Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
Frozen Chosen: Romney/Bachmann 2012 - you heard it here first!
That's from this morning, in the Ricochet debate thread. At 9:41 PM last night, guess what I typed out in an email to a fellow political writer?
Romney/Bachmann '12
His reply?
I had the same thought. Then I was hit with a profound sense of deja vu.
Hmmm, as they say. But why not? That's the question anyone who'd like to be president is now obliged to answer. Declared candidates. New entrants. Lurkers and maybe-rans. Truth be told, that's the question anyone who'd like to vote for a new president has to answer, too.
It's not that Bachmann is 'less presidential' than Romney (or, y'know, 'more female'). It's that she's got lower donor power, a lower political profile, and lower poll numbers. Sure, that might change over a long primary campaign. But as of this morning Bachmann is already three or four lengths ahead of everyone else but Romney. Mitt's the frontrunner and Michele's number two. Love it or leave it.
Yes, Team T-Paw, protest away. This analysis isn't fair. It isn't patient. But neither is politics. You don't get to negotiate with the onus. And the onus is on everyone but Mitt & Michele to justify our indulgence in their presence and their plans.
But Mitt, you say. Isn't he willing to say anything to win my support? One word answer: Obamacare. Obamacare is so awful, reviled, monumental, and indicative of everything today's Democrats represent and promise that people are ready to forgive Mitt anything if he vows to do everything in his power to destroy it.
Not every Republican, of course. But enough. Especially if the other half of the ticket -- in an era when vice presidents are the most self-realized human beings on earth -- is this prickly-yet-polished, youthful-yet-mature, competent-yet-charismatic Michele Bachmann.
Republicans have every incentive to wrap up this nomination process early and begin grinding, pounding, needling, macerating the sitting president. Republicans have every incentive to match Mitt with a grassrootsy Tea Party candidate with both chops and sass -- instead of hounding Mitt out of the race. Republicans have other scattered incentives, too, that don't line up perfectly with a Romney/Bachmann ticket. Window shopping season, however, is going to be over in about five minutes. With or without a guy like Huntsman, this race could be gift wrapped and bagged up by the end of the month. Forget about the campaign process. The thought process takes about ten seconds.
Perry and Pawlenty have one chance apiece -- at most -- to break this otherwise inexorable logic. But it's not just logic. The last thing Republicans want is to charge into a wall of molasses. Hit now, hit now, the passions are saying. You'll need every warmup punch to get the knockout, and every step of running room to power up to ramming speed.
I'll admit it: I'm not sure -- not entirely -- that even I buy what I'm selling here. But I'm much closer to buying it than I ever could have imagined 24 hours ago.
Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not? It's so sane, it just might work.
- Comment (52)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Apr '11
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
Why Romney/Bachman , I remember there was another "front runner" destined for the nomination in 2008 named Hillary.
He had his chance and couldn't beat the "Maverick" for the nomination.
I believe what Michele Bachman says but see Romney as a phoney. The tide can shift quickly as we no from the previous election.
I'm with Michele all the way to the White House.
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
My mom suggested this match-up last night. And she's a pretty standard Republican voter.
Aug '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
I was only half serious when I wrote that comment. My gut feel is that Romney won't pick Bachmann because she is a bit of a bomb thrower and let's face it - Mitt's pretty buttoned up.
However, unless he can talk Rubio onto the ticket Michelle may be his best bet. The others potential VPs have issues:
Any other suggestions for the #2 spot?
Jul '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
Oh, great, Bachmann could go to state funerals while Romney implements cap and trade and "comprehensive immigration reform", which favors the intensive ongoing recruitment of Hispanics by the Mormon church.
Uh-uh.
Apr '11
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
How does Romney effectively promise to detroy Obamacare when he won't admit Romneycare was a bad idea?
What incentive do Republicans have to wrap this up quickly? To give the media as much time as possible to create their negative narrative?
Let the whole group hit on Obama without any one candidate taking all the return fire. Work together against Obama until the last possible moment.
But Romney is just too much of the same old thing.
Jul '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
Wow, it's not even Summer 2011, and we're already throwing up our hands and giving Romney the nomination? I've heard of jumping the gun, but at this point the starter's pistol hasn't even been loaded yet. Why don't we let 2011 finish before we start fretting about not having a nominee picked?
Jun '11
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
Kenneth: Oh, great, Bachmann could go to state funerals while Romney implements cap and trade and "comprehensive immigration reform", which favors the intensive ongoing recruitment of Hispanics by the Mormon church.
Uh-uh. · Jun 14 at 12:08pm
Thank you.
Thinking Romney has a chance is not the same thing as thinking McCain or Dole had a chance. It's worse because it vastly underestimates the deep seated resentment of voters. The same old/same old is not going to fly.
Aug '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
Why not? Because Romney is not the change agent we need to roll back ObamaCare and Obama's massive expansion of government. Romney would make a superb manager and caretaker, but he does not appear to have the passion and drive that will be required to right our severely listing ship. Going along to get along at this point means that the ship will be going down.
Aug '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
It sounds like an a good way out of the mess we're in.
It beats watching the GOP elites and the Tea Party continue to circle each other like the Sharks and the Jets (I'm picturing blue suits and tri-corn hats).
The Tea Party won't be denied and rightly so, but running Bachman for VP is a real win for them. Mitt would still have to show some flex on ObamneyCare, even with Bachman on the ticket.
Our populist bretheren still want to see Bachman or Palin in White House. Hell, I want a pony. They know that it's a general election and that sooner or later we'll have to take on the left instead of each other.
Why not now?
Aug '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
Kenneth: Oh, great, Bachmann could go to state funerals while Romney implements cap and trade and "comprehensive immigration reform", which favors the intensive ongoing recruitment of Hispanics by the Mormon church.
Uh-uh. · Jun 14 at 12:08pm
Actually, Kenneth, we recruit Hispanics just fine in their own countries. No need to ship 'em here.
Feb '11
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
She won't be a team player for what she doesn't believe in. And he's gotta know that.
May '11
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
It is way to early for this conversation. I don't think a true consensus front runner will emerge for a very long time. With the new proportional system of awarding delegates to a candidate rather than the winner take all system, the battle may go all the way to the convention. Keep praying for Paul Ryan. He is the only potential candidate who might be able to lock up the nomination early. That said, what candidate in his right mind would want to participate in a process as obnoxious as last night's so called debate.
May '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
There's no reason a VP needs to merely be a VP. This is a variant on the Romney/Palin ticket I was advocating as early as 2009. I like the idea. Romney's perceived weaknesses are Bachmann's perceived strengths, and vice versa.
I endorse this ticket!
May '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
James Poulos
Republicans have every incentive to wrap up this nomination process early and begin grinding, pounding, needling, macerating the sitting president.
That much I agree with. Republicans need a concentrated campaign. And I would hate to see a repeat of 2008, with the least conservative candidate benefiting from the conservative vote being split among viable candidates. But Whiskey Sam is right that it's too early yet to choose.
I would not be comfortable with Romney as President because he's a big government, managerial squish. But I also expect him to be among the most popular candidates.
Sadly, all the candidates seem capable of wooing voters. So we'll have to wait and see which one the Left's media destroys first.
Ron Paul will do better this time around. The very statements that people laughed at in 2008 will not be laughable this time, and there are a lot more voters sympathetic to Libertarian arguments. He might make a good VP.
May '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
Why not? Because Romney is not the change agent we need to roll back ObamaCare and Obama's massive expansion of government.
And you know this precisely how? Because he didn't transform Massachusetts into Texas?
Romney has the skill set and low ego to hire the smart people who can de-Obama-ize the federal government, and cut government big time. Afraid he won't go far enough? Worry about that when Palin or Bachmann herself runs in 2020.
Oct '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
Romney/Bachman?? Did you get an insider tip from the Almighty that he'll be calling Mitt home the first quarter of '13?
Edited on Jun 14, 2011 at 12:55pmMar '11
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
"Why Not"
Because Romney is absolutely horrible.
Oct '10
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
I like, and endorse, your optimism.
Mar '11
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
I think Mr. Poulos may soon be doing Guest Political Analysis at Iowahawk.
http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2007/12/in-my-objective.html
Mar '11
Re: Romney/Bachmann '12: Why Not?
Kenneth: Oh, great, Bachmann could go to state funerals while Romney implements cap and trade and "comprehensive immigration reform", which favors the intensive ongoing recruitment of Hispanics by the Mormon church.
Uh-uh. · Jun 14 at 12:08pm
It's a tired refrain to suggest that Romney is somehow going to implement the goals or policies of the Mormon church. Just look at Harry Reid, hardly a standard bearer for conservative values most Mormons adhere to.
As to Romney/Bachman, a great idea! Talk about unifying the party.