Historically, there has been a conflict among Republican voters. Conservatives want a nominee who passes certain litmus tests. Other Republicans stress the need for a candidate who will appeal to a broad section of the electorate in a general election.
The current primaries present other issues as well, different from the historical conflict but not separate. In the current debate, some emphasize the need to beat Obama. Others stress the need to elect a president who will lead the country in a different direction.
The difficulty of the choice can best be understood by the statement of an anonymous voter. He wished he could choose Gingrich to run in the general election but Romney to be President. Others might be disposed to reverse that selection or to choose a completely different one.
Complicating the choice is a tendency to view a candidate from our personal perspective. For example, do you prefer a candidate who is a fighter or one who is conciliatory? Each of us has a different opinion. These are my impressions of each of the remaining candidates:
Gingrich is a fighter, a good debater who speaks with authority and assurance. He is intelligent and prolific in generating ideas. At times, he can be impulsive.
Romney is conciliatory but can be a forceful debater; projects an image of personal integrity and "presidential" demeanor. Could be viewed as playing it too safe; sometimes ambiguous in his statements.
Santorum is a values based candidate whose primary appeal is to voters who share his views. Seems belligerent at times; attempts to force debate on a variety of topics, a transparent effort to attract more voters.
Paul's libertarian message resonates with voters who are angry and frustrated with the political establishment and the country's direction. His weakness is in foreign policy and defense. He sometimes rambles.
Each of these candidates represents different skills, backgrounds, philosophies and character. Which one will you choose to be the Party's nominee to campaign against Obama and to be elected President?
The current primaries present other issues as well, different from the historical conflict but not separate. In the current debate, some emphasize the need to beat Obama. Others stress the need to elect a president who will lead the country in a different direction.
The difficulty of the choice can best be understood by the statement of an anonymous voter. He wished he could choose Gingrich to run in the general election but Romney to be President. Others might be disposed to reverse that selection or to choose a completely different one.
Complicating the choice is a tendency to view a candidate from our personal perspective. For example, do you prefer a candidate who is a fighter or one who is conciliatory? Each of us has a different opinion. These are my impressions of each of the remaining candidates:
Gingrich is a fighter, a good debater who speaks with authority and assurance. He is intelligent and prolific in generating ideas. At times, he can be impulsive.
Romney is conciliatory but can be a forceful debater; projects an image of personal integrity and "presidential" demeanor. Could be viewed as playing it too safe; sometimes ambiguous in his statements.
Santorum is a values based candidate whose primary appeal is to voters who share his views. Seems belligerent at times; attempts to force debate on a variety of topics, a transparent effort to attract more voters.
Paul's libertarian message resonates with voters who are angry and frustrated with the political establishment and the country's direction. His weakness is in foreign policy and defense. He sometimes rambles.
Each of these candidates represents different skills, backgrounds, philosophies and character. Which one will you choose to be the Party's nominee to campaign against Obama and to be elected President?
No comments:
Post a Comment