GOP 2012 field emerges Issues Beyond Palo Alto, posted by Willy SM, a resident of another community, on May 24, 2011 at 8:57 am
Moving this to a new thread (from: “GOP cancels 2012 Reagan Debate” Web Link )
Apparently, the last couple GOP presidential threads scared off the conservatives on these boards from making public their choice for the GOP nomination, to see who becomes the candidate against President Obama’s reelection. While several here have ventured some of the usual suspects in a broad, generic fashion, none have been proud enough of anyone in the GOP field to pick a winner.
As noted before, by this time in the 2008 cycle, every major candidate had not only formed a committee, but had declared and was actively pursuing the nomination. Debates were planned and eagerly anticipated. As noted in the previous thread, the GOP originally planned a debate on May 2, which was postponed 6 months due to the general disarray of the GOP field.
Why are the candidates lagging?
Is it they want to read more polls to understand how strong the President will be in 2012?
Is it that they do not want to commit to the political suicide of too early declaring, or not, their allegiance to the radical, "right wing social engineering" of the GOP/Ryan budget bill that privatizes Medicare, gives new tax cuts to billionaires and maintain subsides for Big Oil, the most profitable industry ever?
Waiting appears to be the right move, allowing them to avoid head on questions on those and other absurd fringe questions, such as whether they support birthers.
Most obvious with this field, is who is NOT in:
“[Daniels'] exit illustrates the degree to which the GOP race is being shaped by who’s not running. Consider the list of would-be candidates who’ve passed on a campaign in the last four months: Mike Pence, John Thune, Haley Barbour, Mike Huckabee, Donald Trump and now Daniels.
Add Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan and Rick Perry – Republicans with star power who’ve said flatly they won’t run – and it translates into a GOP establishment deeply worried that the flawed options they’re left with won’t be any match …
“Insofar as politics abhors even a near-vacuum, others are bound to get in,” Weekly Standard editor William Kristol predicted this morning, suggesting a race that could “remain open and fluid until Thanksgiving.”
One Daniels friend … was blunt when asked about who in the current field was now more appealing: “None of the above.” “
All the above likely saw the writing on the wall and may be protecting their reputation from this toxic tea bagging environment, marshaling their reputations for an open 2016 race.
To recap the current field:
- Mitt Romney: Out fund-raised all contenders, as he did initially in 2008. Will he continue, or like 2008, will his fundraising falter after his Mormon connection taps out, i.e. reach the legal limits. Bigger question: can he get past Rombamacare to even place in the top three in Iowa? He’s already chickened out in Iowa, and is barely campaigning there.
- Tim Pawlenty: Announced yesterday, but was pre-empted on the news stations by "O'Bama's" ancestral visit to Ireland.
Pawlenty - always the personality questions! Timmy Snore is the anti-Romney at this level, but will soon be replaced by Huntsman. Tim as a VP candidate?
- Sarah: says this week she has "fire in her belly,". (I think it’s the moose burrito.)
Sarah joins a long list of recent GOP candidates that use the press and hints of a campaign to get media exposure and publicity for personal gain: fox appearance money, speaking fees, increasing book sales, etc.. As with previous iterations of Newt and Rudy.
Nonfactor, won’t run, unless Santa brings the Dems a great big early Christmas gift.
* Second level:
- Michele Bachmann: Tea bagger fav. Grew up in Iowa. Will have big effect early, if she enters. Big in Iowa, not so much in NH, a small rebound in SC with haley's help, then out?
See also: Dem Christmas gifts.
- Jon Huntsman: What’s not to like? Serious. Dignified. Statesmanlike. Looks really good on the tube, maybe better than Mitt.
Oh, yeah, there’s this: supported an individual mandate. Is Mormon. Believes in climate change. Laughs at birthers, just like the normal folks.
Which is deadly in the GOP primaries. Jon Huntsman is in this to build name and cred for 2016, which would be difficult for him to do then in the face of Christie, Jeb and others. But can he make a go of it this time? Looks likely.
- Newt: What a difference a week makes. Was: the corporate media’s choice for serious candidate in the primaries. Now: will he make it to the primaries?
Has Newt received his thank you note from the Dems yet? “right wing social engineering”, “privatizing Medicare is extreme” and "any ad which quotes what I said on Sunday is a falsehood..."
The gifts that just keep giving. Gamed the system for years as a potential candidate to increase speaking fees and book sales. Destroys it in a day. One doesn’t even hear about the ethics or cheating scandals anymore.
- Herman Cain: G'father. Clearly won the first debate. That's his 2012 highlight reel right there.
- Ron Paul: permanent candidate. Give it to the guy, he's a believer in his libertarian values, right down to declaring heroin and prostitution should be legalized. At a GOP debate.
- Fred Karger: Log cabin republican. God luv ya, Fred. Because the republicans sure won't.
- Gary Johnson: I haven't googled him.
- Rick Santorum: Sadly, I have googled him.
Care to pick you man/woman?
Any conservative pride in any of these candidates?
My opinion? Looks to me like a cast of characters that will give the GOP a nominee whose sole job will be to motivate the base to get out and vote for down ticket races, because current numbers show it’s unlikely they will win.
We’ll get to those down ticket races - the lopsided Senate race (once again, Dem’s have to defend the majority of seats up for re-election this time around,) and an interesting House cycle - in a few months.
Coattails are always important. And I don't see GOP voters getting motivated by any winner of this group.
Unless things change, 2012 will be ALL about the coattails.
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 25, 2011 at 9:59 am Perspective is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
Just common sense. Tell you what, why don't you let your worst enemy choose your husband or wife?
The left chose McCain, which is why we lost, having a choice between left and lefter, many of us simply stayed home.
If someone is going to take the "credit" for destroying the country, we prefer it be someone who has the label "Democrat", not carrying a false label of Repub. ( Bush/Ruling Elite Repubs were too far to the left re: government growth....we stayed home for 2008 in disgust over TARP and "stimulus" checks sent out to buy votes, in disgust over a man who, though a decent guy, had authored anti-free speech McCain-Feingold, had trashed our military in Europe, and was completely and always on the side of bigger government).
I am taking a wait and see approach. We'll see who comes forth by the time the nomination comes around. It will take a brave, brave person who will be willing to be a target and take the full load of crap that will be flung his or her way by the media and democrats, and stick to his/her principles, be able to articulate and teach. I have no doubt that whoever it is, will not have "enough experience" and be "right wing extremist", want to "feed granny dogfood" and "hurt children's education" for the leftists in our media, who claim 93% to be "liberal". Great news sources.
Bottom line, though...I will now vote for ANYONE who is not a democrat..period...I think the USA has learned its lesson about the far left takeover of JFKs party, and the left takeover of MLK's party. They must both be rolling over in their graves.
Posted by That User Name is already, a resident of another community, on May 25, 2011 at 10:56 am That User Name is already is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
Yes, we understand you would vote for a madman if you had to make the choice: "I will now vote for ANYONE who is not a democrat..period"
What a patriotic American.
There is panic about the GOP field among the right. You and Walter confirm it by not having anyone you are even willing to talk about proudly in this (anonymous) public forum. That was Willy's point above.
Others who are troubled on the right?
Bill O’Reilly On GOP 2012 Lineup: If I’m Obama, ‘I’m Not Quaking Over There’
Micheal Weiner (oh, yeah, he wants to be called Savage) Web Link
Conservative columnist George Will said that there were really only five plausible Republican candidates: Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour, Tim Pawlenty, Jon Huntsman and Mitt Romney. And then he trashed them all.
And you've heard Rush moaning.
I call out to you to tell this board if the above are all wrong. Tell us why voters should take anyone on the list seriously, other than your hatred of the Democratic Party.
Who's your man, or woman? You haven't told us, because you too are sickened by the weak field.
One last thing: your insistence that the corporate owned media is liberal is ridiculous. Exclude the obvious partisans, Fox and MSNBC, and what evidence do you have? Even PBS has more conservative talking heads on their shows than true liberals. Turn off Fox.
btw: did the "liberal media" or Fox tell you today how the GOP/Ryan House budget bill plan to disembowel Medicare cost the GOP $3.2 million and a House seat last night in NY26?
A district that voted for the GOP house candidate in November by a 75/25 margin. The family values GOP guy who won was posting naked pics on craigslist and quit.
The dem won last night, against superior GOP money in a very red district, getting 48%, double the November dem vote.
Why? Not the tea bag candidate, who got 8%. For the last month, as the tea party guy bleed support from his high of over 20%, the dem's lead grew.
The dem won a SOLID RED district (+30k GOP registration) because the GOP has shown it's true stripes to America - they want to destroy SS and Medicare while giving tax breaks to the ultra wealthy.
I'm guessing the "liberal" media didn't share that with you.
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 25, 2011 at 3:17 pm Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
I have not yet selected a candidate. The election is a while away and there is no need to commit early. I am leaning toward a Palin/Rice ticket, but as a libertarian I will be unable to vote in their primary.
The democrats are stuck with Obama. What a dismal prospect they face.
Posted by curmudgeon, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on May 25, 2011 at 4:23 pm curmudgeon is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
"The democrats are stuck with Obama. What a dismal prospect they face."
The prospect is "four more years," with new and bigger Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress.
I must confess my prediction that the 2010 election would be a huge boost for Democrats came true much sooner than I expected. Wow, debacle now. This tea party bunch just don't know how to talk the talk then balk the walk as seasoned GOP-ers like Reagan did.
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 25, 2011 at 5:41 pm Perspective is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
All I can do is chuckle at anyone who thinks that NY 26 was a rebuke of Paul Ryan..I heard that repeated across the "unbiased" mainstream media today, and everytime I just had to laugh. Newspeak.
The candidate who "won" proclaimed her horror every chance she could get about Obamacare slicing ( with a hatchet, not a scalpel) 500 billion from Medicare right now..affecting seniors right now.
One of the other candidates was a dyed in the wool democrat who pretended to be a "tea party", but did nothing but trash the Repub in the race, all the while proclaiming he was for Ryan's plan. He got 9%.;
The Repub also opposed Obamacare and supported Ryan's plan...btw which doesn't affect a single person 55 and over, unlike Obamacare...and got the rest of the vote.
Combine the fake tea-partier and the Repub, and it would have been 53%, but the REAL story is that all 3 trashed Obamacare for seniors.
I think that is the bigger story, in that this is a non-story in the first place. I see this in the same light I saw NY 26 last time..not much.
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 25, 2011 at 5:49 pm Perspective is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
BTW, one thing I am completely confident of...conservatives will take more Congressional and Senatorial seats. The worst that will happen is a repeat of the second term of Clinton, who also made me nauseated, but at least ( for a while anyway) the Repubs put up a few walls to his destructive tendencies. I gotta say, as much as I despised Bill, with his fakery and knee jerk leftism, at least he has SOME thoughtfulness and was able to humbly admit the era of big government was over ( until the Repubs brought it back!!).
As I said before somewhere, I don't see this as "team sport" or a "sport person" to root for, like the Dodgers vs the As or something. This is USA taxpayers against the media, the government and the takers; and USA sovereignty against those who want "one world" government and open borders...that is the real battle. As long as the USA wins, I am happy.
And I have come to think that USA wins only when there is a Dem President for fools to give credit to when a conservative/Repub Senate and Congress make forward progress in the country...and that the Repubs need to have a liberal to unite against or they slide into bigger government mindset.
Works the other way ok too..look at Reagan with a liberal Senate and Congress. They managed to put their fingers in the air and see which way the wind was blowing, and come around for some things. Not others, but some...
Posted by That User Name is already, a resident of another community, on May 25, 2011 at 7:41 pm That User Name is already is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
Walter: Thanks for the opinion. One doesn't hear Condi's name much.
Perspective - Your opinions on NY 26 are unsupportable.
It was wholly about Medicare and Davis didn't make much of a difference, the numbers from polls and their crosstabs prove it. If you disagree, post a link.
The GOP spent over $3 million on a district that's listed as the 10th reddest district in the country.
I repeat: The GOP spent over 3 million on a district that's listed as the 10th reddest district in the country.
Bush won twice. McCain won. Even Carl Paladino (wow!) won it in November (his only one?) Repubs have a +30,000 voter reg advantage.
Last November,the GOP beat the dem 75-25%. Last night the Dem doubled that number from 25% to 48% It should never have been within 30 or 40 points. The GOP lost.
The Republican turned Democrat turned Tea Party candidate, Jack Davis, took votes from both candidates, and as his support dwindled, shed voters to both candidates roughly evenly, at most 60/40.
This was the Republican's race. Not up on anyone's radar. The tide turned in two steps. The first was when Corwin (without prompting!!!) declared she supported Ryan. The polls turned on the second step, when Horchul ran ads replaying Corwin's blunder.
At that point the dem took a 4 point lead. At that time Davis (tea) had 22%. As Davis shed votes, Horchul went from 4 to 6 and hovered there the whole time Davis rode down from 22 to 9 percent. Davis made virtually no difference in the final vote counts, certainly not enough (even 60/40) to effect the 4,700 vote margin of victory.
If this landmark vote on Medicare made no difference as you falsely claim, why are the GOP running away from Ryan today?
Just today, Pawlenty, ran from Ryan and spewed forth generalities of his "future" plan that sounded almost Democratic. Scott Brown bailed. Several other GOP senators bailed.
Ryan's planned destruction of Medicare is over for now.
But the damage is done. To the GOP.
It was a horrendous political blunder, something so politically ill-advised I thought only the democratic party was capable of screwing up that badly. The GOP usually has their ducks in a row and it's the dems flailing. Wow, did the GOP step in it.
It's a long way away to predict Senate and House changes. The Dems just picked up one to make it 24 instead of 25. From one of the reddest districts.
Medicare is a game changer. If the economy slowly continues it's recovery, and the GOP doesn't find a way to counteract this, your Senate/House prediction is never going to happen.
- - - - - - - - -
Pers: "conservatives will take more Congressional and Senatorial seats." Nope.
Senate? Dems defend something like 24 of 34 in this cycle. Impossible to gain playing defense 24-10, but right now, I predict Harry or another dem is the leader in 2013.
House? Sheesh, all those GOP freshman (87?) with a record of voting to end Medicare as we know it? That's almost humorous when you think about how dumb Boehner was forcing that vote. Dumb, or hubris? Barring anything else major, no way the GOP gains seats, they're on defense. Dems gain seats. One down, 24 to go. Dunno, but Nancy may pick up a gavel again. We'll see.
Funny, a guy who has one successful term in an office (as opposed to Sarah, Trump, Cain, etc...) spends all his time running from his success.
What does everyone think of his chances?
* The steps used by GOPers, such as Newt, Tim and Mitt in this cycle (dates are for Newt, he did some of the steps out of order:)
1. Getting called "a possible contender" on cable TV, or calling yourself a contender 1/14/2011
2. Letting a friend leak that you're "considering a run" 2/27/2011
3. Saying yourself that you're "considering a run" 2/13/2011
4. Announcing the possible formation of an exploratory committee 3/1/2011
5. Announcing the actual formation of that exploratory committee 3/4/2011
6. Announcing that over the next few months, you may be announcing 3/27/2011
7. Announcing that your announcement may be imminent 4/28/2011
8) Announcing that you will, in fact, be announcing something 5/04/2011
9. Announcing that you will be announcing something in a certain week or day: "I'll be in by the 10th or 11th," Gingrich said, without elaborating on where or how he would announce his candidacy. 5/1/2011
10. Announcing the date or time of your announcement 5/1/2011
11. Announcing that your announcement will be that you're announcing that you will run: Gingrich spokesman Rick Tyler said Gingrich will announce the decision on Facebook and Twitter on Wednesday... He plans to make his "first announcement speech" at the Georgia Republican Party convention on Friday. 5/9/2011
12. Announcing "unofficially" that your announcement for running will be imminent (within 24 hours) 5/9/201