Opinion

Gregg Easterbrook

Who would Obama rather run against: Mitt or Newt?

December 15, 2011

By Gregg Easterbrook
The opinions expressed are his own.


Conventional wisdom says the Republican presidential nomination will go to Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich. This could change – don’t be surprised if it changes more than once. But suppose conventional wisdom proves correct. If you were Barack Obama, which would you rather run against?

A follower of polls might say, “Of course Obama wants to run against Gingrich.” An Obama-Gingrich race could end with a walkover for the incumbent, as happened in LBJ-Goldwater of 1964 and Nixon-McGovern of 1972.

Gingrich, some thinking goes, has a borderline personality. His past is full of strange diatribes on a weird range of subjects. As Ronald Reagan sometimes confused movies with reality, Gingrich confuses science fiction novels with reality. He threw a temper tantrum about his seat on Air Force One. Hardly anyone likes him personally. He was a transparent opportunist with Fannie and Freddie, organizations that voters hate. Gingrich is proficient at bloviating, and the one time in his life he held actual responsibility as Speaker of the House he did a terrible job. Would you trust the nation’s budget to a man who ran a $1 million tab at Tiffany?

Gingrich hectors others about their personal lives, while presenting himself as a champion of traditional values. Yet he admits betraying not one but two wives. Some kind of new low in politics was achieved when Gingrich formally pledged to stop committing adultery. Gingrich wears the letter H — for hypocrite — around his neck as Hester Prynne wore an A around hers in The Scarlet Letter.

These are sound reasons why Obama might prefer to face Newt. They are reasons the Republican National Committee is said to be feeling panicky about a Gingrich candidacy. Newt has the potential to lose by a spectacular margin, dragging Republican Senate and House candidates down with him. The Republican establishment has not forgotten how much damage he did to the GOP during his administration of the House. Run against a guy even your opponents despise? Sounds promising.

But, as you’ve probably guessed by now, there is a but.

Gingrich is a wild card. He probably would end up a flaming wreckage in electoral terms, but there’s a chance he could become seen as the man unafraid to bring sweeping change to an ossified Washington, D.C. There’s perhaps a 90 percent likelihood Obama would wipe the floor with Gingrich, versus a 10 percent likelihood Gingrich would stage an historic upset. In game theory terms, this invokes the minimax problem – should Obama maximize his chance of a huge victory or minimize his chance of a stinging defeat?

We must take into consideration that Gingrich can be vicious. He viciously denounced Bill Clinton and demanded his impeachment for having an affair, all the while, as we now know, Newt was busy cheating on his own wife. This shows Gingrich will say anything in order to serve himself. Of all GOP contenders, Gingrich seems the only one who might stoop to appealing to the very worst aspects of the American character — if he thought he would personally benefit.

Now consider Mitt Romney. He is perceived as being more appealing to independents than Gingrich. Romney possesses an air of maturity and reasonableness, qualities Gingrich sorely lacks. Also unlike Gingrich, Romney has been a success as an executive — running private businesses, the Olympics and the state of Massachusetts. There seems little chance Romney will stage a campaign that melts down and simply hands a reelection to Obama, which Gingrich might do. Because he is perceived as admirable, Mitt could help Republicans pick up House and Senate seats, even if they miss the White House.

Overall, in most respects, Romney is a significantly more formidable opponent than Gingrich. Yet there are reasons the president might prefer to run against Mitt.

His Latter-Day Saints faith could be a negative — one Obama need not even mention. Evangelicals normally turn out for Republican candidates, but they may be put off by the longstanding question of whether Mormons are Christians. As a churchgoer myself, I think Mormons have the same claim to be followers of Christ as anyone else does. But then I belong to an eccentric joint Christian-Jewish congregation that takes a broad view of spirituality. Many traditional Christians, however, are suspicious of the Mormon denomination. This could knock a couple of points off a Romney vote without the president having to do or say anything.

Romney’s other powerful negative is his background in private equity. Right now “Wall Street” is an expletive, and Romney is Wall Street up one side and down the other. His years running Bain Capital will be described in campaign advertising as vulture capitalism – corporate raiding, followed by layoffs and outsourcing with huge profits for wealthy insiders and average people out of work.

That may not be a fair charge, but it is a powerful one, with which Obama could pillory Romney. There is a clear political playbook to use against Romney.

This especially matters to the youth-vote/youth-volunteer equation. The young voters who enthusiastically supported Obama in 2008 now seem more turned off by him. But if 2012 pits Obama versus Mr. One Percent, young voters might get excited again. Obama would be offering them a chance to defeat Wall Street, at least symbolically.

Whatever other failings he may have, Romney has always comported himself with dignity. An Obama-Romney contest would be the kind of decorous, high-minded campaign at which the president excels. In an Obama-Gingrich race, practically anything could happen.

So forget the polls. If I am Barack Obama, I want to run against Mitt Romney.

Photo: Republican presidential candidate former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) looks on as fellow candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (L) makes a point during the Republican Party presidential candidates debate at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, December 10, 2011. REUTERS/Jeff Haynes

Comments
29 comments so far | RSS Comments RSS

If the goal is maximizing the chance of winning the election, the Democrats would prefer running against Newt. Not only is it almost a lock that Obama would win, but the Senate and House would gain seats.

If the goal is to minimize the risk for the country, then it is better to go against Romney. As you point out, the campaigns would be a lot more civil. I think Romney would make a good president, I don’t think Gingrich would be a good president. With that in mind, I would prefer an Obama vs Romney decision next November. On either case, a smart, dignified man would be president of the USA.

Posted by Quique12 | Report as abusive
 

The pity of Obama and his followers is that there is clear lack of a definitive platform for the future. At least FDR unveiled his New Deal and Johnson unleashed his Great Society model. For Obama, the cryptically-defined themes have been of Hope and of Change … fine words, but just words.

Gingrich and Romney have been battling for the hearts and minds of conservative Republicans. Conservatism has not been about conservation, preservation, progress, hope, mom, or apple pie. In the end, conservatism had been about a partisan return to the party’s platform of core values. And those core values were most certainly manifest in society during the Reconstruction Era … an era of Carpetbaggers, Robber Barons, Tycoons, lawlessness, exploitation, ignorance, and wide-spread poverty.

Conservative answers embedded within the Tea Party Movement are not solutions for a prosperous America. Conservatism is not inclusive, fair, constructive, or intuitive. The democrats appear lost; unsure of a direction but gravitating toward a self-sufficiency model.

I admit favor for the wisdom of the Progressive GOP movement. Looking beyond conservative sound bites, clever slogans, and slurs impugning leaders of the progressive GOP movement that nurtured this nation’s independence, it is certain that the citizenry will be less prosperous and less independent in a conservative America.

Posted by SanPa | Report as abusive
 

No Gregg. In my opinion, you have the Zeitgeist very wrong. Peggy Noonan at the WSJ is clearly superior to you in this realm. Paradoxically, if the US economy goes through calamity anytime between now and election time, he gets re-elected by a landslide as people scramble for a “nanny”. If the US economy is only bad, as it is now, he loses to whomever the GOP nominates. Newt is the “crisis leader” in people’s minds and in fact. Romney is the leader we’ve always preferred for calmer waters…just keep a steady course. Most average folk know this instinctively and this is why Romney isn’t getting traction. There are times in organizational turnaround situations when “dignified”, moderate leaders are inappropriate. Now is actually that time. Most don’t understand the depth of crisis we face in my opinion.

Posted by sarkozyrocks | Report as abusive
 

Almost certainly, on a comparative policy basis, Obama would rather run against Newt. But Newt’s more whacked-out than Mitt, so Newt presents a greater threat to the future of America if Obama doesn’t win.

Posted by Bob9999 | Report as abusive
 

Obama’s game-plan right now is clearly to use fear, uncertainty and doubt to manipulate the Republican nomination race so as to make it as long and expensive as possible.

Posted by matthewslyman | Report as abusive
 

I agree Mr. Obama should run against Newt that way if Newt loses, the country implodes and we can split it up and peacefully all go our own way with the socialists on the coasts happy and the freedom lovers in the heartland happy too. On the other hand, if Newt wins, he’ll turn back the clock on the socialists states.

Posted by Truth_Teller | Report as abusive
 

It doesn’t matter who Obama runs against, his presidency is over. The D’s are not reclaiming the House, and are very close to losing the Senate. He’s demonstrated he can barely govern when he had overwhelming margins in both chambers. He’s a liberal fantasy, and they are about to face the grim reality of what pursuing that has done to them.

Newt may of may not be a good president, but he will certainly tear enormous holes in Obama, and O does not take criticism well. That criticism will further weaken a not terribly effective leader.

This election is going to come down to White Middle-class swing voters. Not a group that the D’s have much street cred with. If his poll numbers with that group don’t start coming up, and soon, expect a dump O and draft Hil movement to quietly cut his throat.

Posted by ARJTurgot2 | Report as abusive
 

Of course, President Obama would prefer to run against Romney. When it comes down to it, Romney is generally indistinguishable from the President in healthcare reform, climate change, immigration reform (or lack thereof), abortion and many other issues. Romney is currently being recast as a man of the people, and the more conservative of the two, amusing in that Romney has never been anything other than wealthy, and a vacillating charlatan who earned his “business experience” as a venture capitalist, shutting down American companies and shipping jobs overseas. He has never been, and will never be, a “man of the people” regardless of what Obama’s allies in the media would suggest. Romney has repeatedly proven himself to be a condescending opportunist, most notably in his comment to Rick Perry a few debates ago, where he made his Christine Whitman-style defense to illegal immigrants he was paying for yard work; “I can’t have illegals, I’m running for President!” Romney is untrustworthy, a panderer who will say whatever he has to say to get elected to the prize he feels he so richly deserves. Why anyone would trust Romney is beyond me, and if Republicans are foolish enough to nominate him, he will go the way of Bob Dole and John McCain in the general. Far too many of us out here in the rank and file of Republicans will write in Ron Paul or stay home before going out to support Romney. I am personally a moderate Republican, but I will never vote for any candidate lacking firm political principles to the highest office in the land.

Posted by RBINTN | Report as abusive
 

@matthewslyman fear, uncertainty and doubt are part of republican tactics.

Posted by CASTnIRON | Report as abusive
 

Lets take this slow so there is no confusion. Bill Clinton was not impeached because he had an affair, as bad as it makes the country look when that is done in the Oval office. He was impeached because he lied to a grand jury and coerced others into lying as well. He was a known philanderer so if he would do this to cover up an affair, hardly anything new for him, wouldn’t he do it for things of more importance? The President derives his power from the citizens of the US. They have a right to take that power away when someone shows an inclination to abuse it.

Now to the issue at hand. I would prefer that Mitt Romney be the nominee. I think many people feel that way even those that today say they support Newt. What Newt has done that Mitt has not is show a willingness to defend the conservative point of view and to go after the Obama administration and Democrats on their own points of view. I think that if he did that, even a little bit, that people would shift. He is obviously the more stable and “Presidential” of the two candidates. Though I think that either stand a good chance to beat President Obama. The President seems to be positioning himself to run on envy and resentment. His message seems to be that for some to do better others have to do worse. I don’t think that that message plays beyond his base.

Posted by AustinG | Report as abusive
 

Obama should sit back and keep letting the Repub’s keep shooting themselves in the foot. The Repub clown-fest is rooted in “It’s all Obama’s fault” thinking, hence no substance on their part. Whether this fact makes you smile or not means you’re either part of the problem or enjoying the roller coaster ride to the finish line.

Posted by cm3kz0ut | Report as abusive
 

@AustinG

“We congratulate you on your simplicity, but do not envy you your folly”

You are absolutely correct in what you say about the impeachment charge. To the Left, that does not matter, because to acknowledge that is to imply the possibility of error. Their inability to accept those facts lie at the core of their current dilemma – Any criticism of any action or proposal or statement by them must be:

a) Racism
b) Sexism
c) Militarism
d) Wealthism
e) Issue from: Fox/Rush L/consuming too much Koch
f) Probably all of the above
g) Worse if you come from south of the Mason-Dixon Line or the vacuum between Chicago and Reno

because there can be no error in their thinking. They are pure, and they will teach us how to live. Except, it’s not working come election time, and 2012 is going to be another debacle for them.

Posted by ARJTurgot2 | Report as abusive
 

What about Ron Paul, is he not still in this race?

Posted by ActionDan | Report as abusive
 

All Romney has to mention is the government take over of GM, which caused the closing of many dealerships and the loss of many other jobs, all to save the larger company. Further, Solandra was an ‘investment’ error. Its product was too expensive for the market. Or, he can talk about the bankrupting of medical practices to socialize medicine. So our private equity president had better be careful in what he says about Romney.

Posted by Shuttle6 | Report as abusive
 

As an Independent I get the advantage of looking at both parties objectively with being shackled to either or drinking their koolaid. This government is a mess. Both sides are responsible. But there are distinct differences between the two. For the record, I believe that we should vote out every politician that has been in office for more than 1 term. The Republicans have made their policy abundantly clear. Give the richest americans a huge tax cut (creating even larger deficits), gut medicare and social security (which are only in trouble because Congress has mismanaged these programs..these are not FREE government handouts. I like most other American’s have being paying for these programs through pay roll deductions my entire adult life), maintain the status quo of spending $700B on the military (the military budget in this country is insane. Exactly WHO are we defending ourselves against that would warrant those huge sums of money? The super committee could have easily taken the entire $1.2T out of the defense budget and we would still spend more on defense than the rest of the world combined..you can not be taken seriously about smaller government and controlling deficits when you support spending this just absurd amount of money on defense ) and get rid of any regulations that attempt to stop the madness on Wall Street. They have been fighting Frank-Dodd tooth and nail. Meanwhile..if any of you have been watching the current MF Global debacle..it’s absolutely clear that we need more regulation. Any Republican making less than $100,000 a year that supports either Romney or Gingrich is a moron of biblical proportions. This is one of those cycles where the Democrats are less likely to cause greater damage than the Republicans. Boehner and McConnel are just nasty SOB’s.

Posted by xyz2055 | Report as abusive
 

Ron Paul would be his worst nightmare. Paul is cleaner than the Almighty. Moses was God’s lobbyist.

Admit the truth at least. But cant make hima martyr figure.

Good luck with democracy without a constitution.

Posted by goldeagle | Report as abusive
 

It does not matter much who he runs against. The republican candidates are all retards.

What I don’t understand is how conservatives “think” either of Gingrich or Romney would do a good job? After all, both are very wealthy so how can they represent the average citizen…

The republican party represents the rich. They are funded by the rich. They are slaves of the rich. They make laws in favour of the rich (tax cuts; low tax rates).

Do I need to go on?

Now the Democrats are not much better. However, when someone is on your side (read as: Obama) even just a little, then you should support that someone, no matter what!

That’s right you American dimwits!

Posted by JohnG-73645 | Report as abusive
 

I don’t want more war or corporate-bailouts. The only choice is Ron Paul. Obama and the other Republicans will go to the mat for more war and corporate welfare. This country has gone insane; they keep electing these fools who don’t care a lick about them.

Posted by TomPeppermint | Report as abusive
 

interesting how the media continues to ignore ron paul …

Posted by katezz | Report as abusive
 

BTW it’s an interesting aside about your religion! I love the ideas of your church – beside fellowship and sharing of insight into the scriptures, the Saturday/ Sunday Sabbaths must make it very convenient to share space too.

Posted by matthewslyman | Report as abusive
 

you forgot Ron Paul. Did you vote him off?

Posted by KJF | Report as abusive
 

Obama would gladly run against either and most likely win. Had a higher impression of Romney till I youtubed his interviews and debate performances – he’s vacant, will be a Mondale making a Reagan out of Obama for the democrats. Ron Paul is by far the best Republican bet against Obama, and I’m sure Obama’s camp will make it very nasty, very quickly against Ron Paul to try and stop him.

Posted by Sal20111 | Report as abusive
 

xyz,

For an independant you come loaded for bear with left wing talking points. There are no Republicans proposals to “gut” Medicare and Social Security. There are plans to make them sustainable. Unchanged they will consume the entire federal budget within a decade or two. So not only will we pass on some $20 trillion in debt to the next generation we will pass on a much greater burden in the amount that they need to pay into those programs. So if the program cannot be sustained by the time I would be able to collect from it how do you justify forcing me to contribute to it today?

The problem with Wall Street isn’t a lack of regulations. It is a lack of being held accountable for their own bad decisions. When we bail them out we create incentives for them to take on more and more risk. MF Global had more political connections than almost any other company. What regulations would have controlled them when politicians control the regulators?

Posted by AustinG | Report as abusive
 

Gingrich will crash and burn just like all of the other NotRomneys that have emerged as “frontrunners.” I don’t expect him to win either IA or NH, and he will then fade from view. Obama will face Romney whether he wants to or not, and this is why his campaign is training most of its fire on him.

Posted by Fishrl | Report as abusive
 

Conventional wisdom is the controlled media slant.
Observations show Ron Paul will be the next president.
Unless of course they do a kill Kenny (Kennedy) on him.

Posted by Butch_from_PA | Report as abusive
 

One thing overlooked by some commenters is the simple fact that Obama does not get to pick who he runs agains. He cannot manipulate the Republican primary or tell Republican primary voters who to select. That sort of conspiracy-mongering is just silly.

So far, none of the Republican candidates could win. I hope this sobers the Republican base which has veered so far to the right and is captive of talk radio they have killed off their own with ideological purity primaries that weaken their party. As a Democrat, I should be delighted, but as an American I am appalled.

Loyal opposition is vital to republican and democratic forms of government. An insane opposition is not healthy. We need the parties to be able to work together and squabble and compromise and serve the public interest – not the party interest. But we can’t do that when one party does not operate in the real world.

Posted by OregonRAA | Report as abusive
 

There is no chance that Obama could defeat Newt Gingrich. Unlike Romney, the Speaker would compete with Obama on the basis of an equivalent intellect; Romney, like the other GOP candidates just dont measure up to their level of brainpower (or knowledge), and everybody can see it.

As the only Republican with comparable experience, knowledge, and wisdom to tackle the President, Gingrich’s outstanding record as Speaker (four balanced budgets, huge surpluses, historic overhaul of the Welfare entitlement) during a similar period of divided government gridlock – which he triumphantly overcame to accomplish the above – will stand out to every voter.

He’s “Been there, Done that” with respect to the exact challenges facing us today, which Obama has demonstrably failed at: runaway deficits, ungovernable entitlements, and partisan gridlock. I campaigned for Obama in 2008, but his “purple state” rhetoric of syncretic policy solutions bridging the right-left partisan divide has been nothing but empty “hopey-changey” drivel.

After three years of “Amateur Hour”, its time for someone who’s experienced at fixing these problems, and there’s only one Republican, running or not, who fits that bill.

Posted by PressToDigitate | Report as abusive
 

The media continues to marginalize Ron Paul despite the fact he’s on the verge of winning the Iowa caucus. For the life of me, I don’t see what you guys fear from him or what you have to lose by giving the man the credit he is due. Apparently, millions of Americans support his message. What will you do if he actually wins the Republican nomination? Talk about Obama, the “unopposed” incumbent?

Posted by thedocument | Report as abusive
 

Round & Round we go! Everyone talking presidential politics and no one is addressing any of the real problems, except Newt. This fact scares the hell out of his opposition and the Obama crowd who are living in a dream world.

We have three branches of government and two of them are completely disfunctional. We have elected representatives in the White House and Congress that are not exercising control over the federal government, effectively running around in circles blaming the other party or “faction” for not being able to get anything done all the while allowing the Federal Bureaucrats to squandering Billions of Dollars.

The Republican and Democratic Parties and their national organizations are horns on the head of the same Evil Goat, tossing the body politic back and forth saying all the while, “It’s His Fault!!”

The Federal Bureaucracy is not being held accountable to anyone, for anything. We have Congress passing a Law and the Agency responsible for implementing it saying, “OH!, That’s
not what you really meant to do/say. This is really what you meant to do and then they promulgate rules and regulations accordingly. Case in point is the legislation regarding our personal credit history and access to same. You have companies pulling your personal credit reports, without your expressed permission or any other type of legitimate authorization because the Federal Agency involved deemed it to be in “your” best interest to allow this access in direct violation of the Laws that Congress passed to protect you. And what does Congress do: Absolutely Nothing. Most of these bums are too busy trading on “insider” information to worry about doing the job they were elected to do.

The Federal Bureaucracy in the United States is the best organized and funded “Communist Hog” that has ever existed in the history of mankind.

The only way to kill this self serving parasite is to strangle it by cutting the money off.

This will take a New President and a New Congress with 80% +- of the existing incumbents sent home to find real jobs.

We have hundreds of thousands of federal employees who don’t do anything but push piles of paper around in circles; they create no utility/nothing of value. These jobs shouldn’t exist.

Homeland Security is completely out of control and is on the verge of becoming the “Big Brother” prophesied by Huxley in “The Brave New World”, kicking down a families door at 4 in the morning because of child pornography. A father physically thrown down his own stairs by a federal agent when the porn was being generated by a computer several blocks away. What’s next; how about speakers in every room in your house listening to every thing you say and telling you what to do next.

By all accounts they are already listening.

The people in this country need to stand up, in mass, and vote for somebody who will try to get things under control.

Newt Gingrich is the only person who comes close to filling that bill. He knows how Congress works and he has a vision for the future of this country; for the people of this country that doesn’t include a Federal “Big Brother”. He is being attach from 360 degrees, from every quarter because “the powers that be” don’t want to lose the strangle hold that they presently have on the people in this country.

Wake up, they are taking everything! When Obama gave the Banks and Wall Street billions of dollars of taxpayer
money with no strings attached he gave them a license to steal. They are in the process of stealing the equity from every home owner who has lost their job. We are not talking about the speculators who bought to sell but the people who have been in their homes for 10, 15, 20 years. They have lost their jobs, there are no jobs, the equity in the home has evaporated and their bank is foreclosing. Homeless after 20 years of making mortgage payments on time.

This has to be the “Biggest Scam” in the history of this Country.

And Oh! By the Way! All of this money Obama gave away is now debt that the citizens have to repay.

Somebody please tell me the proper “Legal Ease” for BULL SHIT !!

Romney is a smiling empty suit of cloths and like Obama, will change “NOTHING” if he is elected. Ron Paul is a nice “nut” who hasn’t been able to do anything in Congress so why would anybody think that he could accomplish anything in the White House.

Everyone needs to remember that company’s and corporation’s are not people. They are legal entities that have legal rights but they are not citizens of this Country. The Federal Government’s only legitimate function is to serve and protect the welfare of the “citizens”. That is not being done and has not been done for a long time.

It is past time for a change.

This can come at the ballot box or at the point of a bayonet as prophesied by Jefferson & Lincoln.

With hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funds unaccounted for every time the GAO does an audit I think that there are a large number of people in the federal bureaucracy and Congress that could be charged with Treason.

I kind of like the way the China execute corrupt politicians; but it should be televised.

If the Citizens of this country have to have a revolution to get the federal government back under control it needs to include independent investigations of corruption, charges of Treason and Executions. The Talaban have a very effective way of saying “I don’t like You!”. They cut your head off.

The next American Revolution should bring the French Guilitine back with a few modifications. Automatic reset with duel oil groves and a self sharpening blade would be nice.

The most important modification for public executions however will be the self cauterizing function of the 100,000 volts when the blade nears the receiving block at the bottom. No blood so we won’t have any ladies fainting.

I envision a 100 Guillotines backed up to the reflection pool in front of the Washington Monument.

I only hope that the electric current doesn’t blur the vision of the people being executed so that they can see their bodies being kicked off of the execution platforms for the few seconds that they are still conscious as their heads bob in the water.

There will be substantive changes in Washington as the result of this next election. If this does not happen I Envision the next American Revolution unfolding.

As Martin Luther King once said, “I had a Dream!”.

In the DREAM that I just had I saw all of The Occupy Wall Street Organizations throughout the United States having coffee one Spring morning, in DC, in the middle of the week with a Half Million Vietnam Vets who brought the donuts as well as their shotguns, deer rifles and sleeping bags. This happened in the middle of the week because everyone important needed to be there in town, all of Congress and the Top Federal Bureaucrats.

Things get hazy and confusing at this point but I think the only people who got to go home at the end of the day were the secretaries and clerks.

The occupation was successful as the Army, Air Force , Navy and Marines refuse to fire on the Veterans and Homeland
security was no match for them.

The occupation last several weeks. Tribunals were set up to Hear and Judge multiple Charges of Corruption and Fraud.

The members of the individual Tribunals were nominated and then elected. Ten men per Tribunal, half of which were Disabled Veterans. The charges against the Administrators of the DOD and the VA were eagerly anticipated. After Congress the DOD, VA & EPA are the first Federal Agency’s investigated for corruption and fraud.

The most egregious of offenses resulted in guilty verdicts and the death penality. All of the death sentances were carried out at the same time so that everyone could attend.

A big Party, for the Resurrection of Civil Liberties in the Country. A thousand heads bobbed in the reflection pool the first day and everything was over in 30 days.

The Patriots of the Revolution went home to organize new elections with new rules.

In National elections for Congress and the Presidency each registered candidate is allocated $100,000.00 from the federal government and a maximum contribution of $500.00 from a private citizen. No Packs, Super Packs or Corporate campaign contributions or advertising of any kind is permitted. Future elections are by Citizens, for Citizens and any lobbying by Corporations or Professional Lobbyist is outlawed.

The Presidential primary dates are rescheduled taking the states in alphabetical order, first, and then clustered, adding 1 or 2 other abutting states based on population with elections held every 2 weeks. This will reduce the need for candidates to hop scotch all over the country. The focus of the campaigns will be individual debates in the various States. Super PAC TV Adds with erroneous information and insinuations will become a thing of the past.

As a reminder for the elected officials to follow the Patriots have left one of the Guillotines where it stood, as a monument with a large bronze plaque that reads:

Erected In Memory of the “Last” American Revolution

By The Citizen Patriots

Who Rose Up To Take Their Country Back

All Who Tread Here Remember These Deeds

For “You” Do Not Want Us Come Back

Then the dream ends with the chant of:

So Say We All

One has to wonder how so much stuff gets crammed into one dream.

So Say We All

These elected in l

Posted by rrrreale | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •