Is it time for a bigger tent?

Now that they've had time to pick themselves up and dust themselves off after Tuesday night's general election defeat, it is time for the Republican Party to fully assess what went wrong. In all reality, this was an election that Mitt Romney should have been able to win. History would tell us that past incumbents running for re-election in a bad economy have not fared well. Jimmy Carter was handily defeated by Ronald Reagan in 1980 due in large part to a high unemployment rate and out of control inflation. George H.W. Bush fell short in 1992 when the Clinton campaign convinced voters that "it's the economy stupid." Barack Obama was able to succeed where his predecessors had failed, but how? No president since Franklin Roosevelt had been re-elected with an unemployment rate above 7.1%, that is until Tuesday night. In my view, what should really concern the Republican Party is the fact that a pro-business nominee who touted his business credentials and ran on a platform to fix the economy couldn't win. Does this reveal a problem with the party's nominee, or the party itself? Some would say that Mitt Romney wasn't the ideal candidate because he wasn't conservative enough to appeal to the base of the Republican Party. Some have labeled him a Massachusetts moderate. While both of these may indeed be true, I think the reason for his defeat goes much deeper than that. I believe that a majority of voters in America feel as though Romney's party is not all inclusive. There is no disguising the fact that the demographic makeup of America is changing. The United States has more Hispanic, Asian, and Latino voters now than ever before. More women and young people are voting than at any time in recent history. Gay and lesbian voters have burst onto the electoral scene in larger numbers as well. While the Democratic Party has made a concerted effort to reach out to these key voting constituencies, the same cannot be said for the GOP. Fair or not, the Republican Party has been branded as the party of "old white men." While expanding the electorate is no doubt what the Republican Party needs to do, it might be difficult to accomplish. Doing so would almost certainly require the party to alter it's stance on a number of key issues like immigration, welfare, and gay rights in order to gain more votes from these key voting blocs. Some would say that Romney's defeat can also be attributed to a perception problem when it comes to the Republican Party. One common perception that many voters have of the party is that it cares only about the rich and wealthy, while casting aside the middle class in America. Romney's 47% remark that became a key soundbite in this year's campaign, didn't do anything to help change that perception. Until the Republican Party begins to reach out a welcoming hand to a growing, more diverse electorate, they will have a difficult time competing with the Democrats on a national stage. Perhaps the party can take heed of the old saying, "if you do what you've always done, you'll get what you've always gotten."

Running with Romney

This past Saturday, presumptive Republican Presidential Nominee Mitt Romney was in Norfolk, Virginia aboard the USS Wisconsin to name his running mate for the 2012 presidential campaign. While Governor Romney could have made the announcement from the deck of any battleship he wanted, the selection of the Wisconsin was meant to provide a subtle, or not so subtle clue about who the Governor had selected. That selection was seven-term Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. Currently, a large number of voters in America are still getting to know who Paul Ryan is. He was born in Janesville, Wisconsin on January 29, 1970. His father died when Paul was a teenager, and therefore, the young Ryan had to grow up very quickly. He was first elected to Congress in 1998, and continues to serve Wisconsin's first congressional district. Ryan is probably best known for his role as House Budget Committee Chairman. As chairman of the House Budget Committee, Ryan pushed through a budget proposal known as, "The Path to Prosperity." The "Ryan Budget" as it has come to be known, has made Paul Ryan a controversial pick in some political circles. Critics of the "Ryan Budget" suggest that the congressman's proposal would end Medicare as we know it by turning the government funded program into a voucher system. Congressman Ryan has already faced hecklers on the campaign trail who are concerned about his stance on the popular program. Unless the Romney/Ryan ticket can assure voters, especially seniors, that Medicare will not change under a Romney/Ryan administration, the duo might have a hard time winning votes in key swing states such as Florida and Ohio which have large senior populations. Paul Ryan supporters are quick to point out that his chairmanship of the House Budget Committee gives the congressman the experience necessary to govern in difficult economic times, and indicates that Governor Romney is making the economy issue number one in the campaign. When asked in recent public opinion polls who they trust more to handle the economy, voters have said Governor Romney. However, a majority of voters in a similar poll stated that they believe President Obama is more concerned than Governor Romney about the middle class. The perception that the Romney/Ryan ticket favors the wealthy over middle class Americans has to be a concern for the Republican ticket. If that perception holds, victory could be tough for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan in November. The question remains, can Paul Ryan help deliver Wisconsin (another key swing state) for Mitt Romney in November? Can Paul Ryan truly affect the outcome of this race? Traditionally, a vice-presidential candidate has had little, if any impact on the outcome of a presidential election. Many voters will tell you that they are more concerned with whose name is at the top of the ticket as opposed to who fills the number two slot. Many historians would argue that the last vice-presidential candidate to have an effect on the outcome of a general election was Lyndon Johnson who helped John F. Kennedy carry Johnson's home state of Texas in 1960. While Paul Ryan has energized the Republican ticket for now, it remains to be seen if that energy and enthusiasm will last among Republican voters. You can bet Mitt Romney hopes it does, at least through November 6th.

Mankind's Giant Leap







It was forty-three years ago today that Neil Armstrong took that one small step for man, and one giant leap for mankind. Looking back on that day in 1969, one has to wonder if the crew of Apollo 11 were aware of the indelible mark that they would leave on our nation's history? What Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin achieved on July 20th, 1969 was more than a decade in the making. To fully appreciate what occurred that historic day, one must have a general understanding of key historical moments in the years leading up to 1969. During the decade of the 1950's and beyond, the United States and the Soviet Union were mired in what historians have dubbed the Cold War. Simply put, the Cold War was a philosophical and ideological standoff between the two emerging world superpowers. With both nations trying to gain the upper hand, the competition shifted to space in 1957 when the Soviets launched a small satellite known as Sputnik. The launch of Sputnik led to massive changes in American society at the time. President Eisenhower pushed for increased funding for missile development. America's schools began beefing up their math and science curriculums as a way to train more scientists and engineers to keep pace with the Soviets. It was in the years following Sputnik's launch that the United States created the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or NASA. Although the Soviets were able to get a satellite into space before the United States, America was determined not to be out-done. Fearing that America was losing the race to space, President Kennedy promised in a speech before a joint session of Congress in 1961, that the United States would successfully land a man on the moon before the end of the decade. To many, this goal seemed quite lofty to say the least. With our space program in it's infancy at this time, many questioned if President Kennedy could be serious about the bold assertion he made in that speech. Thanks to a nation of dreamers and believers, a nation of innovators and achievers, that now famous footprint on the surface of the moon will forever symbolize an America that we can all be proud of. 

The Romney Veepstakes

With the presidential election just four months away, speculation is swirling about who Mitt Romney will select as his vice-presidential running mate. There are a number of factors that presidential candidates consider when deciding on who will fill the number two spot on the ticket. Some presidential candidates prefer a running mate who will shore up support among a particular voting bloc such as women or Hispanics, while other candidates might select someone who can help deliver a key swing state come November. While Governor Romney will no doubt consider someone who can help his candidacy in one or more of those ways, he has repeatedly said that his first priority in choosing a running mate is to find someone who will be ready to step into the presidency on day one. In my view, there are six individuals who stand out as the most logical choices for Mitt Romney. First and foremost would be up and coming Florida Senator Marco Rubio. While some argue that Rubio is not quite ready for the vice-presidency, I think the pick makes sense for two reasons. First, the selection of Rubio could help to ensure that Mitt Romney wins the state of Florida and it's twenty-nine electoral votes. Second, as the son of Cuban immigrants, Rubio could help Romney close the gap among Latino voters who will no doubt play a key role in electing the next president. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie would bring not only valuable executive experience to the ticket, but some would also argue that the selection of Christie would bring some much needed enthusiasm and excitement to the campaign as well. Some have suggested that if Christie is the pick, he might overshadow the man at the top of the ticket due to his popularity among many Republicans. Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin appears to be another front runner for the number two job. Ryan currently serves as the chairman of the House Budget Committee. With the economy being the number one issue for voters this election year, many would say that the selection of Paul Ryan would be the best pick that Romney could make. Wisconsin's status as a swing state in this year's election could also persuade Governor Romney to give the nod to Representative Ryan. Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, who is currently on the campaign trail in Ohio as a surrogate for Mitt Romney, would be one of the safest picks that Romney could make. Pawlenty would be considered by many to be one of the most conservative selections that Romney could make. In a state that usually votes Democratic in presidential elections, the selection of Pawlenty could help turn a traditionally blue state red this November. Romney would surely like the fact that as a former governor, Tim Pawlenty, like Chris Christie would bring valuable executive experience to Romney's campaign. Senator Rob Portman of Ohio is also receiving a lot of attention as a possible running mate for Mitt Romney. Portman would be a beneficial addition to the Republican ticket for two reasons primarily. As the former director of the Office of Management and Budget, many would argue that Portman would bring valuable economic experience to the vice-presidential slot. Senator Portman also served as U.S. Trade Representative from May 2005 to May 2006 further solidifying his economic credentials. Needless to say, Ohio is key to a Romney victory in 2012. As a matter of fact, no Republican has ever won the presidency without winning Ohio. Knowing that Senator Portman could help deliver Ohio for Mitt Romney, one would be foolish to think that Governor Romney isn't giving him serious consideration. Perhaps the most surprising pick that Mitt Romney could make would be that of Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire. While New Hampshire will be a key swing state in this year's election as well, I have a hard time believing that Mitt Romney would select Senator Ayotte for the sole purpose of winning the state since it only has four electoral votes. I could see Romney selecting Senator Ayotte to help secure more votes among women nationwide, but at the same time, as a relatively unknown in the world of politics, I see Kelly Ayotte as a very risky pick. Given the fact that Senator John McCain went with a relatively unknown in 2008 by selecting former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, I can't see Romney doing the same in 2012 especially given the outcome of the 2008 presidential race. Trying to predict who a presidential candidate will select as their running mate is like trying to predict which numbers will win you the lottery. It is usually a very difficult thing to do. Who will be the winner of the 2012 Romney veepstakes? Your guess is as good as mine.

A Brief History of America's Independence




Two-hundred thirty-six years ago today, some of the greatest men our country has ever known pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor so that we, the people of this great nation might be free. I can't begin to imagine what must have been going through the minds of our founding fathers as they each courageously signed their names to that now famous piece of parchment inside of Independence Hall in Philadelphia on July 4th, 1776. The signing of our declaration by the likes of Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and John Adams had been years in the making. Those living in the colonies, including those now famous members of the Second Continental Congress, had been subjected to the oppressive rule of King George III for quite some time. The King had deprived the colonists of their basic liberties such as the right to trial by jury, the right to free trade, and the right to be free from taxation without representation. This final grievance was the straw that broke the camel's back. After learning that George III was planning on levying taxes on the colonists to help repay war debts, those living in the colonies decided to take action. Several meetings of the colonies would be held in the coming years to protest the actions of the King. These included the Stamp Act Congress, the First Continental Congress, and finally the Second Continental Congress which produced our Declaration of Independence. Numerous political protests were occurring in the colonies at this time as well. In 1773, several hundred colonists dressed as Indians, dumped close to three-hundred and fifty chests of tea into Boston Harbor in what came to be known as the Boston Tea Party. It is literally quite fascinating to examine the ideological and philosophical changes that took place in the minds of our nation's earliest leaders at this time. This transformation in thinking took place sometime between the First Continental Congress and the Second Continental Congress as delegates came to believe that the only way to secure independence was to do so militarily rather than diplomatically. Previous attempts at diplomacy had failed, and the members of the Second Continental Congress knew that the only way that Britain would take the colonists seriously would be through an act of war. The Congress promptly named George Washington commander of the newly organizing Continental Army, and as they say, the rest is history. Thanks to the courage and determination of our forefathers as well as those who served in the Continental Army, we were able to defeat the strongest military in the world at the time, and secure our freedom. Over the last two-hundred and thirty-six years, the freedom of our great nation has been challenged, and will continue to be. It is only through the sacrifice of many that the liberty of all has been preserved. May that serve as the true legacy of this great and glorious day.

"Obamacare" Upheld

Today, the United States Supreme Court delivered one of it's most historical and controversial decisions since the 1973 Roe v. Wade verdict. In a narrow 5-4 decision, the Court upheld the president's health care law with Chief Justice John Roberts (a George W. Bush nominee) siding with the majority. I think it is safe to say that many Americans were shocked and surprised that the individual mandate portion of the law requiring all Americans to purchase health insurance or face a fine was not struck down. In upholding the individual mandate, the Court essentially stated that the fine that could be imposed if someone doesn't purchase health insurance ultimately amounts to a tax, and since it would be considered a tax, the mandate would be protected under the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution since Congress has the power to tax the American people. Given that the decision came in an election year, it will be interesting to see how today's ruling will impact the outcome of the presidential race in November. Governor Romney has made no secret about the fact that he will work to repeal "Obamacare" starting on day one if he is elected. I've always believed that Governor Romney would have a difficult time attacking the president on this issue in the campaign due to the fact that he implemented a similar law in Massachusetts while he was governor of the state. Many have stated that "Romneycare" served as a model for the president's health care plan.. I could see today's decision motivating many Americans who oppose the law to turn out in November for Governor Romney. Likewise, supporters of the law could also rally in large numbers and reward if you will the president with a second term in office. Over the next few months, Governor Romney will most likely argue that today's decision amounts to nothing more than a huge tax increase on the lower and middle class. To win votes on this issue specifically, Romney really has no choice put to turn it into an economic issue. President Obama on the other hand, when referring to Governor Romney on the campaign trail will most likely say, look, here's the guy who wants to take away your health care. The president will most likely highlight what he views as the benefits of the law while campaigning as well. For example, President Obama will no doubt remind voters that his health care law will enable people who were previously denied coverage for a pre-existing condition the ability to have health insurance. Whether you agree or disagree with today's decision, it was no doubt a monumental one. In upholding the Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court handed President Obama a victory that has eluded many of our nation's greatest presidents who had pushed for the same type of law while they were in office. Today's decision by the Supreme Court, like so many decisions of the past, will have to endure the test of time to see if history will judge it favorably or not. Only time will tell.

Courting the Latino Vote

President Obama and Republican Presidential Nominee Mitt Romney both spoke to the National Association of Latino Elected Officials this past week in Lake Buena Vista, Florida. It comes as no surprise that both candidates made an appearance at last week's meeting, given the fact that Latino voters are the fasting growing voting bloc in the United States, and will no doubt have a major influence on the outcome of this year's presidential race. A number of key swing states (Florida, Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona just to name a few) have relatively large Latino populations. Most polls suggest that the President has a commanding lead (nearly 2 to 1) over Governor Romney amongst these voters. If he is to win in November, Mitt Romney will need to make significant inroads with Latino voters between now and then. Governor Romney is well aware that he needs Latino voters on his side in greater numbers, but can he pull it off? One argument that Mr. Romney has made, and will no doubt continue to make is that the President has taken the Latino vote for granted. In other words, since the President won big among Latino voters four years ago, he thinks the same will be true this time around as well. Governor Romney has also tried appealing to Latinos by arguing that the President has done nothing to improve their economic well-being over the last three and a half years. Mr. Romney has also criticized the President for not acting sooner on the immigration issue, saying the President had a Democratic Congress his first two years in office yet was unable to pass comprehensive immigration reform. All of these are valid arguments that Romney can make to try and persuade Latino voters during this year's campaign. However, the President has some arguments to make as well as to why Latino voters should back him again in 2012. Governor Romney has stated that if he were elected, he would veto the Dream Act. President Obama has supported passage of the Dream Act for quite some time now. The Dream Act would provide a path to citizenship for those young illegal immigrants in the United States (through no fault of their own) who have completed high school and are planning on enrolling in college or enlisting in the military. This piece of legislation, if approved by Congress would give tremendous hope to many young people who could become productive members of American society. While support of the Dream Act will no doubt win the President a lot of support among Latinos, it might very well be the President's own background that solidifies that support. Although I can't speak for Latino voters, I would have to assume that many Latinos would have an easier time relating to President Obama rather than Mitt Romney. That ability to relate to voters, and them being able to relate to you as a candidate is one of the most important factors in getting elected. While Latinos will not be the only voting constituency that will decide this year's presidential race, both candidates would be wise to continue courting these voters if one wants to remain at, or the other wants to move in to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Will a lengthy Republican primary help or harm the GOP?

As the race for the 2012 Republican nomination continues, many have asked if a long, drawn out primary campaign will hurt the GOP heading into the general election in November? Newt Gingrich has vowed to stay in the race through the convention, regardless of the outcome of the remaining primaries and caucuses. If the former Speaker's new campaign slogan, 6 states down, 46 to go is any indication, the Gingrich campaign bus will continue racking up the miles. Those who would like to see the nomination wrapped up sooner rather than later will say that a long primary race will weaken the Republican party and the eventual nominee. Those who hold this belief may point to recent polls that indicate that every time the Republican candidates debate each other, the favorability of the candidates and the party goes down. Many Republicans fear that the constant back and forth attacks will possibly drive voters away from their prospective candidate. Also, supporters of a short primary season would say that the earlier the nomination is secured, the more time the nominee would have to attack President Obama and his policies of the last three years. At the same time, many would argue that a lengthy primary campaign could strengthen the eventual nominee by ensuring that he is "battle tested" heading into the general election. In the 2008 Democratic primary, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton battled for months before Obama finally wrapped up the nomination in June of that year. Those close to the president would say that the lengthy primary fight with Hillary Clinton actually made the president a stronger candidate, not the other way around. I guess it is safe to say that only time will tell if a long, drawn out primary will help or harm the GOP.

The Buffett Rule

Last Tuesday, President Obama laid out his legislative vision for the year ahead in his State of the Union address. One of the more interesting and intriguing elements of the speech was the so-called, "Buffett Rule." For those that may not know, the "Buffett Rule" is named after billionaire businessman and investor Warren Buffett. The president is proposing that all Americans should pay their fair share in taxes as a way to generate revenues to help bring down the deficit. The "Buffett Rule" would do just that. The concept of the "Buffett Rule" comes from the fact that Warren Buffett's secretary pays a higher tax rate than Buffett himself. According to the President, this just isn't right. Why should we expect someone in the middle class to pay more taxes than a billionaire? The president will most likely have a difficult time trying to convince some Americans that the "Buffett Rule" is just what America needs to help solve our economic and financial woes. Opponents of the rule will say that the president is trying to punish those who achieve financial success. In essence, punishing those who have achieved the "American Dream." Some will claim that the president is trying to wage class warfare, while others will say that such a rule will lead America down the path of socialism. Supporters of such a rule would say that those who can afford to pay a little more, should. The president doesn't want to punish success, and he flatly rejects the notion of such a provision constituting class warfare. President Obama simply wants to see the middle class in this country grow stronger by having more Americans sacrifice a little of themselves for the greater good of their country.

The Final Four

As the race for the 2012 Republican nomination heats up, I thought it would be appropriate at this time to take a closer look at the four contenders who remain. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who has long been dubbed the proverbial front-runner, now faces a challenge from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Much of the Gingrich surge can be attributed to the personal attacks that Gingrich has leveled against Romney as a result of Romney's association with Bain Capital. Also, many Republicans are looking for a candidate who can go toe to toe with President Obama in the upcoming general election campaign. To many voters, that candidate is Gingrich. Many republicans simply feel as though Mitt Romney is not "tough enough" to take on the president. Despite the fact that Gingrich is viewed as the tougher of the two politically, many voters believe that Gingrich has too much "personal baggage" to win the nomination. As many know, the former speaker resigned his leadership position in the House due to a number of ethics violations. Much has also been made of Gingrich's three marriages, with his second wife alleging that Gingrich asked her for an "open marriage." Campaigns usually come down to the public's perception of a potential candidate. It will be very interesting to see if voters pay much attention to Gingrich's past when determining whether or not they will vote for him. Rick Santorum and Ron Paul, although still in the race, will most likely be non-factors as the race moves forward. Santorum recently stated that his campaign is broke, and he is tired, but vows to press on. Ron Paul has not seriously contested the race in Florida, and has turned his attention to upcoming caucus states such as Nevada and Maine. As a self proclaimed political junkie, it has been quite refreshing to see the energy and enthusiasm that Paul's campaign has generated. Ron Paul's message has resonanted with millions of Americans, especially younger voters. Unfortunately for Paul and his supporters, the media and those within the Republican party simply don't view his candidacy as legitimate. It is my belief that Mitt Romney will be the eventual nominee of the Republican Party. Although Romney doesn't have widespread support among true conservatives within the Republican ranks, he has gained the support of many members of the so called Republican establishment, namely Arizona senator and former Republican nominee, John McCain. Romney has also received the endorsement of former Kansas senator and 1996 Republican nominee Bob Dole. Without the support of the Republican base, and many members of the Republican establishment, combined with his personal issues, I just find it difficult to see a pathway to the nomination for Newt Gingrich. As mentioned earlier, Santorum and Paul both are non-factors at this point, and neither will be the nominee of the Republican Party. That leaves Romney as the last man standing to take on President Obama in November.