Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktJust kidding. But I did come across a piece this morning that made Marks avatar, with his curly white hair, immediately jump out at me. I’ll either have to vote for a Republican Presidential candidate for the first time in 40 years or “flip flop” on a comment if this happens. I don’t know if I can really vote for someone so conservative or not, but if Huntsman will really take on the TBTF banks and promise to choose Simon Johnson as his Secretary of the Treasury (see what I did there), I’d at least be open to the idea, all bravado aside.
I’m not sure which statement stands out the most — Michele Bachmann’s assertion that the American Civil Liberties Union runs the Central Intelligence Agency; Cain trying to name the president of “Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan”; Gingrich claiming that a luxury cruise around the Aegean gave him experience to deal with Greece’s foreign debt crisis; Rick Santorum stating that he wants to go to war with China; or Mitt Romney asserting that if Barack Obama is re-elected, “Iran will have a nuclear weapon,” but if Romney is elected, “They will not have a nuclear weapon.” My favorite is Bachmann (again) telling an Iowa crowd that if she is elected, she will close the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. Only one problem: the U.S. hasn’t had an embassy in Iran since 1980, when 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days — something you would expect Bachmann, a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, to know.
There’s plenty of entertainment in this crowd and most of the conservatives I have respect for are willing to admit that Republicans are struggling to find that electable candidate. Even some of our conservatives here are predicting an Obama win, regardless of almost 9% unemployment and a 43% approval rating, when they consider the alternatives. There’s speculation now that even Newt Gingrich could beat Romney in the primaries, hard to believe, but there it is.
When you also consider Romney’s close connections to Wall Street at a time when left and right alike are ready to storm the castle, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to imagine Romney winning states like Michigan. Ohio might have been feasible had he not full-throatedly flip-flopped to support the anti-collective bargaining referendum, which Ohio voters rejected by a nearly two-to-one margin. And with Romney suggesting we let the housing market hit bottom as a solution to the housing crisis, it’s hard to imagine victory in places like Nevada, where more than 1 in 10 families with children have lost their homes.
So, what’s the answer? I believe it is staring Republicans in the face: Jon Huntsman. He’s not just the most experienced candidate — he’s also the most electable Republican.
Huntsman has been dismissed from the start — largely because he worked for “the enemy,” as Obama’s first ambassador to China. Yet Huntsman is no less a conservative than Mitt Romney. He is pro-life, pro-business, and deeply religious; he even favors Congressman Paul Ryan’s budget plan. He still holds that global warming is real, a position Romney has retracted.
Unlike Romney, however, Huntsman has the chops to be president. An ambassador three times over, a wildly popular two-time governor who cut taxes while creating jobs, and a global businessman, Huntsman is the only one standing who can negotiate with the Chinese. As Joe Klein recently observed, his ideas are resolutely conservative, and his economic vision “is the closest any candidate has come to diagnosing the real problems at the heart of the Great Recession — and proposing a reasonable path forward.”
Some of this stuff truly bothers me about Huntsman, Ryan’s budget plan, really? I just don’t know if I can go there. And I don’t have a lot of faith in campaign promises. I’ve been at this game long enough to know that even the best intentions run up against the reality show.
He is the kind of candidate independent voters fawn over. His quirks — he rides Harleys, played in a rock band, speaks Mandarin, and dropped out of high school before earning his general equivalency degree — helped him get re-elected governor in Utah in 2008 with a 58-point margin of victory, even as Republicans fell around him. Were he to win the nomination, he would be difficult for the president to attack. After all, if President Obama thought Huntsman unqualified, would he really have appointed him to the most important ambassadorship in the world?
Jeeze, he’s more like Sarah Palin than Sarah Palin is. Harleys and a GED. But he’s apparently smart enough to pick up Mandarin and serve out two terms as Governor of Utah. Michi, help he out here.
Here you go Mark, a little hope for the Holidays. Please don’t hold me to my previous comments though.
This same time last election, John McCain was trailing badly in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. He even took out a personal loan just to keep his campaign afloat. And yet, when Mitt Romney lost the Iowa caucus to a candidate who wasn’t really a national contender, the opening for McCain became clear, he won New Hampshire, and eventually the nomination.
It is not hard to imagine the same Mitt Romney losing to the same kind of far-right candidate in Iowa a month from now, giving Huntsman the window he’ll need. It may not seem like it now: but my prediction is that Romney will lose in Iowa, Huntsman will win in New Hampshire and eventually be the Republican nominee for President.
*****The comments above are not meant to be a political endorsement*****
Filed under: lmsinca's folly, TBTF Banks | Tagged: Huntsman, Simon Johnson |
All Things in Moderation 
One of my last clients before I went on disability was Harley-Davidson. It is an awesome company to work with.The very idea of Bachmann serving on a congressional committee with the word "Intelligence" in its title strikes me as humorously oxymoronic.Another good quote by a GOP presidential wannabe is Gingrich's comments about changing child labor laws to teach poor kids a work ethic.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2069134/GOP-frontrunner-Newt-Gingrich-poor-children-habits-working–unless-illegal.htmlMy response to Newt is that a lot of kids I know who come from wealthier neighborhoods don't have much of a work ethic either. I don't advocate having kids mop the school floors, but if he insists, why require it only in poor-area schools?
LikeLike
Thanks, lms.OKIE – IT's RAINING!
LikeLike
Mark,That's an 1811 picture if ever I saw one!
LikeLike
lms:Saw your comment to me in yesterday's morning post. It's amazing that everywhere I posted that I got almost no response. Who can blame the 1% for taking advantage of the 99% when we seem to not only prefer, but REVEL in our ignorance!
LikeLike
A reply I posted to Ezra's Long Form piece today. Even without the original, it makes enough sense to repeat here:Striner and Hall should talk to each other, because they both miss the big point. Striner wants the government to borrow more and effectively speaking print more money, which is the root of the very problem that Hall is talking about. All of this stems from the fact that the cost of money is too cheap. We have had at least 11 relatively uninterrupted years of "printing money" in layman's terms. The saying that bad money always drives out good is the history of the 21st century so far. College tuition costs so much for instance because there has been an unbroken string of money available from various sources to fund the student's costs. Not only that, but changes in laws have made it impossible to discharge those costs in bankruptcy, which have lead to the proliferation of for profit colleges who grab the money and run, while the student is on the hook forever.The same thing has happened in the commodity business. Fiat currency always chases "things" (commodities, real estate, etc.) to give permanent value to its depreciating nature. Look at the price of gold and you can see exactly what is happening. Low margin requirements only exacerbate this trend, not create it. With Treasury yields at their lowest level in 60 years, excess money is chasing returns everywhere, and finding a great pop in all types of commodities. If the return on the long bond were to double, near it's more normal historical level, much of that spec money would be drained from the commodities market, especially that portion of it being engaged in by insurance companies and pension funds who are trying to stay solvent needing 7% minimum returns in a 2% Treasury world! You can’t simply borrow more and print more, as if there were no unintended effects elsewhere in the economic world.
LikeLike
If the return on the long bond were to double, near it's more normal historical level, much of that spec money would be drained from the commodities market, especially that portion of it being engaged in by insurance companies and pension funds who are trying to stay solvent needing 7% minimum returns in a 2% Treasury world!Fantastic comment there John. I may not be the brightest bulb in the economic chandelier but even I get that. What a mess. I remember the days of 9% – 13% mortgage loans also.
LikeLike
Hey all, I hate to hit and run on my own post, but I've got kp duty at the food bank today. Happy Saturday.
LikeLike
I've been feeling prolific the last two days, so here's another piece about the woe is me people who discuss the crtical doctor shortage in this country. This is an obsolete way of looking at things. The 21st century doctor is a CEO of a medical treatment community, not a standalone one stop shopping destination. For instance up until the 1970's, in an emergency situation the first call was always to a doctor. Now, there are over 210,000 licensed EMTs in the US who are trained to do so. The least likely thing that will happen is that a doctor will come.Similarly, the doctors used to conduct most medical tests themselves, but now virtually all testing is done by technicians trained in that particular field. Physicians' Assistants number around 80,000 in the US today and are rapidly increasing. The supposed shortage has been created not by an aging population, but by a huge increase in the various REASONS that we visit a doctor. Whereas my 91 year old father was literally born at home in bed, people in the US now regularly visit a doctor even for treatment of colds and mild upper respiratory infections, for which the doctor can offer no effective treatment. So, no, there is no nationwide doctor shortage, nor will there be. There is just going to be an expanded definition of the array of medical professional service careers that are integral to a healthy community.
LikeLike
"john said… lms: Saw your comment to me in yesterday's morning post. It's amazing that everywhere I posted that I got almost no response. Who can blame the 1% for taking advantage of the 99% when we seem to not only prefer, but REVEL in our ignorance!"I definitely read all of your posts about the new details on the Federal Reserve actions being exponentially higher than previously thought, but I think I actually have bail out and outrage fatigue at this point. The only relevant observation I can make is do you think the fact that this information was never expected by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department to be come public will act as a deterrent on the next bail out of Europe?
LikeLike
"Even some of our conservatives here are predicting an Obama win, regardless of almost 9% unemployment and a 43% approval rating, when they consider the alternatives."It's not that I think the alternatives are bad, they all, with the exception of Romney, would be unarguably better than Obama. The problem for the country is that we're doomed to another 4 years of him. No unprimaried Democratic Presidential incumbent has lost since McKinley in 1887. Unfortunately for all of us, he'll win another term.
LikeLike
jnc:My comment of course was not directed specifically at the posters here, who are much more savvy than average. Yes, I have been predicting for months that the Fed will use the IMF to effectively backstop Europe. Dean Baker has even openly called for us to do it last week. I posted a video yesterday where Richard Fisher tangentially said that the audit changes would prevent them from doing so, but like much else in the video I think it was smoke screen.After all, remember that these are unelected officals. Whatever they choose to do can't exactly be undone. Even to the extent the GOP might raise a ruckus, the Obama administration thorugh Geithner has already made it clear how important a non-exploding Europe is to their re-election.
LikeLike
before somebody justly corrects me, the Fed does not contribut to the IMF of course, but will contribute the easing policies to enable the Treasury to do so.
LikeLike
Looks like the Zero Hedge Guys don't think the US / IMF can do it without Congressional approval. Do you agree?
LikeLike
Another hit-and-run here . . . apologies to all.john, I ALWAYS read your comments and links and learn a great deal from them. I thank you. I think I expressed this some time ago on PL and reiterate: just because I don't respond (I'm not qualified to do that), don't think you aren't reaching some of us who need it. Thanks again.MARK, YAY FOR RAIN! It interferes with some home chores I'm working on, but I am oh so grateful for it. I think we've fared a bit more than you have this past year, but it's a huge thing here.As alluded to earlier, I hope (but may not have time) to post a rant about whiny baby upper income folks who are feeling oh so put upon. nb, you are astonishingly out of touch with what most of us are experiencing. No sympathy whatsoever from this quarter.
LikeLike
tao: Forgot to say how much I loved your reference to Castaneda novels. Would not have thought anyone else here would have read them. LOL.
LikeLike
I read a couple of Casteneda's books. Preferred Burroughs Naked Lunch.
LikeLike
TMW:They don't have any ability to do so. Remember the Fed is an "indpendent" body. They can threaten various steps against the institution as a whole, but to the best of my knoweldge they have no ability to block Fed actions. that's why Perry and the others are so upset.
LikeLike
okie:I think my original post may have come across whiney, when it really should have reflected astonishment, that all of us as a nation neither know nor care much about what has been done with our money.
LikeLike
john, thanks for the response . . . but that is not the the "whiny" to which I refer. I'm thinking of "whining" about progressive taxes, income inequality (earnings), etc. Different subjects. Lower income folks have nothing to relate your comments to . . . and as it is now, they will not in the future. One has to be able to put aside something before your comments have meaning.
LikeLike
Back to lms's post:Huntsman was an extremely good governor and provided a moderating force to the ultra-right wing legislature here. He persuaded the lege to lighten up on liquor laws, using the Olympics as an excuse, and is (unlike Romney) a very savvy businessman. His dad, after all, was the guy who took petrochemicals and turned them into the iconic McDonald's clam shell.He is firmly part of the 1%, but he has always struck me as someone with empathy. Romney, on the other hand, struck me as an entitled SOB when he was CEO of the Olympics–he was really disliked by the volunteers and staff of SLOC–and exactly like the kind of guy who would strap a dog kennel to the top of a car.I'd still vote for Obama over Huntsman, but he's the Republican that I'd be least angst-ridden about if he won the Presidency. He'd be more pragmatic than the right wants him to be, which is pretty much our complaint about Obama.
LikeLike
"I'd still vote for Obama over Huntsman"Keep in mind that a vote for President Obama is also a vote for Treasury Secretary Geithner.If Huntsman will truly enforce the antitrust laws against the too big to fail banks and Wall Street, he's worth electing just on that issue alone. Here are some relevant links for convenience:The Huntsman Alternative'Too Big to Fail' Is Simply Too Big Also, these are some interesting photograph juxtapositions:Mark Laita's "Created Equal"
LikeLike
And Herman Cain has (dare I say it) withdrawn.
LikeLike
Thanks for the insight Michi. That pretty much matches what I've heard and read. I think his path to the nomination is pretty far out there in the realm of possibilities but you never know.
LikeLike
Iran claims to have shot down a drone. True or not, to the extent that you're an investor at all, you REALLY need to be in oil.
LikeLike
john:And I imagine you are glad you didn't short treasuries.
LikeLike
Yes, that will day will come, but not yet apparently. Probably by the next announcement of easing.
LikeLike
I invest in mattresses and coffee cans. I learned a very expensive lesson the dot.com bubble: I cannot trust my money to my predictive powers, which are notoriously weak. If I'm ever at the point where I can start regular deposits in my Roth IRA again, I'll keep it in the top 25 index fund it's in now–but that's it. Everything else, it's variations on regular cash instruments. Or, if I wanted to drive down the price of oil, I'd invest a lot of my precious money in it. Guaranteed to make the market crash. 😉
LikeLike
to Mr. Troll McWingnut, mckinley was elected president in 1896 and was re-elected in 1900 and was assassinated in buffalo by a anarchist in 1901.
he never lost a presidential election and he was a republican not a democrat.
and there was no presidential election in 1887 it was in 1888.so please get your facts right before you blog. in 1888 cleveland the democratic incumbent did lose but he won the popular vote but lost the electoral college. this was before the primary system so though he wasn’t challenged at the convention he did improve the percentage of the vote he won in the general from 48.6 in 1884 to 48.8 in 1888.
so even though he lost the electoral college he won a higher % of the popular than before, which keeps the trend of presidents improving their voting total when they are facing re-election.
obama ’12
LikeLike