Vivek Ramaswamy is surely the most interesting of the Republican challengers to Donald Trump for the Presidential nomination. Like nearly all the others he was way behind Trump a few weeks ago. I guess he still is, but not quite so “way.” Sometime in July he was at or near a 1% favorability rating among Republican-oriented voters. Since then Trump has subtantially held his own, DiSantis has entered a well-deserved decline of nearly 20% and Ramasamy has risen to 11%.

Ramaswamy(for the good of my arthritis-ridden typing fingers let’s refer to him as “VR”)is in my opinion both deserving and not deserving of this rise. OK, what’s that mean? Well, as you may have guessed, I will explain.

He deserves this attention because he is clearly the most exciting of the Republicans running for President. He is young, attractive and self-confident. He is of South Asian(Indian) descent. He is from Ohio(OK, maybe that’s not an advantage–anyway his birthplace was the southwest, Cincinatti and mine was Akron, Northeast). He’s a Harvard graduate and not yet 40, he’s a billionaire. But most of all he is ARTICULATE. Hey, an articulate Republican presidential candidate, the first one since–well, never mind. But his looks and personality combined with his extremely accomplished speaking ability combine to set up an excitement around him not much different that of JFK six decades ago(I remember him–the greatest speaker I have ever heard in American politics)

VR is like that. Among the hopeless(Doug Berman), the clueless(Ron DeSantis)and the political martyr(Chris Christie)VR is the obvious standout. Some of the others(Pence, Haley, Scott)might be OK but have next to no chance. I doubt if VR has a really big chance myself, but you never know and if the accumulation of indictments against Trump and his own apparent depression and confusion they have caused last awhile, then his still formidable candidacy might collapse. It that case–unlikely, but by no means impossible- there could be a free-for-all. VR might well emerge the winner.

I see two or three reasons for this. He would, as I suggested above, be by far the most articulate candidate and likely the most intelligent–certainly the smartest seeming. After years of uninspired leadership some Republicans might be ready for that. He would also, for reasons noted previously, be so different a Republican leader, that those despairing of the party’s path might see him as the way. Furthermore, in basic philosophy and attitudes he does not vary a whole lot from Trumpian/Republican orthodoxy most of the time. So he could be excitingly different and still an adherent of the party’s attitudes most of the time, enough to satisfy many conservatives.

My own feelings about him are mixed tending toward negative. On the whole, I like to listen to smart, well-educated people with good speaking abilities, so I find him rather fascinating. To the extent that I can grasp it, however, his domestic policy is a re-hash of Trump cum old Republican(pre-Trump)ways. He will find excuses not to help(much, anyway)those truly in need. He would use the legitimate crisis at our Southern border to enforce draconian policies(yes, something DOES need to be done, just ask the mayor of New York)but I would rather someone else did it(Joe Biden, maybe). He falls in with the pack on claiming that the many indictments against Trump & co are politically inspired and says he would pardon Trump if necessary. These things I have mentioned here are a combination of statements of his and inferences but I think they hold

His views on foreign policy I find alarmingly like the isolationist wing of the party and in keeping with right wing American foreign policy thinking for most of the past century.(See my 8/3 blog on isolation for some background). Worst, and likely indicative of his overall stance, he is doubtful about Ukraine. He even suggested to Jim Acosta he might give parts of it back to Russia!! Without suggesting its out-and-out abandonment, he talks about unnecessary American entanglements abroad and getting involved in other people’s business. This is to suggest it would not be our business if Poland or Estonia was somehow, directly or indirectly, taken over by Putin and Russia. And make no mistake, this is not impossible.

This sounds disturbingly like Trump–and also like the America Firsters of 1939-1941, the Republicans who opposed NATO in 1949, and, to be frank, like the British opposition to Churchill in the late ’30’s. What history student forgets that memorable description of the the Nazi-Czechoslovakian confrontation?-“A quarrel in a far away land among people of whom we know nothing.” I want to go easy on condemnation of Halifax, Chamberlain and the others who agreed, and I doubt the wisdom of dismissing them as “appeasers” with no other comment. These were the people who had fought(or whose young relatives had)WWI and they knew of its horrors. But in the long run they were wrong and a few years later the Luftwaffe was over London and other UK cities wrecking havoc. Well, Putin is now Hitler, Zelinskyy is Churchill and Joe Biden is FDR. The similarities are not perfect but they’re close enough. Mr Ramaswamy, please take note here.

What the results of all this will be I hesitate to predict. But I will say this to Joe Biden and the Democrats. Watch out for this guy. He’s smart, articulate and difficult to attack. He would couch his statements in complicated and nuanced ways that would him much harder to debunk than Trump was. Despite the fact that Trump’s BS often worked, this would likely be a strength for VR. So watch it, Dems. He could be a dangerous opponett. Do not risk underestimating him.