Posted on 12/04/2009 5:49:30 AM PST by wzevonfan
Here is a list of 2012 candidates. Generally, I am dwelling on the negatives as this is what is going to limit them in their ability to win but will mention any unique positives.
Please share your thoughts on these or any other potential candidates.
Romney - Romneycare is an albatross. He is a Mormon which impacts appeal. Is popular in Michigan due to his father. Sometimes comes across like a used car salesman. Is probably more conservative than his record and gets a bad rap due to his need to make compromises to get elected in The People's Republic. Big question is can he rally a base that will be disenchanted with his record on social issues and healthcare.
Giuliani - Personal life has historically been a mess, pro-choice, pro-gay at times limiting appeal to social conservatives. Superb defense and fiscal credentials. Comes from NY and has appeal on Long Island and in the suburbs. Like Romney, could carry a significant blue state. Can he rally a base that will not be happy with his position on social issues?
Huckabee - Willy Horton II, clemency issue is big and can be distilled down into a 15 second spot. Fair Tax is legitimate conversation in fiscal conservative circles but sounds radical to moderate voters. Is a minister and has impeccable social conservative credentials. Talks about god too much at times which can be a strong negative to "casual Christians" for lack of a better term. Big question is can he carry DC suburbs, Philly suburbs and Ohio suburbs along with western states like CO, NM, and NV due to staunch social conservative positions.
Jindal - Young, maybe too young. Has had a meteoric rise. Severe media bias against due to his potential. Resulted in horrible reviews of prime time rebuttal which has stuck with voters. Is not investigating ACORN despite scandal. Has a few out of the mainstream catholic views and has even participated in exorcisms. Big question is will media bias torpedo his candidacy before it even begins.
Brownback - Will have only been governor for two years but has a long track record in the senate. Lacks name recognition of other candidates due to lack of controversy. Has strong social conservative credentials, supports a flat tax and has been generally pro-defense. Is typically on the conservation not environmental side of most issues. Big question is can I guy with very little name recognition gain the spotlight in the primaries.
Pawlenty - Decreasing popularity in own state. Is an evangelical who was raised catholic. Has managed to win in a state that is very liberal/independent. He has liberal views on the environment and has a nuanced track record on health care which will be easy to paint negatively. Is likely more conservative than record due to need to compromise. Big question is can he rally a base that will be unhappy with positions taken on the environment and healthcare.
Gingrich - Personal life has been a mess and opens him to charges of hypocrisy. Pretty severe media bias has subsided due to him no longer being viewed as a threat. Big question is can he overcome messy personal history and gain support with social conservatives.
Palin - Media Bias, Media Bias, Media Bias!!!!! What else can you say. She has a great record but so much damage was done during the last campaign. The Couric interview always comes up and the left/press seems truly terrified of her. The uninformed and stupid tend to believe what they hear and think she is an idiot. Big question is can she make a significant enough dent in her negatives and fight the media bias to have a shot.
McDonnell - Just dominated in the Old Dominion by running a smart campaign focused on fiscal issues. Will only have 3 years of executive experience but is running a large, sophisticated state. Has that thesis paper that the press will hammer away at but which helps reinforce his social conservative credentials. Big question is can he replicate his success on the national stage.
The other question of course is if the Dems continue on the current path will it even matter who gets nominated due to Obama bungling virtually everything he touches.
Member since 9/2008.
That says it all.
Palin - ...What else can you say. She has a great record but so much damage was done during the last campaign.”
Few things:
1) if anything the media ordeal she went through is HER BEST ASSET. Palin’s BEEN through the media meat grinding machine unlike the other potentials and has come out stronger. Compare how she is now with how GW Bush was his second term—his administration was virtually demoralized by the media, while Palin has proven her savvy and gained more strength from the greatest media adverity possible. She’s used notoriety—both negative and positive to her advantage, and it’s working.
** Also think about Obama, whose poll numbers suffer now because of the overly high expectations the adoring media set for him. High expectations too early can prove to be a curse.
2) Media savvy is an important strength to have WHILE in OFFICE too—not just while campaigning. In this media age, the success of your agenda and persuading the public to trust your decisions depends on how skillfully you can handle the media and control the way your message is presented. Sarah’s been able to be a trailblazer in this regard with her facebook, OP-eds, etc...she’s practically put journalists in a subordinate position. (I also believe the “failures” of ‘08 were due to the McCain staffers’ decisions—they had a horrible media strategy and were doing even worse before the VP pick—things would have worked out way better had they allowed Palin to fully “go rogue.”)
3) NO SKELETONS to come out of the closet. Every possible piece of “dirt” has already been revealed AND she’s been able to clear up a lot of suff with her bestselling book. People realize that much of the stuff that came out about her were rumors. That and many independents who may have been skeptical are warming up to her. Not to mention there is an overall disenchantment with the mainstream media now anyway.
4) Longtime experience can often be a disadvantage: that means the more potential for skeletons to be dug up, more mistakes in judgment that could be revealed, more enemies made, etc...Think Huckabee with the Clemmons pardon and Romney with the universal healthcare he instituted in Massachusetts.
5) Lastly PEOPLE OVERESTIMATE the impact of the Couric interview on the overall result of the election—on how people come out of the actually VOTED vs. what media pundits and celeb gossipers talk about on TV. obama had it in the bag regardless of who mccain chose and mccain would have lost by a much wider margin had palin not been on the ticket.
Yeah we should not let the MSM choose our candidate, but then again let’s say we do:
* Not only is Palin stronger for having been through the media meat grinding machine—her FAMILY has gone through it too. She controls her message now quite well. Plus: every possible piece of dirt that can be revealed has already come out. CANNOT say the same for the other potentials...remember? Romney’s wife having donated to Planned Parenthood (and I can only imagine all sorts of bizarre Mormon associations people could find or make up if they look hard enough) ...Huckabee’s son killed a dog or something? ANd Romneycare...Clemmons with Huckabee. Who KNOWS what could come out with regard to the other presidential hopefuls...Everybody else is going to have trouble explaining their long and detailed records which will be full of contradictions to their proposed agendas and other mishaps...Palin’s record is short, yet impressive, and has already been dissected.
No thanks.
You've at least 9 un-electables on your list...
Ya got a new list????
Palin, Demint
LOL!!
If he can not communicate and connect with the rank and file...He will NEVER be a superstar.
I saw him speak nationally....and it was frankly a failure.
Oh, I think he has a future....but it needs to be polished without being faked.
We shall see....
I agree with everything you have said.
Why don’t we start with your list? Then we have something to discuss.
Would love to see Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma consider running. Conservative and strong candidate. Maybe JC Watts would do a good job taking over Steeles chairmanship of the national gop too.
Coburn of Oklahoma ran the illegals out of the state. They have relocated in Texas. Sen Coburn would make a great candidate. Check out his site
http://coburn.senate.gov/public
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.