Paul Ryan - 2012's Goldwater? Not so fast...

David Frum, former Bush 43 speech writer turned "journalist" posted a piece this morning making the case that Paul Ryan may be the Barry Goldwater of the 2012 presidential election.   

I used to worry that Sarah Palin would be the Barry Goldwater of 2012. My bad. Paul Ryan is the Barry Goldwater of 2012.

For starters, it may serve everyone's interest to review how Goldwater gained his oft cited presidential election reputation.  It's funny how little time it takes for a great distance to grow between objective historical record and glorified innuendo when it comes to politics.  So let's recap.  In the 1964 election, only one year after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Senator Barry Goldwater faced off against Kennedy's vice president Lyndon Johnson.  Goldwater was annihilated, winning only 52 electoral votes in 6 states.  Why did Goldwater lose?  In a country still grieving the loss of a popular young president, did any Republican candidate really stand a chance?  Kennedy only won 22 states in 1960 but a year after his death, his successor was able to carry 44 states and DC.  Others might say that Goldwater was too extreme in his conservative views and that he divided the Republican party.  The reality is that the country was simply not far enough removed from the tragedy of Kennedy's death to elect a third president in 13 months.  As Goldwater said, "We would have lost even if Abraham Lincoln had come back and campaigned with us."


So the analogy between Palin, Ryan, or any other candidate in 2012, or for that matter 2008, 2004, 2000, etc., is simply not one that I understand.  There has, thankfully, not been an analogous election scenario since then.  But for the sake of argument, I think that Frum's point is more that Paul Ryan represents an ideology that is perhaps too far right, simply not popular among most Americans and would divide the Republican party.  As for that argument, I would agree that his perspective on Medicare is not widely popular and he would hardly stand a chance in the primaries, much less a general election.  However, maybe a better comparison to the late Goldwater would be Ron Paul.  Goldwater was firm in his constitutional beliefs and is widely credited with shaping the libertarian movement to which Paul subscribes.  One view on Goldwater's loss in 1964 attributes it to his vote against the Civil Rights Act on the basis of infringing on states' rights.  This is a perspective that Ron Paul shares that is still very unpopular among voters.  Although Goldwater is credited with the revival of the Republican party, helping pave the way for conservatives like Ronald Reagan, he was also a firm opponent of the Religious Right.  Goldwater supported the legalization of medical marijuana, the legalization of abortion and even the right of gay people to serve openly in the military.  These are all positions that Ron Paul supports and for which he is vilified in the media.  


So to Mr. Frum I would say - when drawing comparisons between candidates today and a candidate of 50 years ago, first we should be sure to understand the historical context of each election, at least choosing the right candidates to compare.  And Paul Ryan is no Barry Goldwater.