Posted on 04/20/2011 7:39:55 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) has gained considerable momentum over the past few weeks.
She raised more money than any of her presidential rivals in 2011’s first quarter, her presence at political events regularly swells crowds, and she’s running surprisingly strongly in early 2012 polling, despite relatively low name recognition.
Yet, for all that, leading pundits still dismiss her chances to become the eventual nominee. Their argument is that her appeal is restricted to a limited constituency — the Tea Party faithful and social conservatives — and that while those groups might boost her to a strong showing in Iowa and South Carolina, they’re too limited to carry her to a national nomination.
While that might be true, let’s play a game of What If, since that’s the game Bachmann and her strategists are likely playing during all those visits to early primary states.
What if Bachmann were to develop a message to which mainstream and establishment Republicans responded? Is that possible? Would it make a presidential nomination possible, too?
It depends on whom you ask.
GOP consultant Mike Murphy, who worked for Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) 2000 campaign, says it’s a moot point and that Bachmann is unable to transition from a Tea Party persona to a more inclusive political mindset.
“Much like Ringo giving up the drums for the concert piano, it would not work. She is what she is, politically. One audience. One appeal.”
Larry Sabato, director for the University of Virginia Center for Politics, takes a similar point of view, suggesting it’s a zero-sum game.
“If you’re going to fire up the Tea Partiers, then almost certainly you are going to alienate the part of the party base that prefers more genteel candidates who can actually win in November.”
That line of thinking suggests that even if Bachmann were to try to branch out, she’d be unsuccessful, because it would render her inauthentic and diminish her appeal with every camp.
Tom Jensen of the Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling agrees, though he lays blame not at Bachmann’s feet but at the doorstep of the Tea Party movement that he claims is unable to integrate disparate points of view.
“If she made any sort of overtures toward the center, she would probably lose that niche, and it would scuttle her chances,” he said.
But is Bachmann’s “niche” strong enough to carry her to a win?
Based on his polling, in a best-case scenario Jensen thinks unified Tea Party support for Bachmann could yield her 20-25 percent of the vote in an individual primary. But only a large, fragmented field could turn that 20-25 percent into a winning number.
In that sort of fragmentation, she has a legitimate shot, Sabato concurs, claiming Bachmann could “overwhelm the mainstream candidates.”
And there’s reason to believe those sorts of stars could align for her.
The conventional wisdom is that the GOP establishment will quickly settle on former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman or former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty.
But this cycle’s establishment seems neither unified behind one candidate nor particularly excited about one. Big-name donors who gravitate toward establishment candidates have been wary about choosing a winner, because no one’s easily identified as one.
So imagine, for a second, a scenario where mainstream Republicans are squabbling over their standard-bearer as Tea Party and grassroots conservatives coalesce around their favorite.
In a contest where the Tea Party unites behind a candidate amid mainstream Republican rankling, it’s quite possible that the 20-25 percent Bachmann could score in a primary might be enough to win and send shock waves through the party.
Former George W. Bush strategist and No Labels co-founder Mark McKinnon has confessed to his disagreements with Bachmann before, but says she’s not to be underestimated.
“I think she has huge potential in Iowa and South Carolina. And if you win those two states in the Republican primaries, you are off to the races.”
Further, once she starts winning, McKinnon claims, she can “refine her message to make it more appealing to a wider community.”
“The establishment may scoff now,” he said, “but if Bachmann starts winning, they will crawl over broken glass to kiss her ring.”
That would bring us full circle: Bachmann might not win by bringing the establishment on board, but the establishment could be brought on board very quickly if she starts winning.
-- Heinze, the founder of GOP12.com, is a member of staff at The Hill. Find his column, GOP Presidential Primary, on thehill.com
133 posted on Monday, April 18, 2011 8:15:49 PM by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)
My two cents:
Palin (Won’t run)
Romney (Please)
Huckabee (Please)
Pawlenty (Weenie)
Huntsman (Please)
Gary Johnson (Pro-drugs, otherwise isn’t horrible)
Buddy Roemer (Please)
Barbour (White male with a heavy Southern accent vs. Obama...don’t know how that will play. Personally, I like him.)
Daniels (Weenie)
Santorum (Got blown out by a fern. UN Ambassador maybe)
Bachmann (Now you’re talking)
The Pauls (Libertarian or just kooky?)
Gingrich (Please)
Bolton (Isn’t he pro-qweer marriage? If not, maybe VP.)
Cain (No way a Black man gets near the presidency again, thanks to Barry.)
Trump (Flip-flopper, but he’s going after Soetoro, which is good.)
I see Jeb Bush getting drafted as the GOP POTUS candidate.
Like I’ve posted numerous times before, I can see Jeb Bush getting drafted as the GOP POTUS nominee.
Since 1900, only one Republican became president by defeating an incumbent. That was Ronald Reagan. He had these four traits that might have helped him:
1. He was conservative.
2. He was a governor.
3. He sought the nomination, in a previous election.
4. He was from the West.
These Republicans, who might run, have at least three of those four traits: Sarah Palin, Dirk Kempthorne, Mike Huckabee, and Mitt Romney. I hope that all of them will run, and I hope that Haley Barbour and Buddy Roemer will run. I hope that at least four of them will continue campaigning until the convention. If that happens, no one will get the majority of the delegates before the convention. The convention will be more suspenseful and exciting, causing more people to watch and hear the great republican ideas. That happened in 1980, and Reagan won about 40 states.
Ames is less than 4 months away. That will winnow the winnowable. Let the winnowing begin ... so we can get some of ‘em winnowed. Especially the ones who need to get winnowed. Who will get winnowed by then? Santorum?
Who's "obsessed"? We just want to see proof of Barry's constitutional eligibility, which only his original LFBC can provide, and which he could release in a New York minute.
We asked for it. Barry refused that simple request. Were we supposed to just shrug our shoulders and say, "As you wish, your Highness"?
It's Obama who has prolonged this, and dragged it out. He could have shut this whole controversy down before the election, if he had simply released his LFBC to the public. That's all that anyone's ever asked him to do.
Instead of attacking your fellow Americans for asking their president for the simplest, and most basic proof of citizenship there is, why aren't you asking Obama why he's refusing to do so? Don't you think we have a right to ask this basic question of our president?
Lastly, you're wrong about "only a small minority of the conservative base" being interested and concerned with this question. I don't have the link, but the results of a scientific poll that was recently conducted among center-right voters indicates that the MAJORITY of us want Obama to prove that he's constitutionally eligible to hold office.
No Reagan didn’t. His shooting was allegedly the attempt by an insane person to win the love of Jodie Foster ala “Taxi Driver”.
Plus, Reagan and Bush had long political careers and plenty to be hit with. Sarah has very little of a career and little to have provoked this storm of hatred. What has she done to generate this? Give birth to a Down’s Syndrome baby?
Have a daughter give birth to an OOW baby? What?
Reagan had kicked the liberals in the teeth for decades and Bush had “stolen” the election from their favorite environut. Sarah’s only crime is having the natural charisma which the media tries to create for its creatures.
Gee, I mention Gary Johnson as an afterthought and the SOB goes ahead and announces he’s running! (no exploratory committee for him.)
Pro-pot I don’t care but articles are saying he is pro-gay marriage, pro-choice and pro-illegals too. Full tilt libertarian basically.
A Playboy interview circa 2000 seems to confirm most of this (no mention of the gays as this was before that started to go down)
So unless he’s “evolved” like Trump and Romney he’s going nowhere.
“Trump may be a modern-day counterpart to Wendell Willkie.”
That’s apt. In Wilkie’s case with the war and GOP still healing from the bitch slap of the 1930’s I think his nomination was acceptable. And he gets points for going to hostile areas and campaigning.
Trump though.....another American Idol like Obama.
If Santorum runs I don’t see him going anywhere.
Barbour is definitely a ticket for 4-more-Obama. You forgot fat and old looking to ‘heavy’ Southern accent. Jeeze, like grandpa McCain had a chance even if he wasnt a complete phony.
Jeb who?? Sorry, his brother killed that possibility.
Your list was entertaining. So far not looking good for our side.
I dont understand all the “ifs”.
These candidates are out campaigning already, even though they are not official.
they are all running.
Barbour
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53485.html
Santorum hired 2 guys in IA this week.
Palin’s people are already working on it. (Go to SarahPac and Organize4Palin and sign up. they will email you.
Some will drop out by SEPT if they don’t get any results.
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.