Next Stop, Michigan
The real fun this Tuesday will be on the Republican side, as Mitt Romney tries to make a stand and stay in the race with a win in his home state. There is no question that McCain has been enjoying a remarkably robust turnaround, but he faces an uphill climb in Michigan. There have been a number of recent polls out showing either Romney or McCain winning, but the RealClearPolitics average has Romney ahead by a nose at the moment. Huckabee is the dark horse, but it would be a real shocker if he finished higher than third.
The Democrats? Well, if it’s not Hillary, that’ll be the upset of the century, since it’s either Hillary or uncommitted:
…[T]he Democratic primary is largely a bust, in part because Edwards and Obama have taken themselves off the Democratic ballot to avoid angering Iowa and New Hampshire, which were unhappy Michigan moved up its primary. All of the candidates except Dennis Kucinich bowed to demands from the two states not to campaign or run ads in Michigan, so there’s no rallies or town hall meetings for Democrats to attend or even a barrage of TV ads to watch.
The primary is such a low-key event that most of the Democratic candidates plan to attend a Nevada debate Tuesday night rather than waiting for the returns to come in.
Making the election even less of a factor is the move by the national political parties to take away all of Michigan’s 156 delegates to the Democratic National Convention in Denver and half the 60 delegates to the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul.
State party leaders are confident the delegates will be seated and plan to move ahead with their delegate selection process. But for now, Tuesday’s election will result in 30 delegates — less than Iowa’s 40 — being divided among the GOP candidates and no delegates at all going to the Democratic ones.
Hmmm…well, if the state leaders are right and the delegates are seated anyway, Hillary just picked up a big bunch for free…
If Romney wins Michigan — or even comes close — it’ll be an unfortunate victory for pandering. The primary issue is jobs, with Romney riduclously stating that he can bring them back. McCain’s right: the jobs are gone. Manufacturing jobs in the United States have been declining for 30 friggin’ years. We’re not going to be a manfacturing economy. What we need to do is make the transition to a more information and service-based economy as smooth as possible.
Mitt Romney pandering? You don’t say
Not sure if I missed this discussion or what, but if so I’m interested to know who the current candidate crop would choose as their running mates if they get the nomination:
McCain: Would he choose Huckabee to try to get the evangelical vote out in full force?
Huckabee: Would be choose McCain to get at least some independents to vote for him?
Romney: Will he call the mothership to send a candidate?
Giuliani: Will he call Bernard Kerik?
Anyhow, just wondering if any of these people would consider choosing other major candidates as running mates or if they’d pull a Bush and find another Cheney. Shoot, maybe they’d hire Cheney to find a VP and we would get Cheney again!
Perhaps Mitt is taking a page from history, like the Chrsyler bailout which unlike many other federal bailouts was a net win. Even tho Chrysler may only be a shell of its former self today, it did have a productive & taxable run for almost 3 decades as opposed to disappearing in bankruptcy.
He may be looking at the Harley Davidson comeback, where a tariff was placed on bikes over 700cc. This gave HD some breathing space to re-engineer & re-tool. The turn-around was so successful, that Willy G even asked Congress to repeal the tariff a year earlier than scheduled. HD has roared away and never looked back.
And of course, he must be looking at McCain-Kennedy-Edwards which, if unchecked, will surely push Detroit headlong into the grave.
Bottomline, there are things that can be done to help the Big 3 meet its challenges. Things like figuring how to resolve the pension issue, high labor costs and ensuring that they can compete in foreign markets.
Of course he’s right. He designed the MKE to kill off industry in the name of saving the planet. All he’s saying is that’s the way it’s going to be, suck it up and move on and hope that the replacement jobs will even hope to come close to supporting the accustomed living standards.
Actually, the benevolent dictator is doing us all a big favor in his secretive end-run. By getting MI to accept that its glory days are over, he will have simply disappeared the pension problem, killed off the unions and saved the planet in one fell swoop.
So there’s our choice America: On one hand, we have a former CEO who believes things can turnaround and on the other, a “maverick” politician who has no qualms making backroom deals (McCain-Feingold assault on freedom of speech, McCain-Kennedy immigration open-enrollment blitz, Gang of 14, etc, etc) to for the good of America because we-the-people are too dumb to decide for ourselves.
1) Chrysler was bailed out primarily because they made tanks and other vehicles for the military. Secondarily because it would have been a national embarrassment if one of the Big Three tanked (although with the state of Ford these days, it’s more like the Big Two and a Half). However I agree that the bailout was successful.
2) Only Detroit can figure out “how to resolve the pension issue, high labor costs and ensuring that they can compete in foreign markets.” I don’t see any useful role for the government here. I think they made a pretty good start with the recent UAW agreement (in fact I think it will go a long way to solve long-standing problems, and I bought GM stock as a result. Also I think that GM has solved a lot of its quality issues. I own some Toyota also: I think these two companies will continue their dominance for some time to come.)
mike, a good topic, and one deserving of its own post – as soon as I get to feeling better…
Peter, concur.
1) After the bailout, they spun off the military stuff, which would have been snapped up by GD and others anyway, had the bankruptcy ensued. Speaking of embarrassments, the K-car was quite the dog, but it served its purpose.
2) Only Detroit can figure out… Indeed, no useful role for the government. If the Big 3 and unions can’t come to mutually beneficial terms, then let them sink. Actually, it’ll be the workers, since the Big 3 will offshore the rest of their production. In any case, the Big 3 is a misnomer, since Toyota muscled its way in. I’m interested in seeing what happens, not only with GM, but with Chrysler, now that the ex-CEO from Home Depot is in charge.
Punditish,
I understand that manufacturing has been in decline for 30 years. It’s the main reason I migrated out of Flint 27 years ago, ahead of Michael Moore. The glory days of unions and auto towns are long over. However, it doesn’t mean that Made In USA manufacturing can’t be profitable. The millstone hanging around the Big 3 is their legacy pensions and greedy unions.
Hardly a non-sequitor, if McCain didn’t think we were dumb, he would have been more open about his legislating and eager to discuss/highlight the merits thereof, rather than trying to railroad them thru. On each of his bills that I’ve mention, he has been less than forthcoming and livid when questioned. Now that he’s running for POTUS, to use your word, he’s mischaracterized the details and sequence of events.
Here are the facts:
1) the US has plenty of manufacturing success stories in the 21 Century.
2) On average, according to BLS, the newly created jobs pay more than the jobs lost.
3) The former unionized workers will never see the likes of the inflated salaries & bennies again, McCain’s retraining programs notwithstanding.
4) The State govt is primarily responsible for making MI uncompetitive by running off businesses and driving the economy into the ground thanks to its tax codes.
5) MKE will only speed up the decline of the automotive industry and inversely raise the death toll.
6) If not for the DNC-owned auto towns, MI would most likely be a red State based on election trends. IIRC, Kerry won with 54% in ’04.
Seems to me that Mitt & McCain are targeting different folks. McCain is appealing to the union worker, i.e. Wayne County, with talk of the Feds funding the retraining. Just how far is that going to fly when the unions realize that re-purposed workers most likely won’t be in a union, nor would they make as much?
Mitt is appealing to conservatives, i.e. Oakland County, who realize that if the govt backed off, the attrition in manufacturing could be slowed and surplus workers dispersed to different sectors, while allowing the manufacturers to regain their footing.
A turnaround also implies turning around the public sector and cutting wasteful spending. Are you aware that a Detroit Public School janitor can make upwards of $110K? All in all, the MI public sector is a royal mess and it will be painful trimming the morbid obesity.
In any case, I hope that when it’s all said and done, Jenny Granholm gets the boot and a real conservative takes the Governor’s Mansion. It certainly doesn’t help that the last Republican Governor was a RINO who loved to tax & spend.
Well, well, well.
I just popped over to Michelle Malkin’s to do a bit of catching up. Lo & behold, looks like my hunches have wheels. Poor John McCain, booed by the AFL-CIO, pouts and threatens to walk off the stage.
My, where have we seen this attitude before? Let me count the ways a leopard can’t change spots.
Why on earth would his new-found, and soon to be retrained, buddies at the AFL-CIO boo his “straight-talk”?
Why, it’s as clear as the nose on my face… It’s the MK & MKE, Stupid.
The point is that the “straight-talk” ain’t all that. It wasn’t in 00 and won’t be in ’08. McCain has nothing substansive for MI beyond the “infamous” soundbite that he’s already dropped like a hot potato.
I don’t think Romney is “simply” saying we can bring them back – MI’s problems are systemic and deeper than just auto jobs and that’s what he’s discussed beyond that 5-sec sound bite. And that resonates with the conservatives.
Well, that explains everything. Name one candidate that hates immigrants? The issue isn’t immigration, it’s illegal immigration. Or if as Huck puts it, “illegals are God’s children…”, well, aren’t hard working citizens God’s children too? What right do illegals have to come in and steal our birthrights?
FWIW, I used to think I could hold my nose and vote for John, not anymore.Here’s why McCain will be political history in ’10 when Arizona tosses his vaunted arse out on his ear – his immunity card as POW is all used up.
No point discussing McCain & Romney’s objectives for MI. We’ll soon see who is buying what. However, I’d point out that the AZ GOP took the extreme step of disowning him. McCain is the prime example of why the 19th should be repealed & post haste.
You consistently conflate illegal with legal immigration. My mother is a legal immigrant and the issue of illegals pisses her off royally and she is far from alone. I’m all for more immigrants – provided we know who they are and that they buy into the American dream lock, stock & barrel.
In OK, we’re proving Fred’s Point that we don’t need to deport 12 ~ 40 million illegals. They deport themselves when they find they can’t work, rent or buy property. So far, I’m happy with the results, I accept the attendant rise in costs and I’m heartened by rising numbers of States wanting to emulate OK 1804. The sanctuary States better wake up soon or they’ll find themselves soaking up the rest of the self-deporting illegals that chose to stay in country instead of going home. We’ll see once and for all, who benefits and who loses from illegal immigration.
Sounds cold hearted, but it has to start somewhere before it gets worse. Oh well…