By Jonathan Miller, on Mon Jan 30, 2012 at 5:00 PM ET The RP: Closing Argument
[The RP’s Provocation, Artur Davis’s Rebuttal #1; Ron Granieri’s Rebuttal #2; Natasha Dow Schüll’s Analysis; Spectrum Gaming Group’s Analysis; Jason Grill’s Rebuttal #3; The RP’s First Defense; Jason Grill’s First Response; Artur Davis’ First Response; David Host’s Rebuttal #4]
I’m going to resist the urge to rebut David Host’s full-throated defense of trickle-down economics — we will leave that for another day.
I’ll close instead on a harmonizing note. Too often the two sides of the gambling debate are boiled down to self-righteous moralists versus selfish libertarians. (Indeed, more often the media focuses on the politics rather than the underlying policy debate.) In fact, whether we are discussing casinos, sports betting, or even a state lottery, there are valuable and valued moral arguments on each side of the issue.
Read the rest of…
The RPs Debate Gambling: The RP’s Closing Argument
By John Y. Brown III, on Mon Jan 30, 2012 at 12:00 PM ET  Know your strengths and your calling.
Just as importantly, know your weaknesses and limitations. For your sake —and because it’s the right thing. And because it works out best for all concerned.
Nine years ago I was entering my last year as secretary of state (term limited) and planning to run next for state auditor. It was the next logical step for me politically, no one else had filed on the democratic side and the filing deadline was approaching.
But there was a problem. I didn’t want to be state auditor.
It wasn’t an intellectual resistance. It was a gut feeling that it wasn’t a good fit for me….that I would have a hard time putting my heart into the job. I liked to build things and wasn’t a natural investigator. And accounting was never my strong suit.
Mostly, though, I didn’t want to run for political office just to stay in the game. I had watched other politicians run for office when they didn’t have their heart in it. And despite being favorites to win, they seemed always to lose.
Why? I think voters sensed they didn’t have the “fire in their belly” and that the office they were seeking was more of a place holder for something better in the future. I told myself I would never let that happen to me. But now I was faced with the ultimate test.
What would I do?
Read the rest of…
John Y’s Musings from the Middle: Know Your Calling
By Patrick Derocher, on Thu Jan 26, 2012 at 8:30 AM ET
Fulfilling something of a dream of mine, I had the opportunity to spend the week leading up to this year’s New Hampshire presidential primary on the ground in New Hampshire and as such, The RP asked me to do a write-up of what the election looked like from the Granite State (though that may have also had something to do with the fact that I missed several blog entries whilst traipsing about New Hampshire).
In the interest of full disclosure, and to more fully explain where I’m coming from here, I spent my time working for former Utah governor Jon Huntsman’s campaign, in a position that is best described as full time volunteer, and so this piece will include some observations specific to that campaign. Given my position (I wasn’t even considered staff), the extent to which I can comment on Jon 2012 is rather limited, as is the extent to which I feel it is my place to comment on specifics. That said, there are a few questions I have been asked on multiple occasions that I will start off by talking about.
– Why did Huntsman never really catch on with voters? The simple fact of the matter is that most voters did not view Governor Huntsman as a conservative. This is, of course, more than a bit absurd (you can start and finish with his implementation of a flat tax, but there’s so much more). Perhaps it was the often fawning media coverage, or his moderate temperament and willingness to work across party lines, but the basic problem remains the same: The “moderate” label was affixed, and there was no changing many voters’ minds. As for why Huntsman appeared to have limited support among independents, that is more pertinent to the body of this piece and will be discussed shortly.
Read the rest of…
Patrick Derocher: The Ephemera of Politics — On Polling and Primaries
By Zack Adams, RP Staff, on Wed Jan 25, 2012 at 12:30 PM ET  Romney should be calling all of his bundlers and soliciting money into Santorum’s campaign to make sure Santorum stays alive. Otherwise Newt may well win Florida and then all bets are off.
In 2002, a few well-informed individuals supporting the re-election campaign of Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.) understood that he probably couldn’t get to 50 percent against John Thune and that he’d probably attracted as many indies as possible, but that Libertarian Kurt Evans could potentially draw an extra point or two from Thune’s right flank. A few of these aforementioned individuals apparently organized a last minute effort to boost Evans, who ended up garnering 2,500 votes as Johnson edged Thune by 520 votes.
The dynamics are slightly different in a primary but the principles are the same. Santorum’s approximately 10 percent in Florida/nationally are essentially off-limits to Mitt in a contested primary, unless somebody like Huntsman is the sole alternative. To win Florida, Mitt must prevent the conservative bloc, currently split between Newt and Santorum, from coalescing behind Newt. So Mitt must keep Santorum in the race. The best way to do that is money. And Mitt (and his homies from the real streets of America) have nothing if not mad benjamins.
It might seem crazy but it’s perfectly legal and it’s what Romney’s people should be quietly communicating to their most sophisticated (and cynical) bundlers.
And hell, we’re in the post-Citizens United age, so one of those bundlers – if his creative juices are flowing – could just decide to start his own PAC and just start running positive ads for Santorum in Florida to boost Santorum’s #s there. Eliminate the middleman(ager) – that’s the Bain way, right?
In sum, to borrow some Bain-style jargon: for Romney, in the absence of a very unlikely Santorum surge, the marginal benefit of an extra dollar spent boosting
Santorum is higher than another dollar spent attacking Newt or another dollar spent trying to boost Romney.
(Cross-posted, with permission of the author, from Politico’s Arena)
By RP Staff, on Wed Jan 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM ET  As the nation celebrates the miraculous recovery of Congresswoman Gabrielle “Gabby” Giffords, who was grievously wounded just over a year ago — and who has decided to retire from Congress today — The RP spoke to the Washington Times about Gabby’s legacy:
For Ms. Giffords, civility had been an issue well before the shooting.
Even before she won her seat in Congress, she was part of the inaugural class of the Aspen Institute’s leadership program, designed to foster better sharing and cooperation on ideas among elected officials.
One of her fellow classmates was Jonathan Miller, then the treasurer of Kentucky, who would go on to co-found No Labels, a group that pushes elected officials to move past partisanship and who said Ms. Giffords has become a symbol of “a return to civility and a return to developing relationships.”
“That’s what Gabby’s career is all about,” he said.
His group and Third Way, a progressive-leaning think tank, want to institutionalize the bipartisan State of the Union seating, which Third Way and some lawmakers came up with in the wake of the Tucson shooting.
“There was that very temporary surge [in civility], and it was quickly forgotten it seems,” Mr. Miller said. “But I think in that temporary surge there were a number of efforts that got their germination, including No Labels, that really have picked up a lot of steam and a lot of energy.”
Click here to read the full Washington Times article.
The RP additionally was quoted yesterday in the National Journal on last night’s bi-partisan seating at the State of the Union address, also a legacy of Giffords’ service:
Part of the push for bipartisan seating comes from independent groups like Third Way and No Labels, which took out a full-page ad in the New York Times earlier this month. But are they really expecting Republicans and Democrats sitting next to each other to solve partisan gridlock?
Last year’s State of the Union included bipartisan seating in response to the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.). But that didn’t exactly lay the groundwork for a productive and cooperative 2011.
“It won’t have any dramatic short-term effect,” admitted Jonathan Miller, a co-founder of No Labels and the former treasurer of Kentucky.
But, Miller said, if bipartisan seating gets institutionalized, it could make a difference. And he said that “it’s a signal to the public that [lawmakers] are taking their demand for less hyper-partisanship seriously.”
No Labels has also been tracking the announced bipartisan seating pairs.
Click here to read the full National Journal piece.
By Jonathan Miller, on Mon Jan 23, 2012 at 4:30 PM ET  The RP‘s Closing Argument
[The RP’s Provocation; Artur Davis’ Rebuttal #1; Rod Jetton’s Rebuttal #2; John Y. Brown, III’s Rebuttal #3; Ron Granieri’s Rebuttal #4; Robert Kahne’s Rebuttal #5; Artur Davis’ First Response; Michael Steele’s Rebuttal #6; The RP’s First Defense; David Host’s Rebuttal #7; Zack Adams’ Rebuttal #8; Artur Davis’ Second Response; Rod Jetton’s First Response; Ron Crandall’s Rebuttal #9; Jason Grill’s Rebuttal #10]
In the long, storied history of the RP Great Debates (OK, it’s only been three weeks…), we’ve never had so many participants and so many opinions. There is something about Tim Tebow that certainly strikes a chord in so many Americans.
But to conclude where I began, the civility and positivity that Tim Tebow has added to the public dialogue is remarkable, particularly considering the hostility of some of his supporters and his detractors. And what’s even more remarkable is that the kid is only 24 years old! To be the idol of of millions and the devil to others, and to still retain such a modicum of humility is truly admirable.
Read the rest of…
The RPs Debate Tim Tebow: The RP’s Closing Argument
By Jonathan Miller, on Mon Jan 23, 2012 at 1:00 PM ET The RP‘s First Defense
[The RP’s Provocation; Artur Davis’ Rebuttal #1; Rod Jetton’s Rebuttal #2; John Y. Brown, III’s Rebuttal #3; Ron Granieri’s Rebuttal #4; Robert Kahne’s Rebuttal #5; Artur Davis’ First Response; Michael Steele’s Rebuttal #6]
This debate has sparked so many wonderfully different tangents. (That, or I am just high in the moment of Tom Brady moving up my list of Pretty Boys I Begrudgingly Admire. And no, it wasn’t for leading my beloved Pats to the Super Bowl, but rather for admitting before 40 million Americans that “I sucked today, but our defense saved us.”)
I want to unfurl one of the threads here; and of course, in the spirit of my political recovery mission to grab onto any third rail issue I can, I want to address an subject alluded to by both Michael Steele and Rod Jetton:
Abortion.
Despite my own über-feminism — the product of the extraordinary influences of brilliant women from my mom to my sis to Mrs. RP to the RPettes — I’ve always been quite conflicted on the issue. Yes, ultimately, I believe that the woman should have the right to make the awful decision, but I’ve never viewed it as an expression of empowerment, or even “reproductive freedom.” I’ve simply concluded that if abortion were illegal, women would still have them, and too many girls and poor women would die or suffer serious injury at the hands of illegal abortionists.
Read the rest of…
The RPs Debate Tim Tebow: The RP Defends
By Robert Kahne, RP Staff, on Mon Jan 23, 2012 at 11:00 AM ET Robert Kahne: Rebuttal #5
 [The RP’s Provocation; Artur Davis’ Rebuttal #1; Rod Jetton’s Rebuttal #2; John Y. Brown, III’s Rebuttal #3; Ron Granieri’s Rebuttal #4]
I don’t mind Tim Tebow. I just can’t stand his fans.
Tim Tebow is a man I have often hated. Hailed as “The Greatest College Player Ever” by many, while he played for Florida, he was one of my most despised players ever. Tim Tebow ended the greatest run of Kentucky football ever in 2007 when Florida defeated Kentucky one week after Kentucky had taken down then-#1 and eventual national champion LSU and eventually rose to #8 in the AP poll. After the defeat of my beloved Wildcat at the hands of Tim Tebow, Kentucky started a downward trend which they are still striding upon. I listened with malice in my heart as Thom Brenaman (perhaps my least favorite sports personalities ever) gushed over him during the 2009 Sugar Bowl, and was extremely frustrated when he was indeed selected in the first round of the NFL draft by Josh McDaniels (perhaps my least favorite person to ever have coached professionally). But once he got to the pros, things changed a bit for me.
I am a fan of anti-heroes. I think they give us a unique perspective to grapple with which makes a narrative much more thoughtful. Tim Tebow has become one of the most interesting anti-heroes ever. Football purists cheer against him with all their might because he doesn’t fit into their mold of what a quarterback should be. I like Tim for this, because I think that if you find a unique way to find success, that should be celebrated, not demonized. Many criticize Tim for being an outspoken believer in evangelical, conservative Christianity. Though I don’t agree with him, I believe any individual in any line of work should be allowed to speak out about how they feel about any issue–and as long as people give you platforms on which to share, you are totally within your bounds to say whatever you will. I will never begrudge anyone’s success–those who are given much are lucky bastards, and good luck to them. I do, however judge what people do to success, and if I were in Tim’s shoes, I would be acting very similar to him, except for you can substitute my version of Christianity for his.
Read the rest of…
The RPs Debate Tim Tebow: Robert Kahne Rebuts
By Patrick Derocher, on Thu Jan 19, 2012 at 9:15 AM ET Yesterday, of course, was a semi-official protest day against the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect Intellectual Property Act, the House and Senate versions of a bill that would, in an effort to protect copyright owners, severely clamp down on websites that reproduce copyrighted materials. The reactions were many, ranging from the juvenile to the nuanced, from the cosmetic (Google blacking out its logo) to the Earth-shattering (fortunately for this blogger, French Wikipedia remained active). Attached is a personal favorite from comedy site “The Oatmeal.” (Warning: Very funny, but borderline not safe for work.) [The Oatmeal]
By Jason Grill, on Wed Jan 18, 2012 at 8:30 AM ET  Jon Huntsman had a good chance to beat President Obama in 2012, but the only problem was he was too mainstream and bipartisan to be nominated by the Republican party this cycle.
As a Democrat, I admired and respected his resume, intelligence, and ability to put pandering to his party’s base aside. A lot has changed in a week.
Why would a candidate whose campaign has ran more anti-Romney videos on their website than any other campaign suddenly endorse Mitt Romney?
 Why would a candidate who has had deep family issues and a rivalry with the Romney’s now come to Mitt’s side?
One word…Ambition. There is no doubt Huntsman is coming to Romney’s side now for a potential secretary of state appointment should Romney take over the presidency.
Read the rest of…
Jason Grill on Jon Huntsman’s Withdrawal
|
The Recovering Politician Bookstore
|
