Ye Olde Partisanship Is Nothing New

WASHINGTON — An American political system marked by partisanship and polarization engenders despair from both Republicans and Democrats.

Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, one of the few congressional Republicans who comfortably works with members of the other party, decided to retire last year lamenting “the sensible center has disappeared from American politics.”

Posts written by the IHT’s Page Two columnists.

Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat who heads the Senate Budget Committee, said he realized it was “time for me to leave” when a senior colleague told him, “Your problem, Conrad, is you’re too solutions-oriented. You’ve never understood this is political theater.’”

This is a periodic refrain. A generation ago it was even more pronounced and pessimistic, as I describe in my latest column.

Jimmy Carter was president. With his legislative agenda stalled, he faced a
challenge within his own party, a relentlessly hostile opposition Republican Party, a sluggish economy and runaway inflation. In the summer of 1979 the president gave a speech on America’s “crisis of confidence.” It often is labeled the “malaise” speech, though Carter never used that word.

Four months later, Iranian radicals stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held 52 Americans hostage for more than a year.

This exacerbated the despair, coming as it did on the heels of the American defeat in Vietnam.

“The last time we got involved with a two-bit country we lost 50,000 men,” lamented one of Washington’s wise men, the late Harry McPherson, who had been counsel to President Lyndon Johnson. “Now we were involved with another one, and there was nothing we could do about it.”

Another of the presidential wise men, Lloyd Cutler, then counsel to
Mr. Carter, wrote an article for Foreign Affairs suggesting that our
political system was broken and America should consider changing to a
parliamentary system.

Ronald Reagan was elected, he proved to be a forceful president, and talk about altering the system diminished.

View the original article here

Nothing About Iowa Caucus Results Say Romney Is a True Front-Runner (ContributorNetwork)

COMMENTARY | Mitt Romney may have walked away with a "win" in Iowa, but not much of one. The results from the Associated Press shows a race that is still very much up in the air.

Romney left with 24.6 percent or the vote, garnering 30,015 votes. This is only eight votes higher than runner-up Rick Santorum, who got 30,007 votes, or 24.5 percent. Ron Paul's supporters also came out en mass to deliver him 21.5 percent of the vote, putting him in third place with 26,219 votes.

These three can walk away with some sort of momentum, but how much is a questionable. An important thing to notice is that none of them was able to get even a quarter of the vote. All three men have very different political views.

What does this spell for the GOP? It could mean a long, expensive, drawn-out primary season. Romney may be able to claim a win, but it's a sign that he is still weak. Nothing about this says "front-runner." If anything, is says people are still wary of Romney.

There were some definite losers in Iowa. Michele Bachmann got only 6,073 votes to put her at 5 percent. After this defeat, ABC News reports Bachmann has dropped out of the race. Her defeat in Iowa was a full 360 degree turn from her top spot in the Ames Straw Poll, showing just how much momentum she had lost over the last few months.

Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich also suffered in Iowa, netting 10.3 percent and 13.3 percent of the vote. The two of them combined don't surpass Santorum or Romney, giving them an uphill battle. Rick Perry has not given up though, as he posted on Twitter that he is ready for South Carolina. Newt Gingrich has also used Twitter to report that he is on the ground in Iowa, and is already attacking Romney as being "timid."

Jon Huntsman, who did not focus on Iowa, had his own take on the Iowa results. The Washington Post reported Huntsman said that "[t]his is an open race." He might be right. Without a clear front-runner in the race, it does leave you wondering what will happen next.

The Republican Party seems to be divided, and the longer they stay divided, the more money they will have to spend to defeat each other. The more the candidates attack each other, the easier they make it for Democrats to repeat the attacks and raise money themselves.

With no clear leader yet in the GOP race, it could mean we are all in for a long primary season. Romney has the most to lose, as he's been seen as the likely nominee. If he continues to perform poorly, people may start to lose faith in his ability to compete. Only time will tell where this race will go, but it will certainly be a race to follow.

View the original article here