I still think Republicans are going to have a hard time coming up with a strong presidential nominee in 2012, as I reflect on their difficulty in doing so in 2008. For as I look back on that Republican nominating contest, it seems to me that none of the Republican candidates had a good strategy for winning the nomination. And if a candidate does not win the nomination, it does not really matter how strong he (or she) would be in the general election.(via Instapundit)
Monday, July 06, 2009
QOTD
Michael Barone:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
> I still think Republicans are going to have a hard time coming up with a strong presidential nominee in 2012, as I reflect on their difficulty in doing so in 2008.
Stupid. Who the hell thought that the Dems would have a viable candidate in 2008, when Kerry was their best choice in 2004?
All the obvious ones -- Gore, Kerry, Edwards, and Hillary were all blatant downchecks. The polling numbers as early as 2006 said that of likely voters, not less than 40% absolutely would not vote for Gore, Hillary, or Kerry under any circumstances.
You simply don't overcome numbers like that.
I can name several with good records who ought to be able to make a stab at it -- Bobby Jindal, Haley Barbour, and Sarah Palin all fill the bill nicely. Combine the support for two of those and you've got a likely viable candidate.
Related:
One thing I've learned in presidential elections is that the "likely winner" of even the nomination is rarely the obvious one at the start of the real campaign season, and even more so the one who finally wins it all.
Go check the papers in 1974, 1986, 1990, 1994, 1998, 2002, and 2006 for substantial mentions of Carter, Dukakis, Clinton, Dole, Bush, Kerry, and Obama as having substantial chance to gain the nomination for PotUS. Not saying there will be no reference to them as candidates, but more likely it was as Veeps, and the ones who won the non-incumbent nods in those years were probably never the initial top bet.
Let me agree and disagree with the post and OBH.
The Republicans need to be thinking about 2010, not 2012. Because of RINO's elected from states where we can expect no better, we have to get to 60% to turn this thing around. Start now, in the House and Senate. Without that, who we elect as president will be largely irrelevant (see Bush, 2006, Bush, 1990).
OBH:
I was already supporting Dole in 1994 and Bush in 1998. I thought the former doomed from the start for much the same reasons I don't see any Republican winning the White House in 2012. Further, competence will be an issue--and that requires a longer resume than, say, Bobby Jindal's, however attractive he may appear today.
AVI:
I agree in theory. But Republicans lack good candidates and causes now. And the ratio of likely Republican to Democrat retirements make re-taking the Senate in 2010 unlikely. Then there's the press--worth 15 points for the Dems.
Post a Comment