JONATHAN CHAIT JUNE 7, 2011
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size

In the face of what seems like obvious steps by Paul Ryan to at least generate interest in a presidential campaign, I've been utterly baffled by the lack of general media interest in the possibility that he might run. Can somebody tell me why I'm wrong? Okay -- you there, Jay Newton-Small from Time, with your post entitled "Why Paul Ryan Isn't Running For President." Here we go:
Generally, Ryan replies that he’s flattered but happy where he is. He talks about his young children and how his father and grandfather both died young of heart disease. Ryan, as a teen, was the one who discovered his father’s body. And while the Wisconsin congressman is doing everything in his power to avoid that fate – including leading daily morning exercise classes on Capitol Hill – he can’t be sure. There’s a reason, he says, that he’s not in leadership: He prefers spending weekends with his kids rather than crisscrossing the country fundraising and stumping for candidates, as leaders are expected to do.
He doesn't want to run because he wants to keep his exercise regimen? He does know that the current president is an exercise fanatic, as was the president before him, right?
Let's continue:
And, finally, Ryan says he’s “a policy guy who has to be a politician for the policy,” as he told me last year. He’s happy being Budget Committee chairman – and just look at the waves he’s managed to make there – burying himself with wonky spreadsheets and think tank white papers, dreaming of one day becoming chairman of the powerful tax writing Ways & Means Committee. To a deficit hawk like Ryan, that seat is the pinnacle of power, perhaps even more so than the Oval Office. After all, constitutionally, the House is the branch of government responsible for taxing and spending — not the White House.
Okay, unrelated point first: Stop calling Ryan a "deficit hawk." He voted for all of Bush's tax cuts. He voted for all the wars. He voted for Bush's Medicare prescription drug bill. He voted against the deficit-reducing Affordable Care Act. He voted against the Bowles-Simpson plan. He opposes any deficit reduction plan that increases revenue. Ryan is anti-government but he is clearly not a deficit hawk.
Anyway, back to the main point. We're supposed to believe that Ryan doesn't want to be president because he's a humble spreadsheet wonk? The degree to which Ryan has gotten reporters to swallow his crafted public image is just shocking. And I agree that Ryan would love to head the Ways & Means Committee -- so he could hand out tax cuts for the rich, because he's not a deficit hawk -- but the notion that he believes that job has more power over the budget than president of the United States is just daft.
What's more, this notion that Ryan just cares too much about the federal budget to run for president has a bit of trouble explaining what he was doing delivering a foreign policy address. Budget Committee chairmen don't do that very often.
Newton-Small provides one more reason:
Almost everyone I know in Ryan’s circle laughs this off, repeating to me all the reasons above why Ryan’s not going to run. I can think of at least one more: the Democrats’ demagoguery of Ryan’s plans for Medicare. They would love Ryan to run for President if only so they could keep spreading their message that Ryan, along with all Republicans who don’t disavow his plan, want to kill Medicare as we know it. (In fact, Ryan does want to fundamentally change Medicare, though those over 55 would be grandfathered in.) That’s probably why it’s mostly Democrats who are seriously pushing the notion that Ryan is running.
Mostly Democrats? I don't know anyone left of center other than me who's argued that Ryan seems to be considering a run. But conservative magazines and blogs are on fire with the notion. Here's conservative pundit/"political analyst" Michael Barone describing his attempts to personally beg Ryan to run:
One question hung over the meeting, and was briefly mentioned by National Review editor Rich Lowry in his 20-minute colloquy with Ryan after the speech: Will Paul Ryan run for president? Before the talk began I asked Ryan if he had read Paul Rahe’s ricochet.com blogpost entitled “Paul Ryan: A Duty to Serve.” Ryan has said that one reason he is not interested in running for president is that he would have to spend time away from his family, including three young children. Rahe, referencing Jennifer Rubin’s reflections in her Washington Post Right Turn blog on how Navy sailors and officers spend months away from their families, argues that Ryan has a duty to serve. His final paragraph is pretty strong stuff...
After the speech and colloquy I handed Ryan a paper copy of Rahe’s post and urged him to read it. He said he would. My guess is that Paul Ryan is giving serious consideration to running for president, and that something like Paul Rahe’s call to duty rather than any crass political calculation is likely to persuade him to do so. I note that over at the Huffington Post Jon Ward seems to be drawing a similar conclusion.
For the record, neither Barone nor any of the other people described in his post are Democrats.
I don't dismiss the fact that Ryan's allies laugh off the presidential run talk. But there's a way this game is played. Denying interest is the norm. Hinting that you might run isn't. Statements and actions suggesting interest in a run therefore carry more weight than disavowals of interest. And Newton-Small's reasons why he absolutely, positively won't run seem very weak.
10 comments
I don't want him to be anywhere close to the presidency, but the more the merrier! Let every single registered Republican in the US all run at once.
- frippo
June 7, 2011 at 12:36am
Small point. "Ryan is anti-government..." Um, no. Ryan is pro-wealthy and big business special interests. Your own examples prove it.
- jet
June 7, 2011 at 2:32am
jet, Whether Ryan is anti government may depend on how you define government. If someone wants to reform medicare so government no longer is obligated to provide medical care for seniors, but, instead, just provides a certain sum of money -- that type of reform would be be anti-government in the sense of, for me at least, a purpose of government. (I agree with Mr. Chait's overarching point that Ryan is not now nor has he ever been a deficit hawk. I define a deficit hawk as someone who puts balancing he budget above all else, which includes a willingness to raise rates instead of lowering top rates by 10% to 25%.)
- Nusholtz
June 7, 2011 at 6:23am
It is amazing how lemming like the MSM is when it comes to calling out Democratic partisanship and turning a blind eye to the GOP's. Newton-Small refers to the characterization of the GOP Medicare plan as demagougery as though it's accepted fact.
- NR409654
June 7, 2011 at 8:03am
I can't help but post Ik'e quote in the Shapiro piece: “The seeker is never so popular as the sought. People want what they think they can’t have.”
- rayward
June 7, 2011 at 8:05am
Nicely argued overall, but I think you're misreading the exercise point, bogus though it might be: the stress of the presidency might trigger a heart attack. Exercise is simply a means to fend off the feared genetic time bomb.
- adsprung
June 7, 2011 at 9:58am
I have no idea if Paul Ryan is going to run or not, and maybe he himself doesn't know for sure yet. But Jay Newton-Small's piece on why Ryan won't run is not at all convincing.
- liberalref
June 7, 2011 at 12:02pm
If I had to guess I'd say he's torn between a field of candidates that suck, which he would most likely win the primary, and going against one of the most popular politicians of his lifetime. I bet he's waiting to see if Obama become a weaker general election opponent in the next few months; if it starts looking like the country really will vote for "the other guy", while disregarding anything actually important, he'll toss his hat into the ring.
- GSpinks
June 7, 2011 at 12:14pm
Hey Nush, I'd generally agree that someone can be anti-government and not pro special interests. I just think it's not Ryan, and that we shouldn't frame him that way as it helps the Tea Party or other anti-government religiousts. As for the Medicare example, it's a cynical choice that's supposed to win a certain voting block. It also allows those wanting to defend it to argue it's non-Dickinson, when down the line it makes senior care unaffordable for individuals. The true death panel.
- jet
June 7, 2011 at 1:19pm
Whoever is Ryan's press agent needs to bottle what they give to so many in the press. Every piece of nonsense he puts out is brilliant! It is like the old Woody Allen line, "90% of life is showing up!"
- MikeB.
June 7, 2011 at 5:09pm