Friday, July 6, 2012

Read Stuff, You Should

Happy Birthday to David Dreier, 60. I've always thought he was a pretty good Member of the House.

Which brings us to the good stuff:

1. Jobs day previews, still worth reading after the disappointing report is out: Nate Silver is good on the overhyped but still important jobs numbers; Annie Lowrey and John Harwood have a very nice piece, too (although as you might guess I agree strongly with the political scientists quoted, but not so much with the campaign folks).

2. I agree with much of what Dan Larison has to say about Veepstakes here, although I'd generally caution against very much tea leaves reading. That is, I mostly agree with him about who is and isn't  a reasonable choice, but I have no idea who Romney will pick.

3. And Paul Waldman notices that John McCain isn't actually reluctant to talk about Vietnam.


  1. I know that the Silvers and the Bernsteins of the world would tell us otherwise, but I have a hunch that the Romney campaign is rapidly imploding due to his exquisite inappropriateness for the moment at hand.

    I know, I know: the economy decides these things. But this economy is unusual, no? Owners of capital are doing okay; workers have been thoroughly eviscerated. Not just unskilled workers; this month's is another bad report featuring mostly "service" (i.e. face-to-face jobs like retail and restaurant work) jobs that, uh, can't easily be outsourced.

    If the theory about the economy holds that those damaged by the economy will take it out on a sitting President, in this peculiar instance, the alternative choice is the very poster child of everything those damaged voters despise. And Obama's Bain attacks, though incongruous to some, are probably devastatingly effective for tying Romney to the misery of those hurt by the economy.

    Obama was talking in Ohio this morning, and though he should be running scared, he looks confident, almost soothing, perhaps sensing that he's got his opponent by the short-hairs due to his opponent's scurrilous past. This is another surprising development; one of the things an Obama re-election would always struggle with was going to be disillusionment from progressive whites who felt good about themselves for voting in the numinous negro, but the second time around don't care about all that anymore.

    That phenomenon is probably mostly out the window, but this moment is so awful for Romney that it may not matter.

  2. RE: Veepstakes

    Why is Thune not considered a viable VP choice? He seems like a slightly more handsome version of Portman. He has the credentials, albeit in a fairly small state, but he handles himself well with national media and hasn't really made any major gaffes I can recall. He's acceptable to conservatives on basically all the issues and yet comes across as reasonable and diplomatic.

    Why isn't he considered a reasonable choice?

    1. I disagree with Larison about Thune. Seems pretty generic statewide elected to me. Would be better to get someone with more of a national vetting (even Pawlenty has a little), and it's not a great state, and I do think he has some issue problems with the Tea Partiers (although that's a problem for a lot of them), so if Romney was asking me I wouldn't recommend Thune, but I'm not sure that he's an obviously poor choice.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Who links to my website?