In a few short months, primary voters will begin selecting the Republican presidential nominee. The two debates thus far have been underwhelming. A third is approaching on Nov. 8, but it, too, promises to be the kind of unhelpful event that lacks the virtue of at least being entertaining. Yet I’ll be watching — tuned in and deciding which candidate to support. I’m not a Republican, but I’ll play one on Super Tuesday, March 5.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The current field of Republican candidates offers a master class in making a comically complex decision tragically complicated.
Those who do vote in general elections often stick to partisan lines that track through a tangle of cultural, ideological and social markers.
Former New Jersey governor Chris Christie is reprising his role as decimator, a title earned with his one-liner daggers that hurried the demise of Florida senator Marco Rubio in 2016.
Former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley’s talent seems to be catching the prevailing political wind, whatever direction it blows.
Her fellow Palmetto State politician, Sen. Tim Scott, is also a curious read, alternating between a compassionate conservative who thinks about inequality and a partisan foot soldier who hopes to prove his bona fides by trash-talking Democrats and progressives.
One idea is to assess candidates’ constitutional character, which Harvard political scientist Dennis Thompson describes as “the disposition to act” in pro-democracy ways by modeling “such qualities as sensitivity to basic rights, respect for due process in the broad sense, willingness to accept responsibility, tolerance of opposition, and most importantly a commitment to candor.”
The original article contains 891 words, the summary contains 183 words. Saved 79%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!