Replies

To get elected president or get a major party nomination you usually have to demonstrate that you can win in a larger, more varied constituency. That means you most often have to be a governor or senator from a large or large-ish state. But to be elected a governor or senator from one of the larger states you usually have to appeal to moderates. To appeal to moderates you have to take stances that many conservatives will see as unconservative. So if you are a viable candidate (under most circumstances) you are probably not going to be seen as a true conservative.

It works the other way as well. To be seen as a true conservative, you have to take stances that probably will make it hard for you to get elected (and reelected) as a senator or governor of one of the larger, more diverse states. So "true conservatives" tend to be representatives or non-politicians (publishers, columnists, pizza magnates), and those are people who usually don't have the experience and skills to win elections.

So Cain and Bachmann weren't likely to be nominees or president. That goes for previous candidates like Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo or Bob Dornan or Steve Forbes. They didn't have the following, the appeal, the proven skills to win. Santorum couldn't win either. He couldn't even carry his own state. And Newt? Not likely either. Even people who liked him didn't really like him much. That leaves Rick Perry. In theory, he could have won. Just like in theory, Mitch Daniels or Tim Pawlenty could have won. In practice -- not so much. You can have the resume and look good on paper, but still not cut it on the campaign trail.

Also, I'm not saying that Romney didn't have a lot of money and endorsements that made for an uneven playing field. But he'd run before, as had McCain, as had Dole (as had Nixon, as had Reagan). For some people this looks like last time's loser just becoming the next time's loser. But they got experience. They made connections and formed relationships with donors, political bigwigs, journalists and consultants. That's what Reagan did himself. All of your candidates were running for the first time (except maybe for half-hearted efforts by Cain and Gingrich) and it looks like none of them will run again. So next time, you start off with equally unknown small-timers.

Ronald Reagan? Well, he was Governor of California, the biggest state. Nobody was going to say that he didn't have an administrative background and political skills. And he signed on with the conservative movement early on, so nobody was going to question his conservative credentials. Anybody else -- anybody since -- is going to have a harder time with that. Sometimes it looks like it's not so much that candidates lose because they're not conservative, as it is that they're not seen as conservative because they lose. If some of the losing candidates had won it might not be so easy to dismiss them. It's harder to pigeonhole at least one Bush as a moderate because he managed to win.