04-11-2018, 03:04 PM
(04-11-2018, 11:02 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: It's hard to believe, but apparently Paul Ryan has just announced he won't seek re-election. I guess that could be good if that means the Democrats take over his seat. I don't know if that will happen, but Ryan apparently thought he could be voted out, or else he was tired of representing the freedom caucus, or both. I doubt the reactionary party can replace Ryan with anyone except someone even more reactionary as (likely perhaps) future minority leader. We'll see; I'm a bit amazed that the convinced trickle-down, Ayn Rand/Hayek evangelist believer threw in the towel so easily.
1. Under Donald Trump it is easier to be an elected Democrat than to be an elected Republican. Being a member of the Opposition usually gives more leeway, as one can live in accordance with principles with little to stop one. Being in the same Party as the President means that one needs a spine to have some independence. With a President who insists upon lockstep obedience as if he were a despot or dictator, one has more difficulties.
2. He could be voted out. There was a statewide race for a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a special election. Democrats had not won such a race except with an incumbent for twenty years or so -- but one the special election by a big margin. Statewide wins are usually narrow, either way, in Wisconsin, but this election was by a landslide margin (56-44). That's about how Obama did in Wisconsin in 2008 when Obama won a landslide election outside the South and High Plains.
His district is R+5, which is strong enough for a Republican to win in normal election years, barring a discrediting scandal. But I have seen generic ballots in which the Republicans are behind by 10%, and Republicans in R+5 elections are vulnerable.
3. Even if he won re-election, he could easily lose the role of Speaker of the House. His Party needs a majority in the House if it is to have a Speaker from his Party, and Republicans can lose lots of seats. Republicans have gerrymandered many states to leave lots of R+5 seats that are safe except in Democratic waves. An unpopular President makes such a wave possible.
4. Maybe we can take him at his word that he wants to spend more time with his family. A difficult campaign ensures that he becomes effectively a father who rarely sees his children, at least early in the autumn of 2018. If he wins re-election, he sai9d he would be only a 'weekend father'. Retired from the House he might get a position as a college teacher of government, which allows him to be home for dinner with his children.
5. Reactionary as Rand and Hayek are, neither showed signs of support for corrupt politics as has erupted under Donald Trump. The libertarian ideal of minimal government ensures that not only is there no welfare state, but also no official graft. Donald Trump is not a libertarian; he is a big-government right-winger who wants to spend huge amounts of money on prisons, the military, and on infrastructure (the latter in public-private partnerships in which the government takes the entrepreneurial risks and a private entity skims the rewards). A Republican with libertarian tendencies has as much cause to hold President Trump in contempt as does a liberal.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.