Saturday, March 13, 2010
Marc Ambinder jumps on the story that David Petraeus is heading to New Hampshire, correctly dismissing it as evidence that he might be toying with a run for president. As Ambinder points out, Petraeus has any number of reasons to go to New Hampshire.
However, Ambinder keeps the rumors of a Petraeus candidacy alive with this closing tidbit:
When Petraeus sets food [sic] in Cedar Rapids...now that'll be something to watch.
Such luminaries of the right and left as James Joyner and Matthew Yglesias have similarly registered their hopes and dreams.
Sadly, they are all wrong. David Petraeus, a student of military history, has given the "General Sherman," the totemic words required in American politics to eschew all ambition to run for president. While it is possible that some politician at some time might dishonor that tradition, I respectfully submit that there is no chance that David Petraeus would. Republicans, and the country, need to look elsewhere for their next president.
I don't think so. When I posted on the subject I got a quick request for a retraction from one of his aides. I think the idea is alive because he is so impressive, has such a track record of accomplishment, is the closest thing we have now to a legitimate war hero in the Eisenhower mode, and such a dearth of leadership in the Republican party.
Tigerhawk, I am likewise confident that the General has no intention to enter politics and especially to seek the Presidency. He is an impressive figure, but the modern campaign calls for a warped, obsessive, self-regarding fool.
And really, does anybody truly know the General's political leanings? Is he even a Republican? From what I have read or heard about him, he is more likely a non-practicing Democrat or more-or-less committed independent, or largely disdaining of partisan politics.
In 2012 America will have been at war in Afghanistan for a decade, nearly twice as long as we were involved in WWII, and most probably with no measurable results. Afghanistan will still be an a**backwards, lawless Hellhole, just like it has been for the past 500 years.
Will all due respect to the military, a military man is not the right candidate for the next election. Americans are tired of war, particularly pointless foreign wars in countries who never liked us much anyway. Candidates who run in 2012 on a pro-war agenda are going to get their heads handed to them on a platter by anti-war candidates.
The next presidency will be a thankless job. After four years of Obama swiping the national credit card, our national debt will likely exceed 100% of GDP, 130% if you count GSE debts which are guaranteed by the Federal Government. To avoid a dollar collapse, the next president will have to implement severe spending cuts and probably tax increases. You couldn't pay me to take the job.
Gregg would be an excellent president for the times.