Don't All Talk At Once, Now
[Posted by reader_iam]
Caucus Cooler makes an interesting observation about the subject Republican presidential candidates aren't discussing and wonders what, if anything, GOP activists are going to do about that:
I can't speak to why insiders and activists aren't demanding discussion; maybe they're too divided on the topic themselves, or are worried about bringing internal dissent into the open, or think the issue is a loser--or at least too radioactive--for Republican candidates right now. It's a good question, though.
As for the candidates themselves, I'm put in mind of the following:
What can I say? Just one of those cynical days, I guess.
Caucus Cooler makes an interesting observation about the subject Republican presidential candidates aren't discussing and wonders what, if anything, GOP activists are going to do about that:
... While Iraq is clearly the issue of the day in the mainstream media, and certainly the issue that will most clearly define the rest of the Bush presidency as well as the next administration, the GOP 2008 portion of the blogosphere has been very quiet on the issue.
...
The GOP 2008 set is not engaging in the same discussion as the D's on this issue. There's no back in forth on draw-down vs. troop surges, timelines, strategy etc... The one candidate who is outfront on this issue is John McCain. McCain has put himself on the line with his "urge to surge." So much so the Democrats have pinned the troop surge on his head, calling it the "McCain Doctrine." As the candidate with a clearly defined stance on this issue, his neck is on the chopping block. He has said for nearly 4 years that we need more troops, was out front with criticism of Rumsfeld, and has outlined certain things that need to be done for the mission to be accomplished.
The other main players have been varying degrees of silent.
...
One would think that those we are putting forth to lead our country would have more nuanced views and a more in-depth discussion about the defining issue of this decade. Why the silence? And why aren't we insiders and activists demanding at least a thorough discussion on the topic?
I can't speak to why insiders and activists aren't demanding discussion; maybe they're too divided on the topic themselves, or are worried about bringing internal dissent into the open, or think the issue is a loser--or at least too radioactive--for Republican candidates right now. It's a good question, though.
As for the candidates themselves, I'm put in mind of the following:
“During a political campaign everyone is concerned with what a candidate will do on this or that question if he is elected except the candidate; he's too busy wondering what he'll do if he isn't elected.” --Everett Dirksen
“It is dangerous for a national candidate to say things that people might remember.” --Eugene J. McCarthy
What can I say? Just one of those cynical days, I guess.
