Posted on 07/02/2011 11:40:30 AM PDT by Brices Crossroads
Much has been written about Michele Bachmann's lack of any executive experience and the crippling disability it poses for her campaign for the GOP nomination and for the Presidency. But candidates with no executive experience have won the Presidency before. Both JFK and Obama come to mind. It is true that no GOP nominee in well over 100 years has lacked executive experience. (Even Senator Warren Harding had served as Lieutenant Governor of Ohio and William Howard Taft had been the Governor of both the Philippines and Cuba). It is a major obstacle for her, especially in this cycle and especially in the GOP, which prefers to nominate Executives rather than legislators. However, this impediment cannot be said to be insurmountable. It has been overcome in the recent past, albeit by Democrat candidates.
What would be unprecedented in modern times would be the nomination and election of a candidate who has NEVER won a state wide election. With the exception of Dwight Eisenhower, a War hero and Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in World War II, who was thus sui generis , it has been over seventy years since the GOP gambled on a candidate who had never run a state wide campaign, the hapless Wendell Wilkie. Wilkie was carpet bombed by FDR in 1940, even though the economy was still in the ditch after eight years of the New Deal. The Republicans confront a similar situation in 2012, a weakened Democrat President, who can be beaten with the right candidate. The GOP is not about to entrust its 2012 fortunes to a four year Congressperson who has never even passed a major piece of good legislation or blocked a major piece of bad legislation.
And the knock on her political experience is not just that she has never won state wide elective office, but that MICHELE BACHMANN HAS NEVER EVEN RUN A STATE WIDE CAMPAIGN. Indeed, even Herman Cain, who has never won state wide elective office, has at least run state wide, seeking the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate in a contested state wide primary. Now, in a singular act of political hubris, Bachmann puts herself forward to be the GOP standard bearer in a national election. And make no mistake. A national election for the Presidency is fifty separate state elections. Having never won, nor even run, a state wide campaign Bachmann argues that the GOP should trust her competence to run 50 state wide elections ON THE SAME DAY, as well as her ability to win more than half of them! Even the "Stupid Party" can't be bamboozled to that degree. The risk of a down ballot catastrophe caused by an inexperienced, gaffe prone candidate at the top of the ticket is too great, even if the Democrat President himself were a shoo-in for re-election (which, in 2012, he definitely is not).
Sarah Palin has the executive experience which Bachmann lacks. But, even Mitt Romney can make that claim, as can Barack Obama. However, leaving aside the question of executive experience, Palin also possesses the political experience so conspicuously missing from Bachmann's skill set. Palin has run in two state wide contested GOP primaries, in 2002 and in 2006. In 2002, she narrowly lost the GOP nod for Lieutenant Governor by 2.5% in a four candidate field. Four years later, after exposing the corruption of his administration, Palin took on and clobbered the incumbent GOP Governor Frank Murkowski, who had been elected state wide FOUR times previously, in the GOP primary, 51%-19%. She went on to easily dispatch popular two term former Governor Tony Knowles in the general election, 49% to 40%, in spite of a third party challenge by a former GOP opponent.
Palin, alone among all the GOP candidates, has actually run in a national campaign, and this experience cannot be overemphasized She has seen the errors the McCain operatives made. To a greater extent than all the rest, especially Bachmann, she realizes what works in a Presidential campaign and what does not work. She knows who can be trusted and who cannot be trusted. Michele Bachmann, on the other hand, will be completely dependent upon the likes of Ed Rollins and his ilk, because she has no clue how to run even a state wide campaign, much less a national one. Palin neither wants nor needs such crutches.
Obama in 2012 is shaping up as a ripe target for the GOP. They are not about to squander this golden opportunity by gambling on Michele Bachmann's thin political resume.
And if you remove Perry, even better
Sorry, should have copied you to my last post.
Anyway, one of the points I made there: if having run in or run a national campaign is the criteria, the only candidates who would meet that standard are losers and incumbents!
I laughed my butt off when Obama claimed that his experience included “running for president.” I’m not changing my reaction to that claim now, not for anyone else, either.
“The Thin Political Resume of Michele Bachmann”
She also has reputedly torn tags off pillows, though the tags expressly stated “do not remove under penalty of law”.
This woman clearly must be defeated while we look for someone who is solidly conservative.
“And suddenly libs everywhere are worried about experience......”
Well, she’s a white Republican and thus needs to embody the collected wisdom of the ages and have it on total recall at all times. Otherwise she’s manifestly not elligible to hold the office.
Obama is God...the MSM talking heads literally said so and how dare you question is patriotism? ;)
Sorry, should have copied you to my last post.
Anyway, one of the points I made there: if having run in or run a national campaign is the criteria, the only candidates who would meet that standard are losers and incumbents!
I laughed my butt off when Obama claimed that his experience included “running for president.” I’m not changing my reaction to that claim now, not for anyone else, either.
I like the Palin/Paul
The thing to do is try not to make sense out of nonsense.
LOL
P.S.
Running or running in a national campaign gives a candidate experience in . . . running or running in a national campaign.
It doesn’t give the candidate experience that adds to his qualifications, whatever they may be, to serve as POTUS.
(That said, how WELL a candidate runs a campaign may indicate his general organizational skill.)
“Perry & Palin.”
Worth repeating!
Yeah, maybe your candidate could show up as a candidate. LOL
Maybe we will find out.
The country doesn't need a president with a thick POLITICAL resume, it needs one with a PRIVATE SECTOR resume and the courage to throw the Ring of Mordor-on-the-Potomac back into the fire of the Constitution.
Bashing Michelle Bachmann in hopes that Sarah might run, maybe, who knows, is unwise.
I’m sick and tired of hearing about experience. It’s a fact that experience alone does not qualify anyone for anything. I’m also sick of the politician’s con game of creating the mess and pledging to clean up the mess. Experienced politicians are the bandits that have gotten us into this mess. Screw experience.
That’s an opinion held by some. I’m aware of that but I’ve researched Perry and his credentials are pretty solid. That’s not to say that I don’t recognize the TTC and gaurdasil fiasco however, when pressure is applied things generally get stopped. Both of those issues caused me to pause about him but I also read that he is a staunch supporter of Israel and has made the trip there more than once. That means more.
What we have to watch for is that we hire someone who will ‘listen’ and can be persuaded through pressure. I don’t believe Perry would go about usurping the constitution in spite of the American people. Not like the nightmare sitting in the Oval office has. That bastard works overtime to figure out just how to get around the Constitution and us and onward to destroying us.
With that said, he is not my choice for president but would very much like him on the ticket behind Palin. I believe the interests of the Nation would be protected.
I don’t have a problem as long as you are signing your own books. But when you want a signature for buying a book you should not have that subject to buying someone elses book.
Not to mention that if you want to be POTUS, it might be nice to enter the race and actually debate and compete with those you believe are lesser than you.
A crowning? Only will happen in dreams.
Go McCotter! LOL
That said, I will add that Michelle Bachmann made a good impression in the New Hampshire debate, and ought to be praised for that.
William Flax
We can say what we want about Bachmann, but she walks the walk when it comes to Israel, and she started that walk at a very early age.
In 1974 when just 17 years old, she spent the summer working in the cotton fields on a Kibbutz in Israel.
And suddenly the MSM types turn on MB after a week of puffing her up. What changed?
The Undefeated started impressing libs and Dems alike. The MSM is coming to the realization that Palin will indeed run and so they need to shut MB down so that she’s off the table as support/a potential running mate (which would nullify the ‘repubs are anti woman attack with 2 women atop the ticket.) I honestly do not see a SP/MB ticket materializing, but when Palin gets the nod, Bachmann can provide valuable support and the MSM wants that minimized/eliminated/killed in the womb ASAP.
I have many problems with MB from birther issues to Rollins to her most recent gaffe, but MB is INFINITELY more qualified to hold the office of President than the golfing disaster that occupies it now.
There are many scenarios in which I could, despite my issues with her, vote for MB as Prez. There are none which could make me vote Democrat.
Are you serious? You posted my Palin/Perry and said even better without Perry but you would go for Paul over Perry?
Geez I need a drink
LOL
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.