I'm already on the record saying that Paul Ryan is a terrible VP pick if you actually care about the budget. I stand by that assessment. So I will offer two additional thoughts:
1. This is an exercise in branding. Romney doesn't have to have Ryan on the ticket to make the "Ryan budget" his policy. Moreover, Romney is no George Bush...he is not going to let a VP be the power behind the throne. Ryan's usefulness to Romney ends with the campaign regardless of who wins the election.
2. Not that I needed one, but this gives me yet another reason to cheer Romney's defeat: I'd much rather Ryan stay in Congress.
2 comments:
not saying i will vote for Romney, (truth, i may not vote at all, 90% chance) but i have yet to see the status quo (Obama) make a case for itself.
I take Ryan as more of a sign that, unlike his opponent, Romney is going to stand for something besides Huey Long "soak the rich." And I shudder to think of Obama living in DC for four more years--the damage he'd do would far outstrip the damage control Ryan could do in Congress.
Post a Comment