The winnowing process

Last Thursday night after the Republican debate in Iowa I wrote about Timothy Pawlenty’s shockingly off-base and graceless attacks on Michele Bachmann:

He made a fool of himself when he argued that her claim to leadership was falsified by the fact that the Democrats passed the bills that Bachmann was opposing—as though she, a member of the House minority at the time, was in any position to stop those bills. In assaying such a weak argument he looked desperate and unprincipled…. she (fair and square) made mincemeat out of Pawlenty and his attempt to cut her down….

On Friday I posted a selection of L-dotters’ reactions to the debate, among which were:

• “Pawlenty came across as a total jerk.”
  
• “Pawlenty—just embarrassingly weak.”
  
• “Pawlenty was the poor and bitter relative who criticizes the rich relative who drove up in a Jag.”
  
• “He was making irrational accusations against the person he thought would be the easiest target based on the height difference.”
  
• “Pawlenty is heading toward the exit sign.”

And on Sunday morning, following his distant third showing in the straw poll, Pawlenty dropped out of the race.

There’s instant democracy for you. People see what the candidates are like, and those who don’t have it, are winnowed out.

(By the way, this doesn’t apply in the same way to non-serious candidates such as Huntsman, Cain, Gingrich, and Santorum, who don’t expect significant support and can keep going for a long time without any. But Pawlenty was running as a serious candidate.)

- end of initial entry -

Robert B. in Minnesota writes:

The Paw had been getting ripped here for months for his pretend conservative values on the campaign trail. Here he is known for being a RINO. Not only were Bachmann’s assertions correct, but the state budget nearly doubled during his eight year reign.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 15, 2011 10:30 AM | Send