bobbyw24
01-06-2012, 11:55 AM
5 Ways the GOP Can Choose Among Better Candidates in 2016
5) Recognize the right's new foreign-policy radicalism. As George W. Bush proved in 2000, running on the need for a humble foreign policy that doesn't squander American resources abroad can be effective for Republicans, as can critiquing Democratic presidents for abusing their power or expressing wariness about the military-industrial complex. Even though President Obama has embraced much of the post-9/11 Bush-era approach to fighting terrorism, the Republican field is determined to run to his right and to portray him as an appeaser who is uncomfortable asserting American power--a hopeless criticism given that his reply will be that he's killed Osama bin Laden and much of al-Qaida's leadership.
There is, too, the Republican insistence on defending the Iraq War and criticizing Obama for ending it, even though half of Republicans think the war was a mistake and that bringing U.S. troops home was the right approach. The result is a party that is out of touch with reality and its own voters. There is no reason why Ron Paul has to be the only candidate advancing an anti-interventionist critique of American foreign policy, and if the GOP had a nominee that incorporated even a moderated version of his best insights they'd actually have a chance of winning some of Paul's voters during the general election, rather than losing them all.
http://nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/5-ways-the-gop-can-choose-among-better-candidates-in-2016-20120106
5) Recognize the right's new foreign-policy radicalism. As George W. Bush proved in 2000, running on the need for a humble foreign policy that doesn't squander American resources abroad can be effective for Republicans, as can critiquing Democratic presidents for abusing their power or expressing wariness about the military-industrial complex. Even though President Obama has embraced much of the post-9/11 Bush-era approach to fighting terrorism, the Republican field is determined to run to his right and to portray him as an appeaser who is uncomfortable asserting American power--a hopeless criticism given that his reply will be that he's killed Osama bin Laden and much of al-Qaida's leadership.
There is, too, the Republican insistence on defending the Iraq War and criticizing Obama for ending it, even though half of Republicans think the war was a mistake and that bringing U.S. troops home was the right approach. The result is a party that is out of touch with reality and its own voters. There is no reason why Ron Paul has to be the only candidate advancing an anti-interventionist critique of American foreign policy, and if the GOP had a nominee that incorporated even a moderated version of his best insights they'd actually have a chance of winning some of Paul's voters during the general election, rather than losing them all.
http://nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/5-ways-the-gop-can-choose-among-better-candidates-in-2016-20120106