Feb 25 2009
Bobby Is No Sarah
From what I hear about the GOP response by Governor Bobby Jindal last night it is clear Bobby is no Sarah. I know lots of my readers are resisting Palin in 2012, but there is an elephant in the room when it comes to who could challenge a bruised and beaten Obama in the next cycle – and that is popularity. Palin still holds the record for attracting huge crowds, and she and Biden hold the all time viewership record for a national debate. Her ability to draw is stunning. The VP debate draw was clearly  not dopey Joe. No GOP candidate pulls the attention she does. And she is exciting when she talks and connects with the people. Sarah is the answer to Obama in 2012.
I agree. However at the present time, Jindal appears to have a much better ability to know the problems and apparent solutions. Sarah will be much better in 3 years though, Maybe we can pair them up. That would be great.
The talking heads didn’t like Bobby, but the polled people did. They thought he was genuine, clear and upbeat. To beat Obama the person is going to have to be a very cleaver politician. Obama has street tactics, he fights dirty. the only person who I know that could beat him at the word game is Fred Thompson, and I’m sure he won’t run. Both Bobby and Sarah are good people but not dirty enough. remember who ever it is will have to go up against a White House organization, and the press. I think the only hope is that Obama screws up the economy so badly that he gets booted. And I have to say he is well on his way. People like flourishes, but they want to survive even more. Icing is fine, but if there is not cake, forget it, we are approaching the no cake.
Style over substance was, in part, how BO was elected. Nobody cared what he said or didn’t say. All we heard was, I sho do like how he say it.
Has our side come to this already? Where style over substance rules? Because if that’s true, then oh, God, we’re worse off than I ever thought.
…
Can we not think too far ahead yet? I’m still looking for Republican leadership today.
I like Palin, and she will be a force to reckon with if she runs in 2012. Some of her interviews with the MSM were disasterous; but, things will be much improved once she is in charge of her own campaign. She is smart, and effective. However, I think Jindal (and even a few other up and coming Repubs) have a better command of the issues.
Jindal’s recent delivery of the GOP response was poor. I admit. But, I’ve seen him in other venues….and, he is a great debater and very persuasive.
2012 will be an interesting election for sure.
I’m keeping my eye on Congressman Paul Ryan right now. I hope we hear from him in 2012. Pull up some of his youtube vids and you will see what I mean. I think he is the best of Jindal/Palin/Romney combined. He connects, he speaks extremely well, and has an outstanding message.
Here are a few:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgfhsaBEWxQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Y9dNeI0CIg
He’s on the Budget Committee….and knows his stuff. He clearly connects to the people (see above vids); but, even when standing in front of a lone camera (like Jindal had to do last night)…he ain’t bad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WifAyJioxQU
Yep, I’m keeping my eye on him.
I have problems with Jindal. One big one is his enabling of a creationist agenda in science teaching. It isn’t science, it is faith, and if you want to teach various religious beliefs in a social studies class, fine, but don’t go teaching them in a science class.
Frogg PS —
There is also a list of impressive articles about Paul Ryan here:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=57463857976
Here’s an excerpt from one of the Wall Street Journal articles:
Mr. Ryan was first elected in 1998, and he has always won re-election comfortably in a state and a district that are not particularly safe territory for Republicans. Racine County, which represents the biggest piece of Mr. Ryan’s district in southeastern Wisconsin, voted for Barack Obama, 53%-46%, but still voted to re-elect Mr. Ryan 62%-37%. He is, in other words, a politician practiced in speaking to and winning over voters who are not necessarily die-hard Republicans.
But the most important reason that Mr. Ryan is the right man at the current moment has nothing to do with electoral calculation. The 38-year-old Mr. Ryan cares about free markets and economic growth and can talk about those subjects in a way that makes sense without falling back on ideology, bromides or oversimplification. He engages these subjects with a vigor that befits his age, and while he has been in Congress for nearly a decade, his is a fresh face on the national scene, one not associated with the bipartisan failures of Congress.
Mr. Ryan is also an effective communicator on television, which will be an important outlet for reaching the American people and presenting an alternative to the economic ideas of Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi and Charlie Rangel. This summer, with a Presidential election well underway and his party in the minority, Mr. Ryan unveiled a far-sighted “Road Map for America’s Future.”
It is a remarkable document….
I know lots of my readers are resisting Palin in 2012,…
Not me; she’s my number-one choice. What she lacks in “book learning,” so to speak, about national and international issues, I’m convinced she can make up pretty quickly: she’s clearly very intelligent, perceptive, and curious about the world in a way I’ve never seen in Obama. What draws me to her, rather, are her innate common sense and strength of character. She has qualities I want to see in someone occupying the Oval Office.
Many people on the Right have compared her to Reagan, which I think is unfair to Palin because Reagan has been sanctified over time. I do think a valid comparison, on the other hand, is to Harry Truman, another president I admire. She has that same plain-spoken toughness. Like Truman, I’d trust her to keep her head in a crisis, something I have a hard time doing with Obama.
Have Palin do the next one after Obie’s speech to Congress, then compare.
I think Jindal did alright, especially without a teleprompter. It was sort of an appeasement speech to Obie because they know Obie has the public support. Otherwise, Jindal might have done better.
I think it’s a little early to try to read the tea leaves too deeply. Particularly when there are two 800-lb gorillas and a 700-lb gorilla in the room.
David Petraeus is known to have an interest in elected office…and it’s worth remember that insurgency and counterinsurgency are domestic politics by force of arms. He would be a formidable opponent, especially after a terrorist attack.
Jeb Bush is equally potent. Highly popular former governor of a key swing state? Whose national exposure was as the steady-as-a-rock leader guiding his state through heavy hurricane bombardment? If his brother had not been President, Jeb would have waltzed to the Republican nomination…and obliterated Obama with very little trouble. Another formidable opponent.
And then there is Newt Gingrich. Yes, he’s older, and carrying a lot of baggage…but if you want brilliance, Newt has it in spades.
I’m not saying that any of these WILL win…or that I support any of them particularly. From my perspective, the nice part about the 2012 Presidential primaries is that there are so many appealing candidates to choose from.
I merely say that it is premature to get behind one person or another.
Unless, of course, you are nominating me. 🙂
I thought Jindal did fine, and was glad to here him talk about America instead of Indonesia and communism.
Crossp
I have problems with Jindal. One big one is his enabling of a creationist agenda in science teaching.
There is no problem in La. as a result of this. For one thing, it apparently is a big deal with the NY Times, which must mean it’s a good thing.
I am, and have always been, a Christian and I have zero problems with creationism and/or evolution.
I see no conflicts in science with creationism. There are many ‘things’ in the world that science can’t explain, but creationism can. There are many ‘steps’ in evolution that ‘science’ can’t explain.
But let’s just assume ‘for a minute’ that the grand scheme of the world was ‘created’ to include ‘evolution’. Does that work?
assume vice versa, that in the grand scheme, ‘evolution’ includes ‘creationism’. Does that work?
I see no conflict either way. But when you can assure someone that ‘everything’ can be explained solely by evolution and it can be proven by ‘science’ then maybe we can consider not including ‘creationism’.
From my perspective, the nice part about the 2012 Presidential primaries is that there are so many appealing candidates to choose from.
I agree, and I think it’s much more important to be prepping for 2010 than wondering whowill win the Iowa caucuses in January, 2012.
(Assuming, of course, Iowa doesn’t move it to next year. 😉 )
I hope we do not get into some sparring where either Palin makes it or Jindal makes and so we have to try and destroy one or both of them.
Just get Obama out of there before he completely bankrupts the country.
Mike,
I remember reading an online article from I think a British paper entitled “A GOP Surge for Petraeus?” In the article, General Petraeus expressed no interest running in 2008, but did not rule out any possibility for 2012. I like Petraeus, but I forsee some problems, both relating to how the American public view matters. Firstly, I don’t know if the average American understands how much better Iraq is now (as long as Obama doesn’t prematurely withdrawal). Second, does the voting public as a whole know who Petraeus is? I’m not sure he has the name recognition that Grant or Eisenhower had. He has won a war, but I’m not sure most people are aware of it. But if the 2012 primaries pit Sarah, Jindal and Petraeus against each other, I don’t know who I would pick.
But regardless who the GOP nominee in 2012 is, Obama will be a tough opponent. Assuming the media is as enamored with him then as they are now, he will get away with anything. To reiterate a previous post, Obama did get elected because of style over substance. And, besides his fanclub at MSNBC and etc, he’s a ruthless opponent who knows no bounds in a campaign. I think that was one of McCain’s problems- Mac was trying to run a clean, nice campaign against the Chicago machine.
I have to admit I amazed how both liberals and conservatives get into the 24 hour news cycle. I have seen Bobby is DONE!!! He is off on one speech and he is done? His appearance he has done elsewhere suddenaly don’t count
This is very familar. Much like how people abandoned Palin when she stumbled.
Anyway I am sort of amazed of all this talk of Jindal in 2012. HE IS NOT RUNNING. He cannot and I repeat cannot run for Governor of Louisiana and at the same time in 2011 run for Prez in the Republican primary in South Carolina, NH, and Iowa.
Bobby is already setting the groundwork for his relelection campaign. The people that mostly think he will run for PResident in 2012 are all outside Louisiana. Here it is pretty apparent he is not.
# biglsusportsfan
I like your site, but I live in La also and couldn’t disagree with you more. Jindal can do, and will do both. he’s not going to lose the opportunity. It come rarely and he won’t forsake it. He’ll be the candidate or vice candidate in 12. and should be.
his re-election in La……. a landslide. nobody in sight to compete.
I may be naive to ask this, but why can’t we accept our potential candidates i.e. Palin, Jindal and any others for the human beings they are? They all have strengths and weaknesses. It is frustrating to see decent people get torn apart and analyzed to death. We do them, and ourselves, a grave disservice. The “other side” does enough of this for us and causes plenty of damage.
Anyone, who shares our beliefs and values and goes forth and faces the vicious, mean-spirited political world, has earned my respect. I may not agree with everything they put forth, but I believe we can and must be more accepting. Look at what is in the White House and Congress now-the antithesis of almost everything we believe in. That is where we must put our energy-we need to mitigate the damage that is being done now
We need to keep our focus on the right issues.
Redteam how can Bobby do both? First there is a lot of time between now and 2011 and God help us who knows how many major Hurricances
THe problem is the Louisiana Dems can put a major contender in there to make Bobby work for it. Plus as you know the Louisiana State legislature takes a strong hand to control. Blanco was horrible at that and she looked horrible partly as a result. How can Bobby be up in Iowa, running for Governor, riding herd in the legislature , and build a organization in Iowa , NH, and SC and campaign there to win those States all at the same time.
It can’t be done. Also look at Hurricane season. Just look how much time Bobby had to spend last year. It was a month long disaster. What if that happens again. Is going to leave and put Mitch Landrieu in charge.
I add that just to the mix. I believe Bobby when he says he isn’t running because it is not in his interest too.
Thanks Mike…
from the article on General Patraeus:
“I asked him if he was planning to run in 2008,” Khadim related, “and he said, ‘No, that would be too soon.’ ”
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=279159584755862