Why conventional wisdom and “Republican strategists” are wrong

The Hill magazine has recently published an article profiling Sen. Kelly Ayotte’s rise in stature in the Senate and the ranks of the GOP, primarily due to her study of, and hard work on, defense and FP issues. She has been especially outspoken about the dangers – military and economic – of sequestration, which would cut $600 bn (not $500 bn as the Hill claims) out of the defense budget over the next decade on top of the 487 bn cuts already mandated by the First Tier of the Budget Control Act:

“Freshman Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) has turned the threat of $500 billion in defense cuts into her signature political issue, raising her Senate profile and sparking speculation that she could become Mitt Romney’s running mate.

Her focus on defense has helped her carve out a unique space among the vice presidential contenders; she’s frequently mentioned as a sleeper pick behind a top tier that includes her colleagues Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).

And her work has given her a platform alongside big-name defense hawks like Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

McCain, the 2008 GOP presidential nominee, has praised her efforts, even throwing in some flattery on the Senate floor on Friday.

“Our most eloquent member has arrived on the floor,” McCain said of Ayotte. “Not to mention other attributes that we are lacking in.””

However, as the Hill notes, several (if not most) “Republican strategists” are still propagating the conventional wisdom that the economy is the sole issue of this election (or at least one that the GOP ticket needs to obsessively focus on) and that defense and FP issues are unimportant, if not irrelevant. For that reason, they are dismissing Ayotte and other figures who specialize in defense and FP:

“This is an economic election, and while she is from a battleground state and that’s important, her credentials may not match up with what the campaign really needs, which is a No. 2 who can speak eloquently on the economy,” said one Republican strategist.

“If this was post-9/11, she would be a perfect VP candidate,” the strategist said. “I’m not saying she’s not qualified — she could do a very good job — but her skill set is only part of what’s needed, not all.”

But they and Washington conventional wisdom are wrong, as usual.

Firstly, while the economy is the #1 issue of this election, it isn’t the only one, nor is it one that eclipses all others in terms of importance. There are also several other crucial issues which the GOP ticket MUST be prepared to credibly address. Defense and foreign policy are two such issues.

Secondly, knowing Romney’s limited knowledge of and experience in foreign policy, the Obama team plans to savagely attack him on this issue. They will be merciless and will not, unlike Republicans, restrict themselves in any way – whether in terms of the scope of topics they will discuss nor in terms of the blatant lies they will state and methods of attack they will employ.

If Romney does not educate himself adequately on defense issues before the presidential debates, he will be savagely attacked and may lose the election. And you can take that one to the bank.

OTOH, if Romney picks a person knowledgeable about defense and FP, such as Ayotte or Kyl, he will gain a credible defender on that front, will inoculate himself against such criticism, and will even be able to credibly attack Barack Obama. Which brings me to my next point.

Barack Obama’s national security record, as I have documented here and elsewhere, is disastrous. Not just bad; it’s downright disastrous. (For the latest examples of that, see here, here, and here.) It gives Republicans a HUGE opening to attack and defeat Obama – if they are willing to do so and know how. If they do so competently, they can add greatly to Obama’s woes and defeat him. Attacking him on defense foreign policy is even more important given that Romney cannot credibly criticize Obama on socialized medicine – because he instituted the prototype of Obama’s scheme in Massachusetts in 2006. It would be a foolish mistake, one which would cost Republicans the election, to waste this great opportunity to pound on Obama’s disastrous national security record.

Those Republican strategists and Washington conventional wisdom are wrong. Romney does not need a veep who can eloquently speak on economic issues. Romney can do that himself, and is an expert on the subject. He already has the economic front covered, so to speak.

But Romney is very inexperienced in, and not knowledgeable about, foreign policy – and Obama will exploit that weakness mercilessly unless Romney selects a defense/FP expert as his running mate.

The only thing that disqualifies Kelly Ayotte – although it’s really a disqualifier – is her lack of experience and proper vetting. She’s been a Senator for just 1.5 years, and this is her first elected office. Prior to that, she was an appointed AG of New Hampshire. She has little political experience and has not yet gained the stature of John C. Stennis, Barry Goldwater, John Warner, John McCain, or Jon Kyl. And, due to her short (so far) stint on the national stage, she has not been properly vetted yet. Nominating her for vice president would cause the American people to doubt Ayotte’s qualifications for the Vice Presidency and Romney’s wisdom and decision-making skills.

Fortunately, Romney does not have to choose between an experienced running mate and one who is knowledgeable about defense and foreign policy. Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl meets both requirements, and also has no skeletons in his closet.

Jon Kyl should be Romney’s running mate.

http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/236029-tough-defense-talk-ups-ayottes-veep-creds

Anything they can do, Kyl can do better

The 2012 presidential race is close. Mitt Romney stands a historic opportunity to become only the second Republican in the last 123 years to unseat an incumbent Democratic President. (Ronald Reagan was the first.)

As is the case every four years, many people (most of whom are misguided and not knowledgeable about politics and are guided solely by their personal political ideologies) are making suggestions (or demands) to Romney about whom should he pick for VP. Candidates suggested include Tim Pawlenty, Rob Portman, Bob McDonnell, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, and Marco Rubio.

They are wrong. Only a few people have offered a rational analysis of whom Romney should pick, Professor  being one of them. In his lengthy May 2012 article at the Sabato Center’s Crystal Ball website, Professor Joel K. Goldstein, the nation’s foremost expert on Vice Presidents, explains the realities facing Romney as he is considering whom to choose:

1) Romney needs someone who would be capable of performing the job of President, should the need arise. That means that his running mate must be someone with a lot of national experience under his belt. There mustn’t be any doubt that his running mate would be able to competently perform the President’s duties should Romney himself die or become incapacitated. And that has to include national experience (as a long-serving Representative, Senator, or executive official). Professor Goldstein says that in the post-WW2 era, running mates on average have had 14.5 years of experience in jobs preparing them for the Vice Presidency.

2) The running mate must not cause any headaches for Romney or have any skeletons in his closet that could cost Romney the election.

3) The running mate must have experience in foreign policy, which is something Romney does not have much experience with and is not knowledgeable about.

4) The veep must be conservative (because conservatives, at least until Thursday, had doubts about Romney’s conservative bona fides), and yet also be able to appeal to centrist voters.

Jon Kyl – the candidate whom I support – passes all of these tests, and in fact does so with flying colors.

He’s a staunch conservative (as proven by his ACU and Club4Growth ratings that are always above 90% and usually close to 100%, making him one of the most conservative Senators currently serving), yet one who does not scare off and cannot be caricaturalized or successfully portrayed as an extremist by the dinosaur media. So he can appeal to indies and Reagan Democrats.

He has 25 years of Congressional experience under his belt, serving as Congressman, Senator, and now the Senate’s Republican Whip (i.e. #2 GOP Senator). If Mitch McConnell wants to mobilize his conference, it’s Kyl who does the job and counts the votes. In fact, he exceeds the “experience standard” cited by Professor Goldstein by more than 10 years.

During his 25 years as a member of Congress, he has studied many subjects in depth – including foreign and defense policy, on which he’s one of the GOP’s leading spokesmen, along with Sen. Ayotte and Reps. McKeon, Forbes, and West.

But he’s not prone to speaking from the hip or saying wacky things that could haunt him (unlike West and Gov. Chris Christie), does not have any skeletons in his closet (unlike Portman), and does not have a millstone hanging around his neck (Chairman Ryan).

The Dems have nothing on Kyl. In fact, if he had any skeletons in his closet, don’t you think we would’ve heard of them by now? He’s been in Congress for 25 years, for goodness’ sake.

Jon Kyl is, in fact, the safest pick that Romney can make, and yet a very conservative one.

Not only does he meet all the requirements cited by Professor Goldstein, he exceeds all of them. Anything other veep candidates can do, he can do better.

But he can also do things that others cannot. He can credibly attack (as he already is) Obama’s dangerous foreign and defense policies (e.g. the “reset” with Russia, unilateral nuclear disarmament, deep defense budget cuts, the LOST, etc.) and explain to the American people why they’re dangerous.

Being knowledgeable about many other issues as well, he can also explain the Fast and Furious scandal, Arizona’s SB1070 and its border problems, and the fact that Obama’s socialized medicine scheme remains unconstitutional.

In short, there is nothing that other veep candidates can do that Jon Kyl cannot do better, but there are many tasks that Kyl can do that other candidates cannot.

And speaking of these other candidates, let’s see how flawed they are compared to the Arizona Senator:

Kelly Ayotte, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Nikki Haley, Susana Martinez, Brian Sandoval, and Scott Walker are too inexperienced to be Romney’s running mate. Too many Americans would ask the legitimate question whether they would be capable of acting as President themselves, to which the answer, at present, must be “no”.

Paul, McMorris Rodgers, Haley, Martinez, Sandoval, Walker, Pawlenty, Daniels, Portman, Jindal, Christie, Pat Toomey, and many other current and former governors and senators have no foreign or defense policy experience (no, Sen. Portman, negotiating three flawed FTAs that only increased America’s trade deficit is not a FP accomplishment).

Bob McDonnell, Portman, Daniels, and Paul have skeletons in their closet. Portman has served as George W. Bush’s OMB Chief (as has Mitch Daniels) and is partially responsible for the Bush Administration’s spendathon (as is Daniels); he has also served as Bush’s Trade Representative and negotiated an FTA with South Korea that, as stated above, has greatly increased America’s trade deficit with that country and globally. Bob McDonnell is the VA Governor who signed a bill MANDATING that every woman who wants to have an abortion must undergo a transvaginal ultrasound, i.e. must consent to have an ultrasound machine being pushed into her vagina even if she doesn’t want to. That’s a gross violation of privacy and would give Obama more ammo than he could possibly use. The skeleton in Rand Paul’s closet is his wacky father Ron Paul, who scares off millions of people while attracting only a small band of rabid, fanatical worshippers.

Nominating Portman or McDonnell would virtually guarantee a second term for Barack Obama.

Furthermore, Portman, Daniels, Christie, and several others are RINOs, not conservatives. They wouldn’t excite grassroots conservatives nor reach out to centrist voters. And polls show Portman would not make any difference in Ohio, while Indiana is safely back in the Republican column. New Jersey is out of reach for the GOP.

Finally, Christie and West are loose cannons prone to speaking from the hip and saying wacky things.

Jon Kyl is absolutely superior to any of these candidates.

Ladies and gentlemen, 2012 is not the year for a wildcard. As Ann Coulter rightly says, it’s not a year for any candidate who will end up himself being the issue, instead of making Obama the issue of this election. It’s not a year to bet, like Walter Mondale did in 1984, that America is ready to elevate a young, inexperienced Congresswoman or Senator to the Vice Presidency, or that the country wants a loose cannon, Bush Admin retread, or Governor associated with transvaginal ultrasounds one heartbeat away from the Oval Office.

The GOP cannot afford to lose THIS election. Too much is at stake. In short, if the GOP loses this one, America will be permanently transformed into just another Western European style socialist country. The country made a huge mistake in 2008 and will get only ONE chance to correct it – this year – before starting to bear that mistake’s consequences forever.

That being the case, the GOP cannot afford to do anything that would cause it to lose. It must not nominate ANY candidate who will end up being the issue himself, instead of making Obama the issue. This election needs to be a pure referendum on Barack Obama.

Jon Kyl is by far the best VP candidate to do that.

Jon Kyl for Vice President

As you may recall, Dear Readers, a while ago I suggested that Bob McDonnell be chosen by Gov. Mitt Romney (now the de facto GOP presidential nominee) for Vice President. I based my argument on the grounds that McDonnell ticked all the required boxes – he’s conservative, represents an imporant swing state (which he’d nail down for Romney if selected for VP), has ample experience as Governor and Attorney General (and a sellable record), and also possesses significant military experience, having served in the Army and achieving the rank of Lt. Colonel.

Since then, however, McDonnell has made two mistakes. Firstly, he has signed a bill mandating transvaginal ultrasounds on all women wishing to obtain an abortion in Virginia. Although I’m pro-life, I believe this is an unacceptable invasion of privacy, and so do most Virginian women, I guess. Thus, even if McDonnell could help Romney win Virginia with that kind of a Big Government invasion of privacy on his record, he would drag Romney down elsewhere and cost him the election.

Secondly, he has accepted a rotten “compromise” on voting fraud laws in Virginia, thus annoying conservatives. Indeed, conservatives who live in Virginia tell me they are dissatisfied by him. It appears he’s trying to have it both ways – pandering to conservatives and moderates alike.

While I think that the latter mistake is forgivable, the first one would certainly cost the GOP the election, and therefore, I believe, disqualifies McDonnell as a potential VP candidate.

Yet, Mitt Romney needs a good veep to help him win the election.

Since I endorsed McDonnell for Vice President, experienced American Spectator journalist Quin Hillyer (one of the few AmSpec contributors deserving to be taken seriously) has written a landmark article which sets forth good metrics by which Romney should select his running mate. Mr Hillyer writes that:

• Anyone who lacks at least 2 years’ worth of experience in a high-profile job must be disqualified (although he has, sadly, relaxed that rule since then, making exceptions for Kelly Ayotte and Cathy McMorris Rodgers);
• The list of those who meet that minimum treshold must then be whittled down to just 5-6 people who have the most of such experience plus would be best suited to helping Romney win the election;
• The Romney camp should poll focus groups in swing states (e.g. VA, NC, FL, OH, IN, PA, IA) on what they think of this or that potential VP candidate, including videos of them speaking and negative information that the Obama team would feed them with;
• The 5-6 finalists should then be interviewed in a locked room by Romney aides and warned that any loose lips on their end would automatically disqualify them;
• The Romney camp must prepare the eventual VP selectee for the madhouse that will ensue once the choice is announced.

However, Mr Hillyer failed to add one important requirement: significant knowledge of and experience in foreign policy and defense issues.

And I’m not saying that because I’m a defense/foreign policy analyst, although I am. I’m saying that because Romney does not need another economic expert as his running mate.

Polls show that a significant majority of voters disapprove of Obama’s handling of the economy and trust Romney and the GOP on that issue more than Obama and the Democrats. Moreover, Romney is recognized by every honest person as a man very well versed on economic issues. As far as the economy is concerned, Romney has already won the argument.

But polls show that a majority of Americans are still allowing the media to fool them that Obama is a great steward of foreign policy (when he’s not), that they trust Obama on that issue more than they trust Romney, and that Romney is not considered to be knowledgeable about the subject.

So I believe that just as the 2-year-rule should be a strict requirement, with no exceptions, candidates for VP must also be REQUIRED to demonstrate good knowledge of, and significant experience in handling, foreign policy issues (and no, Condi Rice, I’m not talking about you – no one is interested in yet another neocon advisor).

Considering all of the other requirements listed above, that leaves us with only two candidates: Governor Bob McDonnell and Senator Jon Kyl.

But McDonnell would, as stated above, cost Romney the election, so that leaves us only with Jon Kyl, recently suggested by a CFIF analyst, who says Romney should move Kyl to the top of his list of VP candidates. Mr Hillyer himself has been very sympathetic towards the Kyl option for the same reasons.

Kyl (R-AZ) is one of the Senate’s staunchest conservatives, always scoring at or near 100% in annual ACU ratings, placing him in the same class with Jim Inhofe, Jim DeMint, Tom Coburn, and the freshman Tea Party Senators elected last year: Paul, Lee, Johnson, and Rubio.

Kyl has been leading the Republican opposition to the Obama Administration’s dangerous foreign policy initiatives, including the New START treaty, the pending sellout to the Russians on missile defense, and now, the Law of the Sea Treaty. His commitment to a strong defense is hard to doubt.

Moreover, Kyl has also recently devoted time to explain why building a strong national defense, and protecting it against savage cuts, is not a Big Government policy and is fully consistent with conservatism, including its Limited Government Principle. This is important, because recently some libertarians masquerading as conservatives have been trying to portray this as a Big Government policy and its proponents as Big Government neocons. Kyl would educate the public, including young conservatives, about the facts, and would therefore prevent the conservative movement from being taken over by leftist libertarians. Using facts, logic, and reason, he would utterly belie libertarians’ claims.

And as a longtime Senator and the current Republican Whip/vote counter, i.e. the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, Kyl is intimately familiar with the ways of Washington (an absolutely crucial trait if you want conservative policies to get enacted, especially when you’re nominating an outsider like Romney), yet not tainted in the least by the Beltway – he has never sold out conservative principles.

Last, but not least, Kyl has no presidential ambitions of his own, and if elected, would not pander to anyone nor fight inside the future Romney Administration against anyone who does dream of being President. If he’s chosen and accepts, being Vice President will be his last service to the Nation.

So let’s sum up:

Is Jon Kyl conservative? Yes.

Does he have experience of serving in high-profile jobs? Yes.

Does he make up for Romney’s biggest weakness (foreign and defense issues)? Yes.

Would he help Mitt Romney win the election? Yes.

Would he be ready to take over the office of President anytime, should Mitt Romney die, become incapacitated, or resign? Yes.

Is he familiar with the ways of Washington? Yes.

Would he help advance conservative policies through the Congress and the future Romney Administration? Yes.

As you can see, Kyl checks all boxes. He fulfills all criteria that a good Republican Vice Presidential nominee must meet. Unless Kyl suddenly commits an apostasy against conservatism – something that he has not done during his 25 years in Congress – Romney should pick him for Vice President.