The Ryan Pick

Here's a positive development courtesy of the Paul Ryan VP pick: Sales of Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged are spiking.

On the morning of the announcement, Atlas Shrugged was number 353 on Amazon's ranking of best sellers in books. As of this morning (Aug. 15, 2012) it is number 92 and still climbing.

Even though he has backed off recently, Ryan's past enthusiasm for Rand has drawn quite a bit of media and public attention. As a result, her philosophy is likely to reach a much broader audience during the current election cycle and beyond. I think this will aid the cause of liberty in the long run.

There isn't a horse race going on. It has NEVER been a horse race. Romney will win a landslide. Period. Here's why.

First, it doesn't matter if Obama is more or less popular than Romney. This race isn't about Romney and certainly not about Ryan. It is about Obama. All re-election campaigns are a referendum on the incumbent. Even Ford's election was beyond doubt a referendum on Nixon.

Second, given the above, the only question is this: Is Obama above or below 50% in the polls? To be even more precise since the general election isn't a direct democratic process, the question really is: Is Obama above or below 50% in the states? If Obama is above 50% in a state, he wins that state's electoral college votes. If he is below 50%, he loses those votes. Only if he is exactly at 50% does voter turn-out really matter and then it is a coin toss. The reason for this is that the "undecided" break for the challenger. The "undecided" are not undecided about the challenger but the incumbent. Given this, if people in a state say they would vote 47% for Obama and 43% for Romney, it isn't ... as the press likes to report ... +3% Obama but +3% Romney. Oh, and Bush Junior was just over 50% in the general polls just before the election and thus he won.

Third, Obama has been burning money faster than he has been taking it in and he has barely moved the needle. Romney's big ad push hasn't even started and he has a pile of money to spend from here to the election.

Fourth, Romney never had any problems smacking down any of his Republican competitors in the primaries. When he went after them, he buried them. He learned from 2008 how to be a battle-hardened candidate and it is now paying off for him.

Fifth, Obama's key demographic groups are leaving him. Even blacks are likely not to vote in the same record numbers as they did in 2008. Obama got 95% of the black vote in 2008 and all current polls put him at best in the mid-80s right now. College students turned out in droves for Obama in 2008, all current polling shows they will return to their previous low turn-out this year. Women went for Obama in 2008 but now Romney is nearly on par with Obama with them. Latinos went majorly for Obama in 2008 and current polls say he's lost major support with them. Only gays will be the one demographic that will come out strong for Obama but since they, at best, equal 2% of the population, they really don't matter electorally. The one state where they do matter a bit is California and that was never considered a battleground state.

Sixth, the ONLY way to re-ignite the Tea Party is by talking about government spending. You seem to have completely forgotten about 2010. Obama surely has. But for Romney to get the Tea Party behind him, he has to talk about the debt and deficit. Bringing Ryan on board as his VP insures this will happen. You think entitlements are a third rail in politics. It isn't with the Tea Party. Ryan is the WORST candidate that Romney could pick as far as OBAMA is concerned. Obama wants to talk about anything but the debt, deficit, and the economy, but the ONLY way you can talk about entitlements is by talking about the debt, deficit, and the economy. What Romney has done is laid a trap for Obama. Obama thinks he will win by "defending" entitlements, but that won't be the case. What Obama will end up doing is defending Big Government and that, as shown in the 2010 election, is a losing argument.

Seventh, it is the economy, stupid! If the economy sucks, the incumbent President loses. If the economy is strong or at least appearing to be getting stronger, the incumbent President wins. The economy sucks and there's no hope in sight. Obama will lose and lose in a landslide.

The "independent voter" is a bit of a myth.

Study, after study, has shown that those who identify or register themselves as independent, always vote for the same party, election after election.

The true way "independents" affect elections is by not voting in elections they can't quite support the candidate of their preferred party.

Jon--
I agree with much of what you write, so I'm loathe to post a comment when we disagree, but...
There's a flaw in your analysis of the Ryan pick. You're treating individual voters as mindless members of lazily-drawn categories. They aren't.
The phrase "all oldsters" is beneath you. Libertarians should hope that individual voters act as such, rather than as drones in some playbook of Morris or Axelrod. There are older people who understand that our current system of wealth redistribution isn't sustainable. And that, for the good of the republic and of citizens under 40, the federal spoils systems must be reformed. Substantially.
To the larger point of your piece, I'm more hopeful with regard to Rep. Ryan than I am about most Republicans. His record focuses more on the financial side of public policy than tinpot moralizing. In many ways, Ryan represents the best a libertarian can expect from the mainstream parties.
It's long been a criticism of libertarians (and Libertarians) that we are both too rigid ideologically and too cynical about the political process. To me, cynicism is the greater fault.
I expect that many older people--even though they're fat on the fruit of unsustainable government pension and benefits schemes--will think that Ryan is charming young man who's trying to do the right thing.
That thinking was enough to put Barack Obama in the White House. Maybe it'll be enough to put him out.

It amazes me how much like contract bridge the VP pick is. In bridge, you give your partner information by your bid. That's what Romney did here. If he'd picked Portman, it would have been considered safe and milquetoast. The fiscal conservatives would have continued to mistrust him. By picking Ryan he tells the conservatives and the tea party (which is half libertarian) that he is serious about fiscal reform and won't become a born-again Obama once elected.