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:
May '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
One man whose endorsement might very well alter the race is Jim DeMint of SC, a Tea Party and social conservative hero in a critical early primary state. There've been rumblings he's open to endorsing Romney, which could be critical to convincing skeptical conservatives that Mitt is, well, good enough.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Scott Reusser: A little perspective, please.
If we do our jobs in the congressional and Senate races, we'll be fine with Mitt, especially with Rubio at his side and in his ear.
There's obviously no savior running. But we're conservatives; we deal with such hard truths by making the best of it. We don't grasp for a savior that isn't there.
That's what liberals do. · Sep 25 at 8:48am
Edited on Sep 25 at 08:49 am
You greatly underestimate the capacity of a conservative party that consistently nominates managerial progressives for the Presidency to come apart at the seams. (Remember what happened in 2008).
Mitt Romney is not going to take direction from Marco Rubio or from Congress or from anyone else. He is an experienced executive with strong ideas of his own. He professes to be proud of Romneycare, and we ought to take him at his word. He is not bothered one bit by the individual mandate.
It would be nice if we were to find a genuine statesman capable of stepping up to the plate. I would myself, however, settle for a real conservative with some executive experience.
May '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Paul A. Rahe
He is an experienced executive with strong ideas of his own. He professes to be proud of Romneycare, and we ought to take him at his word. He is not bothered one bit by the individual mandate.
I thought the common criticism of Romney is that he didn't have strong ideas of his own -- that he relents to changing political tides, which, if true, indicates he'd be subject to the Milton Friedman rule, as discussed a couple weeks ago on Ricochet.
As for taking him at his word: fine, we take him at his word that he'll repeal Obamacare and has no intention of imposing a one-size-fits-all national healthcare scheme, mandate or not.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Does the health care law, as it is structured, make provision for waivers? I know the Obama administration is granting them, but since when did the letter of the law stop them from doing anything? I'm wondering if the actual law allows for granting waivers? If not, then any attempt by a President Romney to grant waivers would be challenged and likely lose in court, right? We already have a President who believes he can do almost anything by executive fiat. I'm just wondering if Romney is being a little to glib by half on this.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Well stated, and you make a compelling case as always. Is it your hope that, were the other candidates to leave the field, that we would learn enough about the remaining candidate(s) that a Paul Ryan or Mitch Daniels might reconsider? Otherwise, it seems we're stuck either way, only without the intellect of a Cain or Gingrich to challenge the presumptive nominee.
By the way, I'm headed to Michigan tonight, Professor. If I get close to your neighborhood, I'll holler.
Oct '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
I am already on record predicting Palin will file for the South Carolina primary on November 1. She will file as a Republican, owing that party or anyone else no favors, and will run her own campaign to win the GOP primaries and the nomination.
As the completely outsider president, and having all the necessary cojones, she will be able to undo the statist Republican machine, much like she tackled the same behemoth in Alaska.
She's got my vote!
Mar '11
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Paul A. Rahe
... and it will be over without Romney even being vetted. We will know more about Cain, Bachmann, Huntsman,Paul, Gingrich, and the like than we need to know (in truth, we already know more about them than we need to know), and we will know next to nothing about the presumptive nominee. · Sep 25 at 12:09pm
Romney has been running for president for the last 5 years. He has, without a doubt, been covered more by both the mainstream and the right-wing media more than any other current candidate (except possibly Gingrich). I have seen at least twice as many embarrassing clips from Romney (who let the dogs out?) than Perry, Cain, Bachmann, Huntsman and Paul combined. His track record on the major issues was discussed at least as much as Obama's in 2008, despite his not being nominated.
The problem is not that Romney has not been vetted; it is rather that we already know him all too well.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Scott Reusser
Paul A. Rahe
He is an experienced executive with strong ideas of his own. He professes to be proud of Romneycare, and we ought to take him at his word. He is not bothered one bit by the individual mandate.
I thought the common criticism of Romney is that he didn't have strong ideas of his own -- that he relents to changing political tides, which, if true, indicates he'd be subject to the Milton Friedman rule, as discussed a couple weeks ago on Ricochet.
As for taking him at his word: fine, we take him at his word that he'll repeal Obamacare and has no intention of imposing a one-size-fits-all national healthcare scheme, mandate or not. · Sep 25 at 12:56pm
The criticism of Romney is that he is a Progressive who makes tactical adjustments for the purpose of getting the nomination of a party that is not progressive. It is not that he has no strong ideas of his own; it is that, as a Progressive, he is not committed to the principles of limited government. Romney care with its individual mandate is proof positive of that fact.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
He is. If it is legal to grant waivers, they can only be granted on a temporary basis. Absent repeal, we are sunk.
Jun '11
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Dave Carter:
As much admiration and respect as I have for you and your judgement, I would respectfully submit that we ought to at least wait until the people themselves have had a chance to cast a few actual votes before we start bidding candidates to exit stage right (or left).
As to endorsements, I consider the source. As conservatives we bemoan the tendency of politicians to stand on compromise rather than principle. But compromise is the bread and butter of politicians. So I wonder if the reluctance of these politicians to endorse some candidates is a reflection of their own displeasure with candidates who, for example, rejected the latest budget compromises on the principle that a reduction in the rate of a growth isn't really a "budget cut?"
I would respectfully caution that "endorsements" bequeathed us John McCain. The most important endorsement ought to be that of the people themselves. · Sep 25 at 8:40am
Edited on Sep 25 at 09:03 am
The political elite on the Left and the Right are/is paralyzed.
They are holding their collective breath waiting to see which life boat is viable.
Let's make our candidate fight for it.
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Dave Carter
Well stated, and you make a compelling case as always. Is it your hope that, were the other candidates to leave the field, that we would learn enough about the remaining candidate(s) that a Paul Ryan or Mitch Daniels might reconsider? Otherwise, it seems we're stuck either way, only without the intellect of a Cain or Gingrich to challenge the presumptive nominee.
By the way, I'm headed to Michigan tonight, Professor. If I get close to your neighborhood, I'll holler. · Sep 25 at 1:23pm
If you turn up anywhere nearby, get in touch. I am in the phone book.
On the political question, I feel nothing but dismay. To date, at least, Perry seems not up to it. None of the other announced candidates has a prayer. Perhaps, Christie will enter. He is formidable. Daniels and Ryan have let us down.
I would like to believe that the last man standing -- McCain last time, Romney this time -- is worthy. But there is nothing in Romney's record to provide encouragement. In 2016, we could find ourselves back in 2008 -- just a whole lot worse off.
Mar '11
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
It may well be, but things are changing fast - it will be interesting to see if Mr Cain builds momentum in the next week. Then there is Mrs Palin waiting in the wings. Both are being studiously ignored by Jennifer Rubin and the Republican elite - but that is their appeal to we the people. I'm with Dave.
As a commenter on Hotair noted, Cain/Palin has a nice ring to it, and we can use the same signs as 2008, with the Mc deleted.
And neither of em is stupid.
Mar '11
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Paul A. Rahe
If you turn up anywhere nearby, get in touch. I am in the phone book.
On the political question, I feel nothing but dismay. To date, at least, Perry seems not up to it. None of the other announced candidates has a prayer. Perhaps, Christie will enter. He is formidable. Daniels and Ryan have let us down.
I would like to believe that the last man standing -- McCain last time, Romney this time -- is worthy. But there is nothing in Romney's record to provide encouragement. In 2016, we could find ourselves back in 2008 -- just a whole lot worse off. · Sep 25 at 2:19pm
If Christie enters the race I'm willing to bet he turns out to be not nearly as conservative as people think he is. He pleases as much because of style as substance.
May '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Richard Young
If Christie enters the race I'm willing to bet he turns out to be not nearly as conservative as people think he is. He pleases as much because of style as substance. · Sep 25 at 3:15pm
No doubt, Richard. There's nothing better than watching Christie clips on YouTube, but with more familiarity would come contempt to some degree.
But those of us who have ditched our utopian standards would be at peace -- with him, or Romney, or anybody else we can be reasonably sure won't fumble the ball.
Mar '11
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
raycon
As the completely outsider president, and having all the necessary cojones, she will be able to undo the statist Republican machine, much like she tackled the same behemoth in Alaska.
She's got my vote! · Sep 25 at 1:28pm
'Cept she didn't stay to finish the job. I know the press and others made that nearly impossible, but not totally impossible. She's been on constant self promotion since then with that bus tour. I'm no hater on her, and Lord knows I dislike Romney. Just not convinced she's someone we should be waiting on.
Jul '10
Re: The Contenders and the Clowns
Dave Carter
By the way, I'm headed to Michigan tonight, Professor. If I get close to your neighborhood, I'll holler. · Sep 25 at 1:23pm
What part of Michigan you headed to Dave?