The Contenders and the Clowns
Nate Silver published a piece on Friday in The New York Times that deserves attention. “In their book The Party Decides: Presidential Nominations Before and After Reform,” he observes, “the political scientists Marty Cohen, David Karol, Hans Noel and John Zaller find that endorsements — not polls, fund-raising numbers or media hits — are the best early indicators of success in the presidential primaries.” Then, he points out that, by this standard, Mitt Romney is the front-runner, with Rick Perry a close second, with the other candidates “having little chance.”
This is, of course, the truth, but we really did not need to know who endorsed whom in order to know it, and my guess is that, in this stage of the contest, this would be the situation every time. There are contenders every cycle, and there are clowns – and there is rarely any doubt as to which is which.
The data Silver has collected is nonetheless interesting – for it shows that Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul, and Michele Bachmann have thus far garnered no endorsements at all from any Senators, Congressmen, or Governors.
In the case of Herman Cain, this may not mean much. He is an unknown who has never himself served as a Senator, Congressman, or Governor. The rest, however, have done so – and in their years of service they have not earned the unabashed admiration of any of their colleagues. Put simply, there is no one in the Senate who thinks well enough of Santorum to endorse him; no one in the House who thinks well enough of either Bachmann, Paul, or Gingrich to endorse any of them; and no one in a gubernatorial chair who thinks well enough of Huntsman to endorse him. This is, I think, sobering. What it suggests is that not one of these individuals deserved to be up on the stage in the debate on Thursday night.
It is not hard to see why lack support. Gingrich is smart, but he blotted his copybook long ago, he remains erratic, and no one really wants him back. He might be useful in the cabinet; he is not presidential timber. Santorum is a joke. He has never held any executive office, and he lost his Senate seat by a margin of 18%. He is a might-have-been who became a has-been some time ago. He is utterly unqualified for consideration, and on Thursday night he made a fool of himself when he rose up in righteous anger to object to their being bi-national private health insurance for people who live along the Texas-Mexico border and do business on both sides. Ron Paul is a crank with a history of supporting third-party candidates. Jon Huntsman is distinguished only by his money and looks. And Michele Bachmann, who has also never held any executive position, is a loose cannon and a nasty piece of work with no friends in the Republican house delegation, who is best known for the speed with which she runs through and alienates staff. About the only thing that this crowd stars in is self-regard.
Of course, none of this would matter much were they not wasting our time at a crucial moment. The country is undergoing a crisis, and the 2012 election offers the possibility of a resolution. The Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee is bent on destroying this country as we know it and on refounding it on principles opposed to our own. The Republicans have not found a plausible candidate capable of restating the principles on which this country was founded and flourished, and the Republican National Committee makes us sit through debates dominated by figures for whom no elected official of any stature feels any enthusiasm at all.
I have no desire for the nominating process to be closed to those who are marginal. There may come a day when we really do need to turn to an outsider. But, at some point, it might make sense to exclude from the debates those who have not by that stage attracted an endorsement or two from Republicans in high office. Otherwise, the process of deliberation by which we choose our nominee will be short-circuited.
- Comment (56)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
Jun '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Romney has a built-in advantage. Perry can do something stupid enough to shut off his money supply. But Romney can be as stupid as he wants, and not run out of money. If you have the money, you might be able to recover from a really stupid statement. If you don't, you can't.
Apr '11
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Your post seems to reflect the growing sense of disappointment a highly motivated GOP base is feeling the more we see of our potential nominees. Doubtless this sense was exacerbated by the hugely disappointing showing of Perry in the debate. With the stakes so high and the odds ostensibly so attractive, it amazes me how not just one or two but arguably all of the strongest Republican candidates have opted out. If now is not the time to run, when would be??
Aug '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
In the absence of a flawless candidate, should the Republicans go for the tough guy, the holy guy, the flexible guy, the persuasive guy, the radical guy, the business guy,or the electric lady? Given the present choice I would lean persuasive in spite of the baggage.
May '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
It might make sense if selecting a nominee were the object of the debates.
The media seems to be most interested in the horse race/freak show aspect of dragging everyone in front of the cameras every week or so, asking largely inane questions, and hoping for a gaff.
Jul '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
That's our two party system. Dems provide the "free" bread, and our clowns perform at the circus.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
It is disheartening in the extreme. Surely, we have someone on the bench who is better than what we have seen.
Dec '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Drudge headline: SHOCK: CAIN WINS FLA STRAW POLL.
Rahe: "Of course, none of this would matter much were they not wasting our time at a crucial moment. The country is undergoing a crisis, and the 2012 election offers the possibility of a resolution."
I'm thinking even Perry and especially Romney are also wasting our time, endorsements aside. Romney's political opportunism in the video KP posted just sickens me and RomneyCare is unforgivable in this election cycle. Unforgivable!
What is Romney thinking, even declaring a candidacy?! It is an act of betrayal to his country at this critical juncture to put himself forward with this as his legislative achievement in his one lousy term as governor of one of the most left-wing states in the nation. Can you tell? I am not a fan.
Desperation is setting in. If Daniels or Ryan don't step forward, I may go to work for Cain. Perry better step it up if he expects to win more support.
Mar '11
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Err, I think that day has come. As Mrs Palin has pointed out, this is gonna be an unconventional election. We are starting to see that with Mr Cain in FL - I hope.
Edited on September 25, 2011 at 2:44amJul '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Paul A. Rahe
It is disheartening in the extreme. Surely, we have someone on the bench who is better than what we have seen. · Sep 24 at 5:36pm
Well, for the time being, let's play the hand We're dealt.
Sep '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
No one should be allowed to compete unless at least a few party bosses approve. Said like a true Republican. In case you have not noticed things are changing. If you feel your precious time is being wasted don’t listen and stop writing about the candidates and the process. There have always been those who sit in ivory towers and complain about those who have actually entered the arena. But now some seem to have moved past that and are complaining about the arena itself. Democracy is a messy business, but I much prefer it to selection by academia or political bosses and take comfort in knowing it will in time produce superior results. Sometimes todays clowns turn into tomorrow’s contenders. This might be closer to what our founders had in mind than what you would like.
Dec '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
I remember someone saying the reason McCain won the nod in 2008 was he was the first to screw up and therefore had time to recover before the rest. Perry had better be playing the same game of Russian Roulette as successfully or Romney really will be "the next guy" in a year when we can little afford Democrat-lite.
/scrambling for a brown paper bag to breathe into...
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Western Chauvinist: Drudge headline: SHOCK: CAIN WINS FLA STRAW POLL.
Rahe: "Of course, none of this would matter much were they not wasting our time at a crucial moment. The country is undergoing a crisis, and the 2012 election offers the possibility of a resolution."
I'm thinking even Perry and especially Romney are also wasting our time, endorsements aside. Romney's political opportunism in the video KP posted just sickens me and RomneyCare is unforgivable in this election cycle. Unforgivable!
What is Romney thinking, even declaring a candidacy?! It is an act of betrayal to his country at this critical juncture to put himself forward with this as his legislative achievement in his one lousy term as governor of one of the most left-wing states in the nation. Can you tell? I am not a fan.
Desperation is setting in. If Daniels or Ryan don't step forward, I may go to work for Cain. Perry better step it up if he expects to win more support.
· Sep 24 at 5:39pm
I would like to disagree. I cannot.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
On that last point, you are surely wrong. The electoral college was designed to put the President above partisanship.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
It is not my precious time. It is the country's precious time. We need to vet the real contenders and not waste our attention on clowns with no chance of getting the nomination. A Congressman who commands no respect in Congress has no business running.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Jimmy Carter
Paul A. Rahe
It is disheartening in the extreme. Surely, we have someone on the bench who is better than what we have seen. · Sep 24 at 5:36pm
Well, for the time being, let's play the hand We're dealt. · Sep 24 at 5:51pm
We have no other option, do we?
Jul '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Paul A. Rahe
We have no other option, do we? · Sep 24 at 6:39pm
Throw Yer hat in the ring.
Jul '11
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
FWIW, Rand Paul has endorsed Ron Paul, but that doesn't really count.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Jimmy Carter
Paul A. Rahe
We have no other option, do we? · Sep 24 at 6:39pm
Throw Yer hat in the ring. · Sep 24 at 6:42pm
If there is one thing that I am certain would be foolish, it would be that. I want to throw someone else's hat in the ring. But who knows? Maybe, this will all play out better than it has in the past.
Jun '11
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
I could not care less about endorsements from Congressional knuckleheads. It is a very different culture now. Past indicators are relics of the past.
However, I am disappointed that someone like Ryan or Rubio isn't running.
Having said that, I think the Republican field is good.
The heart of the issue is that the electorate is watching much more than at any time in my lifetime.
Nobody cares what politician endorses another politician. It's a new model.
Mar '11
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
If I may quote the man:
“Let’s alter another conception,” he said. “Just because somebody has never held high public office, some people are spreading the nasty rumor that Herman Cain can’t win. Well, let me tell you what, that might be what they think, but the American people have a different idea.”
We the people...