Now on the website, two new takes on the Ryan pick.William Pfaff looks at the implications for U.S. foreign policy:
Neither Mitt Romney nor Paul Ryan seem close to the hawkish ideology that gave the United States its present military deployments in Asia and Central Asia ... But they seem to have no clear intellectual position at all, which is to say that they might easily become the instruments of others with aggressive ideologies of their own. Certainly the Netanyahu government in Israel counts far more on the Republicans than on Barack Obama to endorse or reinforce any Israeli attack on Iran, and Mr. Romney himself has announced that in his mind Jerusalem already belongs whole and entire to Israel.
E.J. Dionne, meanwhile, looks at how down-ballot GOP candidates are putting distance between themselves and the vice presidential pick:
There is the idea of having Paul Ryan on the Republican ticket, and then there is the reality.If conservative ideologues are over the moon at having their favorite conviction politician as Mitt Romney's vice presidential running mate, many Republican professionals -- particularly those running this fall -- are petrified. They freely express private fears that Democrats will succeed in Ryanizing the entire GOP.
That anxiety may be justified, according to Sam Wang of the Princeton Election Consortium. His polling numbers indicate that if the subject of GOP budget priorities remains at the forefront of the campaign, the probability of Democrats retaining control of the Senate rises to 82% -- from 52% if there is no "Ryan effect." His summation: "Romney effectively threw Congress under the bus to get a possible (but not guaranteed) advantage for himself."