Presidential Race Freefall
I'm still trying to digest Mitch Daniels' weekend announcement that he will not be running for president, which came as a huge shock.
Daniels was unusually well-positioned within the GOP, having a record and an identity capable of appealing to both Tea Party types and more conventional Republicans. He also had the unusual combination of being both an extremely effective executive and someone who was philosophically anchored in conservatism (it's a shame how many conservatives learn the anti-government catechism without ever dedicating much thought to how to run the government that's still left). In essence, I share Paul Rahe's gloominess, though I stop shy of assigning Daniels the level of personal culpability that Paul does (in fact, I respect Daniels for having what seems to be a genuine allegiance to something besides his own political future).
Regardless, Mitch is out, and my estimation of the field that is left is not a happy one. Absent a surge from Bachmann or Cain -- both of whom I think are capable of the feat, but neither of whom is likely to be able to translate it into the nomination -- we're essentially left with Huntsman, Pawlenty, or Romney. Out of that group, Huntsman is too moderate, Romney is too elastic, and Pawlenty is more acquittable than embraceable.
Those in the GOP fold desperate to make lemonade remind us that a similarly pruned field generated Bill Clinton for the Democrats in the 1992 election. All well and good, except for the fact that we don't have a Bill Clinton. The closest figure in terms of sheer talent is Newt Gingrich, and Newt's flashes of brilliance don't subsidize his pathologies on the scale that Clinton's did (it's an ugly reality to think that you're a less-disciplined version of our 42nd president).
I suppose the search for a white knight continues, but it seems to me likely to end in sorrow. Jeb Bush, who would have easily been the man to beat in 2008 or this time around, is consigned to the political wilderness because of the scarlet W. Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan seem genuinely deterred by the prospect of running so early in their careers. And Chris Christie, who is the most rational choice for redeemer, has so frequently pronounced himself unprepared to be president that he can't enter the race without being haunted by a year's worth of insistences that he is not equal to the nation's highest office.
My hope: that's there's an alternative not yet considered. My fear: that it's time to start proceeding to the exits in an orderly fashion. Please, members of the Ricochet family, give me reason to embrace the former and dismiss the latter.
- Comment (8)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments:
Aug '10
Re: Presidential Race Freefall
Dear Troy,
Please take this in the light in which it's intended - and I mean this is the nicest way possible...
QUIT YER BELLYACHIN'!
The GOP nominee is going to be either Pawlenty or Romney so deal with it. Either one can beat Obama come 2012. Both are very competent executives who will be light years better than BHO.
Are either of them perfect? Uh, no. But then the GOP has been a little short of perfect candidates for the past 20 years, hasn't it?
BTW, the sacred trio of Rubio, Ryan and Christie all have significant drawbacks as well so even their entry wouldn't make it automatic in 2012.
Edited on May 24, 2011 at 7:14amOct '10
Re: Presidential Race Freefall
the real reason Mitch is not running?
Apr '11
Re: Presidential Race Freefall
Any current front-runner is only going to be a placeholder until Palin throws her hat into the ring. Everyone should just sit back and enjoy the ride. The junior president is going down!
Oct '10
Re: Presidential Race Freefall
the "lack of quality candidates" in the GOP is attracting the wrong kinds of "savior" candidates--Trump and Palin.
Re: Presidential Race Freefall
No, he knew precisely what he was doing when he signed that law. It was, among other things, his way of signaling to the social conservatives that, his call for a truce on the social issues notwithstanding, he was not going to abandon them. Governor Daniels is a pro. He really wanted to run. And having made a blunder, he was correcting course.
Oct '10
Re: Presidential Race Freefall
shame that romney was willing to flipflop on every issue except romneycare.
May '11
Re: Presidential Race Freefall
Is there some rule here against even mentioning the "P-word"....?
I'm just a Canadian living in Japan who is watching the show with interest and enjoying it, but why does it seem that Palin is the Hockey Mom in the room that so few want to mention?
I like Palin/Cain 2012 :)
May '10
Re: Presidential Race Freefall
The reason for pessimism is that the Right is operating a perpetual firing squad,. shooting every potential nominee, no matter how sound overall, who wavers on any policy, no matter what the reason or circumstances.
I have news for all of us. I was around when Reagan ran in 1976 and 1980. He may be beatified now as the Certified Saint Right, but he was not the consensus candidate in 1980, he was not the front-runner during the general election either.
How could anyone nominate someone who raised taxes as governor, signed the most liberal abortion law in the country, and made similar mistakes as President (e.g., TEFRA, Iran-Contra, ignored the Islamic jihadists, etc.)?
Anyone, from Romney to Rand Paul- Huntsman, Pawlenty, you name it- would be better than what we are suffering through now. And if you think that ObamaCare was bad, wait till the Supreme Court shifts Left and the NLRB thus gets free reign to run the economy. Boeing will build their new factory in Guatemala, not South Carolina.