Bloggerhythms 1/18/2012

There's a lot of comment in the news about Saturday's upcoming Republican presidential primary taking place in South Carolina. In an article by Chris Stirewalt on Fox news, he mentions Newt Gingrich's having done well in the Fox News/Wall Street Journal/South Carolina GOP debate, seemingly giving him new life in the campaign.

Yet, as far as debates go, I've mentioned them often before, but still can't figure out why anyone would put any stock in a candidates words when they have a proven track record that clearly illustrates their deeds and beliefs. And, in Gingrich's case, while he delivers perhaps perfect rhetoric, his history makes his uttering's a blimp-sized balloon of very hot air.

However, if on the other hand you want to use actual deeds as the measure of a candidate's beliefs, it might be helpful to look at the president's recent performance. Because lately, by using selected examples and slightly blurring the lines, he's been billing himself as a tax-cutting, oil-drilling, government-shrinking, terrorist-killing moderate, thereby taking away many Republican objections.

So then, what's the best way to determine the real probability of a candidate's future performance? I think it's the same answer as ought to be done in every aspect of life. Ignore what people tell you about themselves, gather all the hard information you can about the subject by yourself. Digest it thoroughly, making absolutely sure you understand it. Then, make your judgement based on documented fact.

However, if in actuality most people really did that, candidates like the current incumbent or Gingrich wouldn't have a prayer of election to any kind of office, much less the presidency of the United States.

That's it for today folks.

Adios