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.
Governor Rick Perry of Texas anyone?
Heck he maybe out of a job by that time and needing another gov’t teat to such on.
Huck & Mitt are non starters, if either of these boobs gets the nomination a conservative will run to the right of them and we get a Fauxbama 2nd term with him winning by plurality with less than 40% of the total vote.
Considering the uninspiring field of offerings, it’ll probably be Obama’s election to lose, i.e., he’d have to screw something up big time to actually not win it.
These elections are pointless without “None of the Above”.
Yep, he’s experienced all right.
Pro-Abortion
And his business experience really helped him when he signed into law a draconian bill that has economically devestated his state, and effectively taxes everyone for simply breathing.
Romney is nothing more than a slimey used car salesman, he talks like he’s conservative and tries to act like he’s the heir to Reagan, when his political record is a cross between Bill Clinton and George Bush I. This guys a fraud, a liberal republican and DOA.
Hey, RNC, are you reading this??? I WILL NOT HOLD MY NOSE AND VOTE FOR ROMNEY!!!!! I am not alone on this one!!! Not by a long shot! I am sick of Republicans putting up Liberalism Light candidates. I will not hold my nose and vote for another one.
Wolfman,
You are listening to too many pundents. I don’t know if Palin is going to be a serious contender in 12 or not, but I can tell you this, what she is doing right now is completely outside the conventional model, which is EXACTLY how she took down the corruption of her own party in her own state, and how she stared down EXXON and showed them the door and got a better deal for her state in the process.
Just because conventional wisdom would say she can’t seriously compete because she’s not in the GOP system, does not mean she won’t be the winner when the dust is all settled.
I think Palin is far smarter than folks give her credit for, and perhaps a bit more ruthless too. If she and Cheney continue to be the only voices in the wilderness saying what the overwhelming majority of the electorate is saying to the liberal socialist agenda, you better believe she’s going to be a force in the coming cycle, no matter what the pundents and the folks in the RNC headquarters think or say.
Her entire political career has been unconventional and outside the “norm”... writing her off simply because of that is foolish.
Its to early to be looking at 2012. We need to stay focused on 2010. Any conservative canidate that announces this early is just giving the opposition time to bash them with the liberal media’s help.
IMHO Palin is either the Queen of this race or will be the GOP “KING MAKER”. She hasn’t announced but she is in the media light almost daily, I think she has recovered from the damage the media caused in the last election.
DeMint is a possability, he has been coming on strong. I like Jindal.
It will be Obama’s election to lose, incumbents have the edge...I just hope that when 2010 does go conservative, and applies the brakes to Obama’s agendas, we don’t shoot ourselves in the ass and do things to help his re-election bid.
Romney – Proven bad Governor. Massachusetts’ economy tanked as Romney
also imposed gay marriage, socialized medicine, RomneyCARE,
and Romney-DEATHpanels, as Romney also ruined the GOP, and brought in millions of illegal aliens destroying whole cities.
Romney is also hated for his perpetual crying and hiding behind his religion,
for leaving Massachusetts as he ran for President unsuccessfully using dirty tricks,
and for directing, encouraging, and condoning, his team to attack Gov. Palin on the “eve” of the Election 2008.
Palin – Proven good Governor. Beloved.
Game over.
Very well said. I like Fred Thompson, but he doesn't want the job enough to get noticed by the average voter (not a flaw in the man, but a fatal flaw in a candidate). Like you, I expect Palin to run, and I think she has a good chance of winning ... unless elections are suspended for the duration of the "crisis" once Obama/Pelosi see that socialism isn't as popular with the living as it is with ACORN's dead voters. As several others have mentioned though, I'm far more concerned for now with 2010. We need conservatives running, which means they need to be getting their campaigns set up now. I am funding several of them - generously - and I hope other Freepers are putting their money behind the drive to take back an America that follows the Constitution.
We need new faces—The old guys will not do. No Mitts, No Huckabee, No McCains. Jindal is too young-—maybe in the future. Sarah Palin is the best we have but she comes with baggage. I would toss in this hand and seek new people—General Patreaus might be a good choice. No Senators or Congress Critters! Go with a war hero (not a war victim like McCain) Someone the nation can rally around. We need people with lots of experience and Conservative values proven over time. The Mitts, Newts and such can serve on the cabinet if you will. We will need to rally the nation.
You have no idea what the Generals politics are. He’s done a great job serving our nation, but he has made zero statements about where he stands on social or economic issues...nor should he.
Do political junkies wield enough influence in the primaries to doom a candidacy?
Highly likely. Just other people mentioned in this thread like Santorum, Thompson and Thune I forgot about. Pence, Kasich and DeMint I hadn’t considered. Perry could still change his mind and run despite the denial.
And of course the sheer number of other governors or business/thought leaders who may consider running.
Not for something as inconsequential as Jindals’s poor performance in that speech.
I agree completely that our top priority is 2010. Thought this might be a fun diversion for a Friday morning.
The whole iist of Nothings.
i had read several articles that said jindal wasn’t pressing the investigation into ACORN. Seemed odd but that was what was reported. These are the sorts of things that get picked up in primaries and can torpedo someone though.
Which makes me not including Thompson look all the more foolish. I looked at it this way, he considered running in ‘08. he is running for governor in ‘10 which may boost his profile and increase potential support. Additionally he was on a Club For Growth list I had from a while ago and thought I would leave him on.
Oh it is..but just saying that I am consciously not thinking about 2012.
First, I agree that the MSM has a lot less credibility than they did 20 years ago. However, they retain enough clout, particularly with older voters who had trusted them for most of their lives. The MSM and not being George W Bush was enough to get elected this time around. It won’t be next time.
Point D is interesting. It has been almost 30 years since a real liberal occupied the White House. I beleive Clinton was a true liberal but he was willing to compromise anything to get re-elected. Carter had principles. The Liberal label just didn’t resonate the way it did back in ‘88. People just didn’t remember or weren’t alive to know what real liberalism meant. Now that they are getting a taste, I think that it will alienate a large swath of the population for 20-30 years.
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.