You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
-Election 2012
Traditional arguments in Election 2012 going, going, gone?
2012-04-25
Are the Debates About Manufacturing Jobs, Energy Independence and Illegal Immigration About to Become Irrelevant?

By Clark S. Judge

Mr. Judge argues in this guest essay at Hugh Hewitt that the traditional arguments about our elections -- manufacturing, energy, and immigration -- may matter less in election 2012 and beyond. He marshals his reasons; worth a look.
Posted by:Steve White

#9  Well, we certainly know tiny what, don't we?

Obama's historic achievements?

I'll take Sarcasm for 400 Alex.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2012-04-25 21:07  

#8  "Goober the Tiny"

Well, we certainly know tiny what, don't we?

Troll
Posted by: Barbara   2012-04-25 16:39  

#7   Manufacturing has declined (gone to China)--much to dismay of most of us.

Most of us who never had to do those dirty, repetitive, mindless jobs. The problem is we have no jobs for those who have been mis-educated by our public schools to do nothing more than be factory cogs in dirty, repetitive, mindless jobs. Maybe the problem is with the education system, because the Chinese won't be doing them in a generation because most of them will be fully automated by then.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2012-04-25 14:37  

#6  I didn't read him to say that these weren't important to many voters. Rather I read him to say that there are major structural changes happening that will reduce their impact/urgency over the next few years.

If he's right, then our response should address how to manage the shift rather than how to push back against trends that are (mistakenly) considered to be one-way.
Posted by: lotp   2012-04-25 14:20  

#5  Manufacturing has declined (gone to China)--much to dismay of most of us. We haven't had an energy policy since the Department of Energy was established. Siting requirements for new power plants are lengthy. EPA has regulated cheap energy out of existence. Ditto a policy on illegal immigration (cheap labor). Neither party wants to do anything about it--especially in an election year.

However, people out in fly over land are paying $4-$5 per gallon of gasoline. That price is reflected in the price of everything else we buy. Green energy doesn't get us where we want to be. Jobs (manufacturing as well as other jobs) are an issue with people since the real unemployment rate
is around 17-18%. Illegal immigration is an issue because Americans are paying for health care and social services they may use while here.

I think Clark Judge is out of touch. While part of what he says is true, the issues he points out of extreme importance to Americans.
Posted by: JohnQC   2012-04-25 10:50  

#4  Wealth distribution is in reality wealth destruction.

It works, once. But at terrible cost.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2012-04-25 08:05  

#3  the i was a slip.


Dear Sir:

I sinktrapped your above post because you are entirely too fond of abnormal anal sex imagery. Please find another way to express those feelings, as this is a family site.

For the moderators,
trailing wife
Posted by: Shaiting Cretch5122   2012-04-25 07:54  

#2  Three d money tanks food and jobs wonder how the flat landers at the Pentagon and cern are doing today? Perhaps we could print 3-d people to fight for us and take our country back. The the 3-d printed steak it's real good with Heinz-57 on it and french fries.As for exporting energy why then does it cost so much to fill up, hows the wind mill tank core coming, solar panels for break away armor? How about that coming out of the closet in the military and all the humping ion people and broom sticks in asses. Wake Up people!
Posted by: Goober the Tiny7006   2012-04-25 07:53  

#1  Not to dispute Mr. Judge's sited trends, but I suspect as many here, I firmly believe "jobs, energy, and immigration" are still quite relevant. Perhaps a more valid explanation for the recent distancing of these topics might be Obama's absolutely dismal record in these key areas over the past three years. His record will not permit an intelligent engagement in the "traditional" election arguments and topics. That leaves Obama with the typically leftest themes of class warfare wealth redistribution, hate mongering, and division as discussion points. I am certain he feels considerably more at home with these anyway.

I believe candidate Romney can prevail if he sticks to the so-called traditional election arguments as he did last evening in his New Hampshire victory speech.

As an aside, wasn't Mrs. Romney's introduction last evening splendid? Imagine the current First Lady attempting such a performance.
Posted by: Besoeker   2012-04-25 03:03  

00:00