Does the Wall Street Journal always suggest vice presidential choices for Republican tickets? This seems unusual:
Against the advice of every Beltway bedwetter, [Paul Ryan] has put entitlement reform at the center of the public agenda — before it becomes a crisis that requires savage cuts. And he has done so as part of a larger vision that stresses tax reform for faster growth, spending restraint to prevent a Greek-like budget fate, and a Jack Kemp-like belief in opportunity for all. He represents the GOP's new generation of reformers that includes such Governors as Louisiana's Bobby Jindal and New Jersey's Chris Christie. …
Personalities aside, the larger strategic point is that Mr. Romney's best chance for victory is to make this a big election over big issues. Mr. Obama and the Democrats want to make this a small election over small things — Mitt's taxes, his wealth, Bain Capital. As the past two months have shown, Mr. Romney will lose that kind of election.
I'm surprised how confident Republicans are in a plan that would gut food stamps and cut other safety-net plans to a barest suggestion of what they are right now. If this becomes a national debate, the Democratic argument basically boils down to "sharing is caring." I don't know how you can argue that. I have yet to hear Paul Ryan make an argument that convincingly cuts through the most basic lessons we all learn when we're three or four years old. (In the meantime, as the press eagerly speculates about the—Christ, I hate this word—"veepstakes," nobody on Twitter cares. Romney would have to do something vastly out-of-character to get anyone who is not a journalist interested in his choice for VP.)