Also,the idea that you have to be Governor or a SENATOR (for crying out loud)to be President is nuts. The idea that 8 years in Washington is not enough "experience" to be President is anathema to everything conservatives believe in.I want the guy who has the most experience fighting Socialism.Pence has more of that than the entire field combined.BTW nationwide Pence's,Allen's and Brownback's name ID are all less than 5%,so that is a non factor.
Thanks to the other poster for correcting my shoddy memory about Garfield and Lincoln.
Okay, I looked up Allen's abortion positions, and he is straining to be as pro-abort as he can get away with as a southern GOPer. As far as name recognition, once the connection is made with his VERY famous father (and NFLers have made pretty good pols), his recogntion would escalate quickly.
I can consider a politician who wants to fight for what we can now, and get the rest later when the time is right, but Allen makes more "exceptions" than he has to (he supports abortion for fetal abnormality...shades of the eugenicists!).
One of the reasons it is useful to be more than a Rep when running has nothing to do with Washington experience. It has to do with showing you can run (and win) a big campaign. Sitting Veeps are apprentices by virtue of having been close to the president, and getting a head start. Maxine Waters of course, is successful at winning a Rep seat, but could not win larger office even in California! Ron Paul and Chris Smith are excellent reps, but they would have similar problems.
Now, if Bush were interested in helping conservatives, instead of his Texas pals and '70's warmovers, he would have been placing guys like Pence in key positions. That didn't happen, so the bench is kind of lean. Think how much mileage Bill Bennett got just out of being Drug Tsar and Education Secretary. Heck, those two positions shouldn't even exist!