The Tragic End Of G.O.P. Motors [Reader Post]

For the Christmas season, I’ve been assiduously avoiding further political debate, and the current communication isn’t offered as a debate over philosophy or anything like that, but it’s just a bit of mind-jarring data.

The lead of this story was Gingrich building up a huge lead over Romney, consistent with his overall surge to become the GOP front runner.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/11/9365498-gingrich-opens-up-big-leads-in-south-carolina-and-florida

But buried, way below the “center-fold” was this:

“In South Carolina — a reliable Republican state in presidential contests — Obama’s approval rating stands at 44 percent, and he holds narrow leads over Romney (45 to 42 percent) and Gingrich (46 to 42 percent). ”

This is South Carolina, for goodness sake. Not Pennsylvania. Not Florida. Not Virginia. Not even North Carolina. but South Carolina. As bad as he’s now doing; as bad as the economy is; as much flak as he’s taken. As low as his approval rating is. But Obama actually leads the GOP candidates in South Carolina.

I know that you think Gingrich will make mincemeat out of Obama in debates, or whatever. But what rings true to you (or me for that matter) isn’t necessarily the way it will be seen by the sort of voters who tend to decide elections.

Take suburban women, for example. Think about Gingrich’s big red face and agitated, funny high pitched voice, going against Obama’s unflappable demeanor and sonorous baritone. Who appears most “Presidential?” These are the sorts of things that tend to determine debate outcomes, as opposed to “points scored” by the debaters.

I really think that this may turn out to be the most interesting election of my life, to date. The race for the GOP nomination is already the most interesting nomination race. I think that the run for the Presidency, itself, may end up being more of the same.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

@openid.aol.com/runnswim: Interesting polling. I have to think, though, that the additional scrutiny (and to some extent mudslinging) that the GOP candidates are being subjected to may be affecting the voters. If you look at the polling from June, Romney led Obama 50/41. Republicans are getting to see the worst side of their guys while Democratic voters aren’t getting near that kind of information on Obama (unless they tune in talk radio 😛 ).
More generally, polls at this point are pretty useless. Jimmy Carter led Gerald Ford by 30 points in the polling at several points and ended up beating him very narrowly in the end. Three and four percent leads mean nothing.

A very real prediction of the very near future. I, we loved it! Its just a damn shame that its so true. Cause thats what many of us are planning on doing if Reg Rommy gets the nod, walk off the damn lot and watch the GOP self destruct. But maybe, just maybe we will have the Tea Party Lot to go to in 2016! Great Post!!

Besides the bizarre inclusion of grenades and ninjas – what car salesperson would damage their own stock? As for the Dodge Palin – don’t sign a 4 year rental agreement as it won’t last the distance. The Ford HurriCane is unreliable and keeps playing up. The Chevy Newt has had three not so careful lady owners and has a history of stalling. If you don’t like the Romney Volt howabout the Bachmann Covair – clearly not intelligently designed, or the Perry Pinto with it’s ruptured gas tank, or the more obscure Huntsman Vega, the maverick Spider Paul or the clapped out dull Santorum Cortina. Hell all of these cars are past their sale by date and heading for the scrapheap but happy to sell any of this junk if you want it. If you don’t want the Volt then there are plenty of folks round the corner who do want a family car rather a pick up truck which only appeals to a minority. Trouble is they have an Obama Prius which may be practical but I reckon it’s not American. Now if I can only sell this family a pick-up truck…maybe they can stick the kids in the back. Apparently the Tea Party Lot doesn’t sell any cars. They keep rejecting stock as being Cars In Name Only. They only sell hot air.

@Cry, Beloved Country: I can respect your opinion, but i can no longer keep voting for these RHINOS who only continue to sell us out. And what would we be winning? Just another 4 more years like the past 4 years, and two decades? These rhinos helped the dems to drive us into the ditch, and now i am going to expect that they will correct this mess? Or will we win some more compassionate conservatism? of course the dems will be united. And why not? they have been winning due to our Rhinos compromising everything but the kitchen sink. I give their side credit, they deserve that at least. but we need politicians who will fight them on their own terms, and not trun tail and run. We need politicians who not only understand the art of propaganda, but how to use it effectively like the democrats. No-one wins battles by compromising, compromising is a slow death by giving in over and over. We need leaders who will fight to win, like the dems. Like it or not there is a war on in their country between two opposing ideologies, and if it takes another four more years of the dem wrecking the country to wake more Americans up, then that will be a bummer. But then again it want to be as bad as being sold out again as we watch another Rhino compromise again, and again as our nation continues to slide even further into the ditch. But who knows maybe i will return back to the comfort zone of my denial about rhinos, and go pull that lever one more time. And then hate myself the next morning.

The last GOP Truck that I bought was the Reagan Tank. I was really satisfied with that old tank too. God how miss it! It would crush any other brand on the highway, yet could weave its way in and out of tight spots in a blink of an eye! Those old dem cars owners were so envious of my old tank too, and still are. I know its wrong but I keep measuring all other brands up against the old tank, and none come near it. But since then I tried the old sophisticated Bush car, it was ok. But kinda slow, and not quick enough for me. And then there was the other Bush car I tried! The GOP dealer sold me a bill of lies for the most part. And then to add insult to injury that same darn dealer the GOP wanted me to buy another car that was basically like the second Bush car! And now here we are years later and the GOP dealer is still trying to pass off the Bush/MaCain car but calling it the new and improved Rebuilt Rommy Hybird. They are trying to tell us that this New Rommy is not like that old Rommy car at all. I just don’t buy it though for some reason. And this new car dealer called the Tea Party has had some of its most attractive cars pulled off the lot cause the GOP cried foul I guess. And keeps telling us that it knows whats best for us! Could’nt stand the competition I reckon. So now I have to buy the new, improved and rebuilt Rommy which runs on hot air, and hyped up promises just like some of the others one did. But whats worse is we all know whats really under the hood, the same old stuff we refused to buy four years ago. And in the end I will get the same or maybe even worse performance out of it as all the other cars that are a spitting image of it. Which is not good! Yet they want us to forget that, and waste our money again just so they keep the DNC dealers happy and contented. What a choice!

@GaffaUK: You said:

Besides the bizarre inclusion of grenades and ninjas – what car salesperson would damage their own stock?

Some people just are too dense to get it…

Michael – Great analogy. Thanks!

So do you think Sarah is regretting her decision not to run this year?

@John Cooper: Thanks John. Right now I think there are a lot of people regretting Palin decided not to run this year besides her. In my opinion this primary is actually a battle for the soul of the Republican Party, a showdown that has been coming since the 2010 election. That is why we see the Republican Establishment dug in behind Mitt Romney on one side and Palin/Cain/Gingrich/? on the other.

@John Cooper: No – I do not — imo she is playing a wait and see game — letting the others self destruct under the msms’ prodding — she might not be ‘seeking’ the GOP nomination but that does not mean she wouldn’t accept it nor run independent. There are several things in play —

First is a certain grass roots movement promoting caucusing for Sarah in Iowa and write in voting in NH — these movements are not under the radar but out in open – and to my knowledge she HAS NOT tried to discourage them in any way (at least not publically) and I understand that they are moving forward — both states latest polls show 9-10% undecided – just to start – the only polls that count are the actual caucus and primary votes.

Second — Breitbart and Bannon suposedly have something up their sleeve(s) that Bannon announced to be released ’30 days prior to Iowa’ — I understand that his announcement was made prior to the BS of Iowa caucus and Florida and NH? primary dates being rescheduled to a month earlier — so whatever this concealed up the sleeve ‘blockbuster’ may be – it was originally intended to be released about the New Year — well it may still happen — ???

Third — Sheriff Joe’s investigation of Obie’s eligibility may yet bring something for real — at least it is so far producing DOJ threats and intimidation attempts targeting Sheriff Joe —

Forth — Things developing internationally and nationally almost daily — far too soon to allow the traitorous msm to force oneself into committed stances — here I am talking about the “what would you do about that?” type of specific inquisitions designed to find sound bites to suggest or reinforce acusations and/or perceptions of “wreckless cowboy”, “religious nut”, “right wing whacko”, “will starve kids and old people”, “homophobe”, “naiveity re – sophisticated international ‘delicate’ affairs”, “bigotry in general”, “racism vs any/all minorities”, “just another Boosch” — etc etc ad infinitum

This self destruct mode of the GOP is SOP — best example I can give is 1996 WA State governors race where going into the primary the repubs put up 6 or 7 names from all over the state while the dems put up Gary Locke and one other person – I believe who was also from the greater Seattle area — anyway it was one relatively weak candidate vs Locke — the local conservative radio host were beside themselves with glee over ‘the wonderful varied set of GREAT GOP candidates – all eminently qualified — well maybe 1 or 2 not so nuch — but we gotta look at ALL of them’ >>> well for the last 6 weeks before the primary the newspapers all over the state played “who’s on first” ring around the rosie with the repub’s names – first this one then that one – a hint here – a hint there — allegation here – allegation there – this one says this and / but the other 1 to 6 say that — this one’s a ‘small town hick’ that one is only gonna be for the east side farmers – rural vs urban – urban vs suburban vs rural — on and on — net result was a round robin of no repubs name being on the front page of any newspaper or mentioned in local radio etc more than 1 or 2 times a week (unless of course some real juicy thing came up – then it was dog pile mode) — meanwhile Locke’s name is on every newspaper front page and every local news spot – etc etc — if the opponent said this – then “Locke replies — ” Locke says / wants / prefers / doesn’t / did – etc etc >>>>

and the primary results — paraphrasing here >>
“Locke in decisive win in hotly contested Democrat primary battle with over 51% of the vote”
“(Who Ever it Was?) emerges bruised and battered from Republican field with 28% of the vote”

I am guessing the percentage of winning votes here – but just look at what the GOP fools are doing nationally this year. With only two primary candidates — one being a clear choice – headlines can blare “winner and still champion – with over 50% of the votes cast” >>> while out of a field of 6-8 candidates a winner is lucky to “EMERGE” with 30%.

That sets the stage for the general election with the demo having STRONG support from ALL factions of the party – you know “across the board” while the repub only “managed to eke out” 30% from his own party —

@Patricia: ‘would be attacking him for being too Catholic (also suspect that is a lot of Santorum’s problem).’
I’ve wondered about that myself. I’m not an expert on Iowa religious demographics but I think most of the religious right there is evangelical, i.e. protestant. Now, it’s been a long time since those guys preached the anti-papist message in a serious way – but I wonder whether some of the older voters, especially, still look at Santorum’s religion and say ‘well, he’s really not one of us, is he?’.

To those who think that allowing ObamaCare to see the light of day would end life in these United States as we now know it, let me inform you of what is currently (and rapidly) happening in health care.

In less than ten years, there will be no such thing as private practice, as it now exists, outside of plastic surgery and a cadre of doctors who provide cash on the barrelhead, concierge type medicine to those willing and able to pay (this sort of thing would exist under ObamaCare, as well). What is happening is that, first, hospitals are merging and basically hiring groups of doctors to work for them. Doctors are given incentives to control costs. Doctors are paid more for doing less, as opposed to the current model, where doctors are paid more for doing more. What is also happening is that the distinction between insurance companies and hospitals is being blurred. Insurance companies will increasingly be health care providers, along the Kaiser Permanente model — with one important distinction. Kaiser is a non-profit, with a “progressive” political outlook. All the other emerging Kaiser competitors are for-profits, with a Chamber of Commerce outlook.

Maybe they could be controlled by strict regulation. But, Catch-22, regulation is now a dirty word.

Now, today half of the health care in America is government provided (Medicare, Medicaid, VA, Indian Health Service, military, etc.). Medicare utilizes and pays contractors to administer it and utilizes private doctors and hospitals. It is no more “socialized medicine” than the private defense contractor system is socialized weapons production. It’s the government contracting with private doctors and hospitals to provide services.

The differences between Medicare and the coming face of private health care are (1) transparency and accountability (favoring Medicare), (2) responsiveness to consumer complaints (most Congresspeople have a staffer assigned to deal with constituent problems with Medicare, both from the patient side and from the provider side. When these staffers say “jump,” the Medicare contractors most often reply “how high?” This isn’t at all the way it works in the dark and inscrutable private health care system, which is responsible for virtually all of the considerable “health care rationing” which goes on in the USA today. (3) vastly greater access to physicians, specialists, and hospitals in the case of Medicare, which has, by far, the greatest provider network and the fewest gatekeepers. (4) far lower overhead for Medicare, with vastly more of the health care dollar going to providing services, as opposed to administrative overhead and, of course, profits to the health care company.

If the GOP wins in November, I’m quite sure that ObamaCare will be killed. But the GOP, having killed off the Democrat’s solution to the health care problem, will now assume ownership of the next great economic “bubble” to explode in the face of the party in power. Only it won’t be a bubble exploding in the face of the party in power. More like an exploding cigar.

Did I say “Democrat’s solution?” I misspoke. My bad. Trying to take credit for a health care system invented by the Heritage Foundation (including individual mandates), promoted in the early 1990s by GOP Senators Grassley and Dole (as an alternative to HillaryCare), and put into effect by the likely next nominee for top of the GOP Presidential ticket, His Mittness.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

Hi BBart,

One can only hope that someday we have a medical system that pays doctors for results, rather than how much or how little they do. But that’s not so much a current political problem as an issue with human cognitive biases that has caused problems for millenia.

I don’t really understand your classification of the health care problem as a ‘bubble’. Large unfunded liability, sure. But bubbles are usually understood to involve some unsustainable overvaluation of assets (whether stocks, real estate or tulip bulbs) whereas in the case of health care there is no asset under consideration. If you were just trying to say that we would create an awful mess of things, then I understand what you’re saying.

Paying doctors for results is a key goal of ObamaCare. This is a concept which was also championed by Pawlenty. ObamaCare has $11 billion budgeted for pilot programs to base payment on outcomes.

I use the bubble analogy thusly:

We’ve overvalued the patient as a source from where money can be extracted by the health care system. We’ve gotten used to the idea that the average patient ought to be able to generate so many dollars in revenue, to feed the expectations of providers (from doctors to hospitals to insurance companies). Owing to the aging of the Baby Boom generation, there are no longer enough dollars available to continue paying providers at the same per unit basis. There is only one solution: the ratio of payment per unit (patient) has to go down. There are only two ways of doing this: (1) reduce the number of services provided per unit (i.e. rationing, if you want to call it that, or simply removing incentives to do things which don’t work, simply because they generate fees) and/or (2) reduce payments to doctors, drug companies, medical device manufacturers, and hospitals, which will generate screams of anguish, because of expectations fed by the health care bubble. But this is the effect of the deflation of any bubble, from stocks to real estate to tulip bulbs.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

I stopped by the local Chevrolet to get acquainted with the new service advisor and decided to take a look at the new Silverado 2011, 1500 pickup. Just for fun, I took it out for a test drive. I wanted to sense that new “feel” before they become extinct. The salesman (a black guy wearing an Obama “change” lapel pin) sat in the passenger seat describing the truck and all its “wonderful” options.

The seats were of particular interest. He explained that the seats directed warm air to your butt in the winter and directed cool air to your butt in the summer heat. Feeling like fuckin’ with him, I mentioned that this must be a Republican truck. Looking a bit angry, he asked why I thought it was a Republican truck. I explained that if it were a Democrat truck, the seats would blow smoke up your ass year-round.

I had to walk back to the dealership to get my car.

Some people (knee grows?) have no sense of humor.

@Patricia: You know I have come to like perry more and more as opposed to Rommy. But the GOP has all their money, and power behind Rommy so I doubt that Perry will get it. The Gop and establishment backing for Rommy has been apparent since day one. But as of late its become so blatant that its offensive and obnoxious. But its nice to still have a little hope!

With regards to mergers. They were happening way before ObamaCare. The only way you can stop mergers is with government regulation. You can’t go blaming mergers and consolidation on ObamaCare. That was simply an honest and accurate analysis of where everything was going, anyhow.

The effect of mergers on ultimate consumer costs is something which doesn’t play out for many years. You guys keep wanting to paint Romneycare as some sort of unmitigated disaster. Tell that to the citizens and providers in Massachusetts, where it is overwhelmingly popular, despite all of the inevitable growing pains. It’s just like people who criticize stem cell research because it hasn’t yet cured diabetes and Alzheimer’s. Most big things take a whole lot of time, but a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

It remains true that ObamaCare was designed by the Heritage Foundation, supported by the GOP in the 90s as an alternative to HillaryCare, and put into effect by the man who’s likely to run against Obama in the Fall. The point is that it’s not some sort of Marxist hostile takeover of healthcare. So the Heritage Foundation is trying to cover its butt, after the fact. Fine. So you have sincere problems with the individual mandate. I respect those, but SCOTUS will sort it out, as it should.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

VCMIKE
HI,
I could recommend to you the key to figure a misspelling, which you’ll find easier
to do next time; the answer is to continue reading, and you will find the answer further on the POST,
it will improve your ability to read easier. IT is contrary as to stop at a misspelling and get angry at it. you don’t need to take the lead and note it to the AUTHOR , it give a bad feeling and make you look bad
bye

Great comments, BBart.

Trying to employ free market methods throughout runs into deep trouble because (unlike most areas) people are in a very poor position to evaluate the actual value of care received. I don’t think the government will do any better in trying to do it in a systematic fashion.

This is the very point that I’ve been trying to make here (on this blog) for years. The fatal flaw behind the free market model for health care is that the sellers (doctors) make all the most important (and expensive) purchase decisions on behalf of the buyers (patients). The health care sellers convince the buyers that they need a particular product, and the sellers even select the model of the product, on behalf of the buyers.

With the recent economic downturn, combined with rapid inflation in health insurance premiums, millions of people lost health insurance, and doctors lost a lot of patients, but their incomes didn’t go down, because they just provided more services for their remaining patients. I could give you endless examples. I’ve previous given quite a few, in past discussions here.

Health care is a market which has to be regulated; it can either be self-regulated, by the behemoth conglomerates which are the ones truly “taking over” health care (as opposed to the government), or it can be regulated by agencies accountable to the public, meaning you and I. Medicare’s long and successful history convinces me that this is one area where the government is capable of doing something pretty well, from the standpoint of providing the highest degree of consumer satisfaction for the lowest aggregate cost.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

@Gary G. Swenchonis:

>>And what would we be winning? Just another 4 more years like the past 4 years, and two decades?

I agree with you. And I think that’s the very difficult reality with which conservatives are probably faced. If we run a RINO, we can win, but nothing much changes; if we run a conservative, we can’t win.

There just aren’t enough conservatives in this country to effect change. Our national symbol should be changed from the bald eagle to the dairy cow: It appears that most of us are now firmly latched onto the teat, addicted to the teat, and unwilling to give it up. And that majority isn’t going to vote for anyone with a platform that involves weaning.

Where do we go from here?

@openid.aol.com/runnswim: ‘Health care is a market which has to be regulated’
Well, now. I could actually go for total deregulation (on principle, mind you, not on utilitarian grounds), and it’s not even clear that the result would be strictly worse than the frightful mess we have now. It would certainly cost less, since there would be a vast influx of ‘medical practitioners’ of various sorts driving down prices. But I’m not under any illusion that the healthcare provided in such a scenario would be good, on average.
I also think that your proposed solution is ultimately subject to regulatory capture, i.e. either the providers or the insurance companies will find a way to extract extra money from the government. But the only proposals that really avoid the twin dilemmas of perverse incentives and asymmetrical information are far to the left, i.e. things like doctors employed by the state in a state-owned clinic on a fixed salary. That sort of thing has its own set of problems but in my opinion is not clearly worse than the Frankenstein solution we have come up with.

@Patricia

as no democratic secular goverment has ever survived more than a century in all of world history

The US is a democratic secular state which has lasted over 200 years.