You're In The Agora
Welcome to the Net's best new source for commentary on current events, culture, faith, science and much more.
Faith
Confessing Evangelical Evangelical Outpost He Lives Mere Comments Mirror of Justice Religion Clause Three Hierarchies Science Dispatches from the Culture Wars In the Pipeline New Scientist Tierney Lab Liberty A Constrained Vision Asymmetrical Information Becker-Posner Blog Hit & Run Instapundit Positive Liberty The Agitator Volokh Conspiracy Economics Café Hayek EconLog Environmental Economics Freakonomics Free Exchange Greg Mankiw J. Bradfor DeLong Marginal Revolution The Right Andrew Sullivan Best of the Web Eunomia Hugh Hewitt Michelle Malkin Power Line The American Scene The Corner The Left After the Future Ezra Klein Matthew Yglesias Political Animal Talking Points Memo Errata Daniel Drezner Democracy in America Dilbert Blog Lilek's Bleat Overcoming Bias The Sartorialist Hoosiers Daily Contentions Indiana Barrister Masson's Blog Matthew Stevenson |
|
« Sic Semper Tyrannis? | Main | Behind the headlines? » February 27, 2007Gov. Mark Sanford: The GOP's savior?
The first thing that stands out about Sanford's record is a passionate dedication to fiscal restraint and responsibility. His opposition to pork spending is so strong that after legislators of his own party overrode his veto in a 2004 budget showdown, Sanford brought live pigs into the House chamber as a visual protest against 'pork projects'. For good measure, the pigs even defecated on the House lobby floor. The thought of that kind of leadership in Washington is enough to make some fiscal conservatives salivate. Sanford's libertarian approach to limited government will appeal to moderate voters and disciples of the Reaganite era. He has innovatively sought to improve the public education system through market based reform. Most recently he penned an op-ed in the Washington Post outlining a conservative approach to climate change. Although some conservatives are critical of the specific proposals, even those critics seem to admire that he takes "seriously the challenge of reconciling conservative principles with a serious approach to climate change policy." Of course a common criticism of the current GOP field is a lack of any true social conservatives. Sanford has a believable resume that will resonate with both conservatives and moderates. He is pro-life and would define marriage as between one man and one woman. Yet he also favors campaign finance reform and supports affirmative action in state contracts (but not colleges). In spite of what appears to be a balanced yet conservative record and an attactive look and personality, calls for a Sanford presidential run have been minimal within his own state. The reason is summed up in his 2004 stance against pork: he is often at odds with his own party. As others have said, "This is not surprising; throughout history a prophet is not valued in his own land." A recent New York Times article, titled "Christian Right Labors to Find '08 Candidate," noted that a "secretive club" of influential Christian conservatives held a private meeting in Florida to decide upon a "champion to carry their banner in the next election." Although they largely left without answers, Sanford, a guest speaker at the gathering, was allegedly asked to run. "He firmly declined the group's entreaties, people involved in the recruiting effort said." No one knows for certain if Sanford will change his mind, or even if he could overcome low name recognition after having laid no true groundwork. But it seems clear that a large chunk of the conservative populace crave a new kind of candidate, and Sanford seems to fit the bill. Posted by Joshua Claybourn at February 27, 2007 10:00 AM CommentsSanford might be a good consensus candidate for conservatives, but that might not be enough to get him past McCain or Rudy in a national primary. There are two many people trolling those waters right now. Hunter is appealing to the immigration-hawks and Brownback and Huckabee are appealing to the theocons, so Sanford will have to differentiate himself somehow from that pack, then wean establishment conservative types away from Romney and Rudy. That's drawing to an inside straight (or a gut draw, as they say in Hold-um) and a low-percentage proposition. Had he thrown his hat in six months ago, he could have edged past Romney for third and be on his way to becoming the conservative champion. It seems a bit late now, but still feasable, if he's willing to roll the dice. Posted by: Mark Byron at February 27, 2007 12:44 PM | permalink Well I think all of that is a bit flippant. You've neatly categorized certain subsections of the political spectrum, but they can't be placed nicely into a box. "Immigration-hawks" do not vote solely based on that issue, nor do any of the other sub-groups vote based solely on the issue that they've been tagged with. People look for a number of things and value them at varying degrees. One of Sanford's winning qualities, among many, is that he can appeal to more groups that people are more passionate about than most (and perhaps all) of the other candidates. Posted by: Joshua Claybourn at February 27, 2007 01:32 PM | permalink Posted by: JohnS at February 27, 2007 01:36 PM | permalink The question is how deep are the pockets of the '"secretive club" of influential Christian conservatives'. The rich started early and the poor are getting out of the race already. Jesus saves individuals. He's interested in your eternal soul not your politics. Posted by: Mike O at February 27, 2007 02:21 PM | permalink Mike O I was just making a lame joke, lighten up. Judging from the photo here, at least Sanford's handlers don't have to worry (unlike Romney's worry-worts) that his hair is too "perfect" for GOP primary voters. Posted by: JohnS at February 28, 2007 09:50 AM | permalink Posted by: mary at May 7, 2008 09:23 PM | permalink Post a comment |
Unless you live in South Carolina, you may not have heard of that state's governor, |
---- ADVERTISEMENTS ----
|