Skip to comments.The Conservative's Case for Mitch Daniels (Hear Me Out - Long)
Posted on 02/16/2011 8:46:31 PM PST by cartervt2k
I don't post here every day, but I do often enough that you to page through the archives and check my conservative bonafides. I am staunchly pro-life, pro-gun (own an AK-47, Glock .45 and a Ruger 9mm), anti-climate religion, anti-gay marriage, anti-VAT, and anti-Obamacare. I listen to Rush occasionally. I listen to John Gibson in the afternoons, Levin every night. I live in reddish-purple Virginia, in Jim Moron's district, specifically. I know a lot of Obama voters - some of them leftist automatons, some of them squishy Independents.
The conventional wisdom among conservatives on here and other blogs is to always elect the most conservative candidate - period. They say the reason we lost in 2008 was because we ran McLame on the top of the ticket, and had we run a real conservative, we would have won. This theory is mostly false.
The reason we lost in 2008 was because all the organs of the democrat machine were able to define McLame as a clueless establishment geezer and Palin as a ditz. Neither of them were able to shake these caricatures and often times made them worse. Obama had enough baggage with his associations with terrorists and racist ministers that the election was competitive until the bottom fell out of the economy. They were then able to successfully (however falsely) pin it on Republicans, and it carried them to victory.
The fact of the matter is, if you can define yourself and your opponent, you will win the race. We beat Kerry in 2004 with devastating video of him lying about Vietnam, betraying his unit and flip-flopping on his record. Rove further rallied the base with worries about proliferation of gay marriage, and Bush got more votes than any other president in history. While you may think we should go back to the gay marriage well, I would submit to you that with 9-17% unemployment or underemployment and the FACT public opinion has softened on gay marriage, this is not the trump card it once was. In fact, social issues specifically will not carry a candidate from either party to a presidential victory - especially in this economic climate.
I look at Obama, presiding over the worst economy, job market and housing market in a generation, and he somehow has around a 50% approval rating. This is as stupefying as it is disappointing. Then, I look at the field of candidates and really start to think this is going to be an uphill slog. Obama is damaged but still has the upper hand with his incumbency. Those of you pointing me to last year's elections, I would refer you to NV, CO, DE, CA, CT, and WA (the last 4 for reasons you might not expect).
Case study 1: Nevada. If you think beating Obama is going to be a slam dunk, here you have the most despised member of the senate pulling out a last minute victory with the sheer brute force of his bank and ground game. In fairness, I'm not sure Sue Lowden would have won, but I am certain it would have been closer. Angle or Lowden would have received the similar tons of money from groups looking to unseat Reid, but Sharron was not a polished candidate and stuck her foot in her mouth too many times ("2nd amendment solutions", etc.).
Case study 2: Colorado. Here we have another purple state with the wind at our backs and blew it. Buck is a smart guy and articulate, but he walked right into the gay marriage trap down the stretch, comparing homosexuality to alcoholism on Meet the Press. He never recovered. Even though I do think homosexuality is an identity disorder, if you're trying to get elected, shut up about it and keep hammering away on fiscal issues. You can get away with that in Alabama - not Colorado.
Case study 3: Delaware. I hate Castle, so this was the least significant for me. He was basically the 2010 version of Dede Scozzafava and glad we don't have to defend him in the senate. However, it hurt us from the standpoint in that it allowed the DSCC to mostly ignore the race, where Castle would have forced them to spend more money there (a point I'll get back to a lot).
Case study 4: California and Connecticut. Carly was the best we could have ever done there and had a lot of money. Linda may not have been the best candidate in CT, but she is also extremely wealthy. Both of them pulled a LOT of DSCC resources away from other states and really helped us, even in defeat (stop me if you see a pattern here).
Case study 5: Washington. Dino isn't uber wealthy like the last 2, but he is an extremely polished, solid candidate and forced the DSCC to spend a lot of money there.
Here's the thing: believe me if I tell you I could bring back Barry Goldwater from the dead and install him in the White House without having to worry about losing an election, I would. But I recognize we cannot win without a plurality of Independent squishes. This is just a fact. It is also a fact that conservatism will suffer more with the re-election of Obama than any Republican in the mix right now. We can win with 100% orthodox conservatives, but they MUST be able to connect with independents in a way so that they feel comfortable voting for them, even if the sources of their comfort are for superficial reasons. I felt like Pence could have been that guy, but he's running for IN governor. There's really no one else like him left right now.
If I were Obama, of the names being mentioned, I would fear Daniels the most. How could they label him? He's a competent, accomplished, books-balancing, budget-slashing, Harley riding, ivy league educated state executive. They would be unable to easily label him a racist (hello Mississippi Barbour), an idiot (hello Palin), a hypocrite (hello Romneycare), or a Bible beater (hello Huckabee). What are they going to attack him for - his height? Having once worked for Bush? If that's the worst he's got in the way of baggage, he's in good shape. If he put Christie on the ticket with him (a true RINO to be sure, but a star with gravitas nonetheless), Obama would have to go and dump money into NEW JERSEY. The midwest would be an electoral killing field from PA to WI. There would only be a few states Obama wouldn't have to defend. I think we'd have a similar shot with T-Paw, but he hasn't really impressed me in one-on-one interviews.
Back to the social issues, all I want out of our next president is to reinstate the Mexico City Policy and to elevate as many Scalias to the bench as possible - bonus if he can defund Planned Parenthood. Ginsburg is probably going to expire pretty soon, and Kennedy is wanting to step down soon. Do you want to risk their seats with a candidate likely to lose?
I'd be interested to hear your feedback of why you think I'm right or why you think I'm wrong. I'm on your team, so let's keep it civil.
Sorry didn’t mean to repeat your post.
You make good points. I guess we’ll see how much fight he’s got and how he handles the slime. I reserve the right to change my mind. :-)
Perhaps you don't understand the MO of the democrat/media complex yet.
They will label and savage any candidate for president with an (R) behind their name.
Daniels will be no different, and he has never faced that kind of thing so we don't know how he will handle it. Besides the lambasting he will take like any of the others, he has a lot of weaknesses as a candidate, as many or more than the rest that might become candidates.
If he wins the nomination I'll get behind him, but right now he's nothing for Obama to fear at all.
EVERYTHING you wrote about Palin is spot-on IMO.
The MSM has been able to define some of the more
notable conservatives such as Palin and Newt in
the eyes of the un-informed masses. They will, of
course, attempt to paint a negative picture of whomever
wins the GOP nomination. That is one of the reasons
I am interested in Daniels or someone like him. There
is an opportunity, however slight, for Daniels to
define himself before the cretins focus in on him.
But, if he doesn’t have the ‘fire in his belly’ it
masculinity not efiminety
God help us.
You sir are hilarious. That statement brought tears to my eyes.
“Plain folks appeal” identity politics is not an argument. What are Mitch Daniel’s opinions about ethanol subsidies?
Doesn’t any body read anymore. I strongly encourage you all to read Daniels speech at CPAC. This guy is VERY smart. You all want a Justin Beiber type popularity contest. The only one that comes close is Palin. I really like her, but . . .
I’ll vote for brains and integrity. This guy has a backbone, and won’t stand around and listen to the administrations nonsense. He’s got a plan. He put Indiana in the black, and he’s not afraid to take on the sacred cows of politics.
Listen to him, wake up and pay attention, this is really important.
Sorry, but the moment he said he wanted a truce on social issues he became another rino in my eyes. I’m sure he is great fiscally speaking, but if he doesn’t champion all aspects of what I consider conservatism, then he’ll never get my vote.
I mean, if that’s the case, I might as well vote for Romney. No, sounds to me like he doesn’t want to fight for social issues in the public arena at the presidential level. Not exactly a good sign.
How about summarizing your LONG post in one paragraph of 3-5 lines?
That is hilarious!
I’m crying it’s so funny. I’m from KY and we’re always making fun of those crazies from IN.
I will admit he would get the BUBBA VOTE in all 50 states, including all those liberal Democrat union member BUBBAs, both white and black.
Question: can he balance a budget AND get Wall Street to back him, and think he knows what he’s doing?
“Case study 3: Delaware. I hate Castle, so this was the least significant for me. He was basically the 2010 version of Dede Scozzafava and glad we don’t have to defend him in the senate. However, it hurt us from the standpoint in that it allowed the DSCC to mostly ignore the race, where Castle would have forced them to spend more money there (a point I’ll get back to a lot).”
The democrats wouldn’t have had to spend any in Delaware to defeat Castle. He would have crossed the aisle. Rather then them spending money, Republicans would have wasted money electing a democrat.
COD did as well as any Republican has since Roth, and forced them to spend money in DE that they could have spent otherwise. Plus, it doesn’t hurt having a pretty, solidly conservative young woman running on your ticket.
Which would make him an excellent VP like Cheney pairing up someone who is charismatic.
His back of the bus for social conservatives disqualifies him for me. His support for the value added tax (VAT) will make him a non starter with the TEA parties. Anyone running who wants to become the nominee needs TEA party support. Daniels’ love of taxes disqualifies him.
I do not like any of the candidates named,and I used to be a Romney supporter. He is boring and has nasty people within his organization.He also had Romneycare hanging around his neck. Huckabee used his influence as Governor and got his son off from torture and dog killing charges,and pardoned scum that went on to kill several Police Officers. He is not boring,just a fake,phony,fraud.
It is still early and lots can happen,but from my view point Sarah is the only Conservative that has any guts, and has great records of accomplishments. Jim Demint is really good,and shows some guts,but not compared to Sarah.
McLame was all it took to take the winds out of any sails for a Republican ascendancy and I think most of us thought of Sarah as someone who would win the next round anyway.
OK, Carter. I promise I will keep it simple and sort of sweet.
People like Carly and Dino weren’t Conservative enough. Both were mushy on the illegal alien situation. That is why they lost - not supportive of law & order.
Daniels position on illegal aliens is a telling one: his stance, that “Rule of Law” doesn’t matter, is more of the same mushiness. This creates anarchy, not only in Indiana but in our nation at large.
I do not want him as President. Any questions?
So did Reagan.
Mitch Daniels = a plainer and a much more boring Richard Luger.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.