Here’s a prediction: Peter Schiff will do extremely well at fundraising in his pursuit of Chris Dodd’s Senate seat, but in the end he’ll fall completely flat.
The problem? He’s too principled. Now that doesn’t sound like a bad thing. And in a normal person, it isn’t, but it’s a liability when you’re running for office.
The thing is, you can’t just keep slamming the Federal Reserve, or trying to bring every question back around to it. His frustration (and that of many others) is legitimate and deserves recognition.
But voters are biased towards politicians that give slick, solution-ey sounding answers. If someone asks the candidates about the foreclosure crisis, voters will gravitate towards the guy with a 5-point plan about workarounds, and loan mods, and state assistance, and all that, even though the answer is BS.
The guy who says, “We need to embrace sound money so that we avoid bubbles, and so people will be encouraged to live within their means,” is probably being much more honest, but nobody wants to vote for that.
If you think this is untrue, then you have to explain the utter failure of “principles” candidates over the years, and the success of politicians who promise neatly-packed solutions.