
J: I find him appealing! I think he's gotten a bad rap. There's plenty of stuff I disagree with him about. But considering that the Republican party exists, I like him about as much as any Republican. I hope he runs again. And I think he probably will. When I watched Romney, I thought: that's probably what I'd be like if I ran for president. I'd be stilted and awkward and overly calculating. Probably most people I know would be. Most normal people would be uncomfortable as national politicians. Very few people would be as cool and effortless as Obama.
A: Given how lukewarm my opinion about Romney is, it is sad to say that I'd still prefer him to just about anyone else the Republican Party is putting up. I just don't trust him.
J: We should never trust any politician.
Monday, November 10, 2014
A conversation about politics
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Good post, and interesting!
I was mystified by the following quote, which you seemed okay with: "I'd prefer to vote for the Democrat over a socially conservative Republican. These social issues are clearly being resolved in favor of the liberal position, as is usually the case in American history, and it's time to let these issues go."
Can't follow that. On economics, on foreign policy, he/you might prefer the Republican, but social issues override? Even though, as he said, "These social issues are clearly being resolved in favor of the liberal position"? What does the president have to do with abortion or gay marriage anyhow?
To me, this sounds like voting against someone because you disagree with his religion. From my youth: "Kennedy would be my choice, but I just can't bring myself to vote for a Catholic. Huh? Well, what if the Pope said something - he'd have to do it, right?"
I think Romney was pretty clear on these issues; I think pretty much all Republican candidates are these days. Something like, "I personally feel __ about abortion/contraception/gay marriages, but it's not my job to decide them. These issues are getting settled where they should be settled, and I will respect the law whatever it says."
Are you not buying into something from a Democratic playbook: Whatever you think of Democratic policies recently, Republican War On Women!
If social issues are getting resolved on their own, isn't "it time to let these issues go"?
What does the president have to do with abortion or gay marriage anyhow?
Obama has done a lot on gay marriage — by not defending the law in court, and by nominating Supreme Court Justices.
The president has a lot to do with abortion through nominating Supreme Court Justices, and signing or vetoing abortion legislation.
I think Romney was pretty clear on these issues; I think pretty much all Republican candidates are these days. Something like, "I personally feel __ about abortion/contraception/gay marriages, but it's not my job to decide them. These issues are getting settled where they should be settled, and I will respect the law whatever it says."
That is not Romney's position on abortion or same-sex marriage. He would nominate Supreme Court Justices who would change the law on those issues. And as Alex noted, Romney supports the Federal Marriage Amendment, as did George W. Bush. The president has no formal role in constitutional amendments but could promote an amendment to national attention. As for the law on same-sex marriage, people vehemently disagree on what the law is and should be, so it's inadequate to just throw your hands up and say, "Meh — whatever!"
Post a Comment