Salon: "The Search for an Intellectual GOP Presidential Candidate"

[paul718]

This was in Salon last week, but I just came across it now.  I found it interesting because the recent neglect for intellectualism within the GOP is troubling.  Stanage highlights Daniels and Thune, while touching on Huntsman, Barbour, and Petraeus.  There's some good copy from David Frum included, as well.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Derek]

I want no such thing as my nominee. Someone simple and someone conservative. Unless you're talking about Newt Gingrich.

[nhmagic]

I don't like this talk about how social conservatives are not intellectual.  We need someone like Marco Rubio - eloquent, hardline economic conservative, hardline social conservative and Latino.

[paul718]

I want no such thing as my nominee. Someone simple and someone conservative. Unless you're talking about Newt Gingrich.

Seriously?  You don't want someone smart to be President?

I don't like this talk about how social conservatives are not intellectual.  We need someone like Marco Rubio - eloquent, hardline economic conservative, hardline social conservative and Latino.

Daniels and Thune are both socially conservative.  Thune rather emphatically so. 

Rubio hasn't set foot in the U.S. Senate, why do you want him?  And why do we need a Latino?

[Derek]

intellectual and smart are 2 different things.  An intellectual is a scholar or someone who is educated like Obama.  Someone smart is someone who knows what decisions to make and what to do in certain situations like Ronald Reagan.  I don't want an elitist from Harvard who is "smart" according to the Ivy League.

[BlueSwan]

Good article. And I agree that Daniels is the best candidate for the "thinking Republican".

While European and American politics aren't directly comparable (for instance, Europe was dominated by social democratic parties throughout the 20th century, while the social democraztic movement never gained any momentum in the US), I want to draw one parallel to danish politics.

Throughout the 20th century it was pretty common that the economic upper- and middle class voted for the center-right parties while the working class and a majority of the academic elite voted for the socialist parties. In other words: classic classvoting.

Over the last two decades this pattern has changed. Social issues like views on immigrants, law and order and the environment has taken total precedence over the old economic issues. This has changed the previous classvoting. The working class in Denmark no longer vote primarily socialist, because the working class is generally very social conservative. In a danish context that primarily means that they're anti-immigrant, anti-EU, want toughness on crime and discipline in schools. This is something that the rightwing parties have been touting and hence more working class people vote for rightwing parties than leftwing.

But at the same time the right has lost loads of their better edcucated voters (what you might call the cultural upper and middle class according to Bourdieu) who tend to be socially liberal (but often fiscal conservatives). Increasingly the dividing lines in danish politics are determined by education rather than class.

With the likes of Palin, Limbaugh and Beck setting the tone for republicans these years, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see this educational dividing line replicated in the US in the near future.

Please excuse the poor english, I'm dead tired and english isn't my first language. :-)

[justW353]

intellectual and smart are 2 different things.  An intellectual is a scholar or someone who is educated like Obama.  Someone smart is someone who knows what decisions to make and what to do in certain situations like Ronald Reagan.  I don't want an elitist from Harvard who is "smart" according to the Ivy League.

You'd rather have someone who mooched off his father to get ahead like Bush?  That worked out well...

I hate that freaking word...Elitist.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Ron Paul

[nhmagic]

Limbaugh and Beck are very intelligent, tonally and intellectually.  Beck has used source after source to prove that you liberals are liars through and through.  Limbaugh has pieced together your schemes for years using simple news reports.  It's obvious that you don't listen to or watch either of them. 

As for the question about why a Latino: We need a Latino so that the democratic party doesn't have a monopoly on Latino votes.  A Marco Rubio could engage them to come out in numbers for us like blacks did for Obama.  We can frame him as the first Latino president.  More importantly he is an anti-amnesty Latino.  He's someone who can help bridge the divide in the immigration issue and really come up with a workable plan that does not give the democratic party 10 million instant votes (which is why they want comp. immigration reform).

[Zarn]

Limbaugh an intellectual?

...

...

...

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Whatever else you may not like about him, I believe Newt does indeed have "genuine cerebral appeal"

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

He is wrong about Newt but I think Daniels is the best candidate if looking for an intellectual Republican candidate. 

[paul718]

As for the question about why a Latino: We need a Latino so that the democratic party doesn't have a monopoly on Latino votes.  A Marco Rubio could engage them to come out in numbers for us like blacks did for Obama.  We can frame him as the first Latino president.  More importantly he is an anti-amnesty Latino.  He's someone who can help bridge the divide in the immigration issue and really come up with a workable plan that does not give the democratic party 10 million instant votes (which is why they want comp. immigration reform).

So you think Hispanics will vote Republican just because the candidate is Hispanic?  I'd like to think most Hispanics are more principled than that, regardless of which party they support.  I don't want to win back the White House through racism. 

Whatever else you may not like about him, I believe Newt does indeed have "genuine cerebral appeal"

I agree.  The article acknowledges Newt's intellect, but he does tend to play down to the Tea Partiers' level.

[TheGreatOne]

Limbaugh and Beck are very intelligent, tonally and intellectually.  Beck has used source after source to prove that you liberals are liars through and through.  Limbaugh has pieced together your schemes for years using simple news reports.  It's obvious that you don't listen to or watch either of them. 

As for the question about why a Latino: We need a Latino so that the democratic party doesn't have a monopoly on Latino votes.  A Marco Rubio could engage them to come out in numbers for us like blacks did for Obama.  We can frame him as the first Latino president.  More importantly he is an anti-amnesty Latino.  He's someone who can help bridge the divide in the immigration issue and really come up with a workable plan that does not give the democratic party 10 million instant votes (which is why they want comp. immigration reform).

I've watched Beck and Limbaugh for years and I can tell you that Beck and Limbaugh are not experts on anything.  They are socially gifted inviduals.  They know how to speak to and con the American public with wild accusations, distortions, and the worst elements of human nature.  What schemes have they uncovered?  Nothing.  ACORN turned out to be a complete lie.  What have they uncovered throughout their careers?  Everything I've heard from Limbaugh or Beck has been easily dismantled by logic and research. 

[nhmagic]

Limbaugh and Beck are very intelligent, tonally and intellectually.  Beck has used source after source to prove that you liberals are liars through and through.  Limbaugh has pieced together your schemes for years using simple news reports.  It's obvious that you don't listen to or watch either of them. 

As for the question about why a Latino: We need a Latino so that the democratic party doesn't have a monopoly on Latino votes.  A Marco Rubio could engage them to come out in numbers for us like blacks did for Obama.  We can frame him as the first Latino president.  More importantly he is an anti-amnesty Latino.  He's someone who can help bridge the divide in the immigration issue and really come up with a workable plan that does not give the democratic party 10 million instant votes (which is why they want comp. immigration reform).

I've watched Beck and Limbaugh for years and I can tell you that Beck and Limbaugh are not experts on anything.  They are socially gifted inviduals.  They know how to speak to and con the American public with wild accusations, distortions, and the worst elements of human nature.  What schemes have they uncovered?  Nothing.  ACORN turned out to be a complete lie.  What have they uncovered throughout their careers?  Everything I've heard from Limbaugh or Beck has been easily dismantled by logic and research. 

Or, it could simply be that you are the liar.

[TheGreatOne]

The Republicans don't want an intellectual canidate, and they certainly don't want intellectual voters.  How would they be able to give more rights and priveleges to corporations with an intellectual public critically investigating their actions.   The Republicans have put Corporate Judges in the Supreme Court, who have purposely misrepresented precedent in order to allow corporations to influence campaigns through first amendment rights.  Why do you think Congress hasn't stopped these tax loopholes that allow most corporations in the United States and around the World to pay no taxes in our country.  How would the Republican Party sell their constitutents tort reforms for Corporations if they knew that the tort litigation crisis was all BS?  Sorry, but the Republican Party is sold out to the highest bidder and so is most of the Democrat Party.  

[TheGreatOne]

Limbaugh and Beck are very intelligent, tonally and intellectually.  Beck has used source after source to prove that you liberals are liars through and through.  Limbaugh has pieced together your schemes for years using simple news reports.  It's obvious that you don't listen to or watch either of them. 

As for the question about why a Latino: We need a Latino so that the democratic party doesn't have a monopoly on Latino votes.  A Marco Rubio could engage them to come out in numbers for us like blacks did for Obama.  We can frame him as the first Latino president.  More importantly he is an anti-amnesty Latino.  He's someone who can help bridge the divide in the immigration issue and really come up with a workable plan that does not give the democratic party 10 million instant votes (which is why they want comp. immigration reform).

I've watched Beck and Limbaugh for years and I can tell you that Beck and Limbaugh are not experts on anything.  They are socially gifted inviduals.  They know how to speak to and con the American public with wild accusations, distortions, and the worst elements of human nature.  What schemes have they uncovered?  Nothing.  ACORN turned out to be a complete lie.  What have they uncovered throughout their careers?  Everything I've heard from Limbaugh or Beck has been easily dismantled by logic and research. 

Or, it could simply be that you are the liar.

Okay prove me wrong.  Give me an example where Beck and Limbaugh uncovered a scandal.   Actually do one better.  Give me an example of when Beck or Limbaugh uncovered a Republican scandal. 

[redcommander]

How about Sununu?

[memphis]

intellectual and smart are 2 different things.  An intellectual is a scholar or someone who is educated like Obama.  Someone smart is someone who knows what decisions to make and what to do in certain situations like Ronald Reagan.  I don't want an elitist from Harvard who is "smart" according to the Ivy League.

You want somebody who is smart, but uneducated? What's the GOP's slogan going to be? Unrealized potential '12? Why on earth would you want somebody who is not educated as president?

[paul718]

How about Sununu?

I could support him. 

intellectual and smart are 2 different things.  An intellectual is a scholar or someone who is educated like Obama.  Someone smart is someone who knows what decisions to make and what to do in certain situations like Ronald Reagan.  I don't want an elitist from Harvard who is "smart" according to the Ivy League.

You want somebody who is smart, but uneducated? What's the GOP's slogan going to be? Unrealized potential '12? Why on earth would you want somebody who is not educated as president?

It's mind-boggling.  Some of the comments in this thread are evidence of why I dislike the GOP and many Republican voters.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The Republicans don't want an intellectual canidate, and they certainly don't want intellectual voters.  How would they be able to give more rights and priveleges to corporations with an intellectual public critically investigating their actions.   The Republicans have put Corporate Judges in the Supreme Court, who have purposely misrepresented precedent in order to allow corporations to influence campaigns through first amendment rights.  Why do you think Congress hasn't stopped these tax loopholes that allow most corporations in the United States and around the World to pay no taxes in our country.  How would the Republican Party sell their constitutents tort reforms for Corporations if they knew that the tort litigation crisis was all BS?  Sorry, but the Republican Party is sold out to the highest bidder and so is most of the Democrat Party.  

So if previous precedent is unconstitutional the Supreme Court can't overturn it?

[© tweed]

Romney is very bright.  he doesn't present himself as an intellectual for a good reason.

[TheGreatOne]

The Republicans don't want an intellectual canidate, and they certainly don't want intellectual voters.  How would they be able to give more rights and priveleges to corporations with an intellectual public critically investigating their actions.   The Republicans have put Corporate Judges in the Supreme Court, who have purposely misrepresented precedent in order to allow corporations to influence campaigns through first amendment rights.  Why do you think Congress hasn't stopped these tax loopholes that allow most corporations in the United States and around the World to pay no taxes in our country.  How would the Republican Party sell their constitutents tort reforms for Corporations if they knew that the tort litigation crisis was all BS?  Sorry, but the Republican Party is sold out to the highest bidder and so is most of the Democrat Party.  

So if previous precedent is unconstitutional the Supreme Court can't overturn it?

Sure they can, but no Republican Supreme Court Justice will ever overturn precedent favorable to the Corporate agenda. 

[TomC]

Whatever else you may not like about him, I believe Newt does indeed have "genuine cerebral appeal"

Yes, Gingrich is absolutely an intellectual.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It's funny that no Republicans attacked the article for being from salon.com, since they seemed to be the entirety of the "liberal media" in this country, at least after 9/11. salon.com was running articles about how Bush failed on terrorism on 9/12/01. The rest of the media didn't dare criticize him for at least a year.