An Early look at the 2012 Caucuses
- Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 4:18
- National, News Center, Top Story
- 9,767 views
- 29 comments
I have been putting off writing about the 2012 Republican presidential campaign for some time now. Even though I got my start in Iowa politics back in 1999 with Steve Forbes’ presidential campaign and have continued to make my living in Iowa politics since then, I have to admit that all the presidential chatter starts way too early in Iowa.
If I had my way, we would focus making sure Governor Culver is the first incumbent Governor to lose re-election since 1962. I also wouldn’t mind letting people know that there is a government program out there that allows you to trade in your clunker of a congressman for fresh new leadership. The best part of that program is that it doesn’t cost you a dime and could actually end up saving thousands of tax dollars, but like many things in life, things don’t always go my way.
Last week, Des Moines Cityview published a feature story on the Republican contenders for the 2012 Iowa Caucuses. I can’t blame anyone for wanting to speculate on the 2012 caucuses, but I found it interesting that Cityview had Douglas Burns write a Republican horserace article.
Mr. Burns is a fourth-generation Iowa journalist. He’s written for The Ames Tribune, IowaIndependent.com (an online news site that is funded by the same homosexual activist that targeted former State Rep. Danny Carroll), and his family’s newspaper, The Carroll Daily Time Herald. Burns also worked for Democrat Congresswoman Pat Danner, but what really makes me question his ability to write an objective article on 2012 Republican caucuses is the book he wrote about Congressman Steve King titled “King Kong Krazy.”
Here is how Burn’s describes his book, “King Kong Krazy.”
“U.S. Rep. Steve King, a western Iowa Republican who has long inhabited the fringes within his own party, seems to be hurtling into insanity, and is undoubtedly the biggest freak show going these days in Iowa politics.”
Can someone with that viewpoint really speak to Republican candidates’ abilities in the Iowa Caucuses? The base of the Republican Party is full of people who view Congressman King one of the few champions of conservatism left. So it’s likely that since Burns thinks King is a “freak show,” he probably thinks that the majority of people who vote in the caucuses are as well.
With all of that said, the following is how I stack up the potential field of presidential candidates as we begin to look at the 2012 Iowa Caucuses. Before we begin, let me say that lists like these will change dramatically. If I had done this list in March or April of this year, Mark Sanford and John Ensign would have been included. Now, due to their own self-destructive behavior, they are not even a blip on the 2012 radar.
1. Mike Huckabee (Falling): It should come as no surprise that the winner of the 2008 Iowa caucuses occupies the top spot as we begin the discussions about the 2012 caucuses. Despite being out-spent my Mitt Romney 20 to 1, Huckabee was able consolidate Iowa’s social conservatives around his campaign.
Looking ahead to 2012, Huckabee will have to deal with something new if he seeks the Republican nomination for president – expectations. No longer will Huckabee be the underdog, meaning, the national media will be looking to see how much money he has raised and what type of organization he is building in the early states.
Just last week, it was reported that Huckabee’s Political Action Committee only raised $305,000in the first six months of the year. By comparison, Mitt Romney raised $1.6 million and Sarah Palin raised $733,000, and both had ample amounts of cash on hand. Huckabee, on the other hand, ended the period with $48,000 in the bank but listed outstanding debts of $63,000. Huckabee could get by with those types of numbers as an underdog, but now, is more expected of him.
Still, Huckabee might be the best communicator in the Republican field, and he’s already proved that can get you a long way in a state like Iowa.
WHO Radio host Steve Deace, an early supporter of Huckabee’s 2008 campaign, believes that the candidate who offers the best solutions will win. “There is no question that Mike has a unique chemistry with the Republican base here in Iowa no other Republican anywhere has right now. Sarah Palin may be able to duplicate that, should she spend the same kind of time here and grow in her presentation of the issues. However, what will be interesting will be to see if Mike has grown, too. What worked in 2008 will not work in 2012 because it will be a different dynamic,” Deace said.
Deace went on to say, “In 2008, Huckabee took advantage of the fact he was really the only candidate running that spent any real time here who made any sincere attempt to mobilize and galvanize the Christian base. But he will need to show both that base and voters across the board that he has an integrated worldview with solutions and not just slogans. Can he integrate his worldview into doing something about infanticide and not just talking about it? Can he integrate his worldview into doing something about judicial supremacy and not just talking about it? Can he integrate his worldview into doing something about the economy and not just talking about it? Voters do not trust the condescending platitudes of either political party, so the old Republican talking points won’t make a dent in the next election. The candidate with the best solutions wins – period.”
2. Sarah Palin (Falling): Sarah Palin’s brand of politics should play well with Iowa Republican. In fact, one could easily argue that she could give Mike Huckabee a run for his money when it comes to lining up support from the GOP base in Iowa. Palin would potentially have the ability to attract women from all political persuasions to her campaign. Part of the trick to winning the Iowa caucuses is finding a way to bring new people into the process, and Palin has the ability to do just that.
While Palin might be the best known candidate in the race, she will also bring with her a lot of baggage. Some of her liabilities have been generated by news organizations’ vicious appetite to destroy her. Yet, she has brought on some of those problems herself. One thing is for certain, if she does run for President, she is going to have to explain why she could not complete one term as Alaska’s Governor. While people tend to favor candidates who have been governors, Palin not finishing one term could haunt her for the rest of her political career.
3. Mitt Romeny: The national political pundits all have Mitt Romney occupying the top spot on their 2012 presidential lists, but for the man who invested millions of dollars in Iowa during his 2008 presidential run, Romney hasn’t stepped foot in Iowa since right before the last general election, and even that event was very low key.
Romney built an impressive political operation leading up to the 2008 Iowa Caucuses but failed to manage his expectations and was a victim of his own success. Romney’s boisterous Iowa campaign eventually caused competing candidates like John McCain and Rudy Giuliani to focus on other states rather than contend with Romney’s well oiled machine.
Both McCain and Giuliani were to Romney’s left in terms of their political philosophy, so when they surrendered Iowa to him in the summer of 2007, Romney was left to wage battle against a rag-tag group of candidates who were all to the right of him on most issues. As we now know, Mike Huckabee was able to consolidate social conservatives behind his campaign and won rather easily. That might not have been the case had John McCain remained a viable Iowa candidate through the entire process.
Looking towards the 2012 caucuses, Iowa could cause a problem for a second Romney attempt for the Republican nomination. Romney is most likely avoiding Iowa in an effort to keep his expectations in check this time around. However, the 2008 caucus campaign between Huckabee and Romney was bitter near the end, and his campaign’s ongoing feud with WHO’s local radio talent did him no favors. It’s also unlikely that those wounds will heal before caucus activity resumes.
Nonetheless, as candidates like Mark Sanford and John Ensign have fallen off the map, Romney remains the candidate who most of the establishment Republicans would seem apt to support. That, combined with his fundraising ability and almost robot-like ability to stay on message, makes him a major player in Iowa in 2012 if he decides to run.
4. Newt Gingrich (Rising): There is no candidate better situated to emerge in the current political environment than Newt Gingrich. Nobody doubts that Gingrich has his eyes set on the White House, but the question has been “when” not “if.”
In the first part of this year, Gingrich raised $8.1 million, a number that dwarfs the amount raised by Huckabee, Palin and Romney combined. What’s different about Gingrich is that he is focusing on issues instead of personality. Having been the main architect of the Contract with America in 1994, Gingrich is once again traveling the country talking about issues, and it’s obvious that people are responding.
In addition to being the idea guy in the race, Gingrich might be the only candidate on this list who has shown the willingness and tenacity to go on the offensive against President Obama’s agenda day in and day out. If he runs in 2012, he is the one to watch.
Will Rogers, a longtime GOP operative and current co-chair of the Polk County Republican Party, thinks that Gingrich would be well received by Iowans. “When Newt was leading the Republican Party, we had a balanced budget, reduced the national debt by $500 billion dollars, reformed welfare, and cut taxes. Since then, he has been at the forefront in the battle of ideas and is unafraid to lead the charge. Newt talks about Jobs Here – Jobs Now – Jobs First. What Iowan doesn’t want that?” Roger’s said
5. Tim Pawlenty (Rising): The Governor of Minnesota is the new darling of the national media. What separates Pawlenty from his likely competition is that, while all of the other candidates either reside in the south or were involved in the 2008 campaign, Pawlenty has been successful in the blue state of Minnesota.
Pawlenty has been an outspoken critic of the Obama administration. He has come out against the cash for clunkers plan and has also been an early critic of Obama’s health care proposal. The well-spoken Pawlenty should also do well in the neighboring state of Iowa, and it’s also likely that many Iowans in the northern part of the state have seen him on the local news or watched his campaign ads in the past.
“Pawlenty is just the type of candidate that could connect very well with Iowa voters,” said Jill Latham, a principal at Concordia Group and former Iowa political director for Mitt Romney for President. “He’s a Midwestern governor who has a solid conservative record, is from a working class family, and is a proven winner in a difficult state for Republicans. Once Iowans get to know him, I think they will like what they see and hear,” Latham concluded.
6. Haley Barbour: Barbour didn’t do himself any favors when he gave some remarks that outraged many social conservatives when he was in Iowa earlier this summer to headline a Republican Party of Iowa event. That said, Barbour is in a perfect position to set up a presidential run.
Having control of the reins of the Republican Governors Association leading up to the 2012 caucuses never hurts. In that capacity, Barbour is able to travel the county, increase his fundraising ability, and make friends in some targeted states like Iowa.
As for how he would fair in Iowa, I would never underestimate him even following his remarks earlier this summer. Barbour is an unabashed conservative who isn’t afraid of anybody. If he runs for president, he will be in it to win it, and Iowa would probably be key to his strategy.
7. John Thune: Late this past spring, Sen. Thune was the guest speaker for Congressman King’s annual fundraiser, and he headlined an RPI dinner last year. While visiting his neighboring state is an easy thing to do, it also indicated that he might have his eye on 2012. Thune is a smooth talking conservative who looks like he is straight out of central casting.
8. Rick Perry: Texas Governor Perry faces a stiff primary challenge from current Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson next fall. If he wins, he will likely catapult himself up the list of potential Republican presidential candidates. If he loses, he’s off the list.
Longtime Republican operative Bob Haus thinks that Iowans are looking for proven leadership, and Governors Perry and Barbour might be the best situated to deliver. “Republicans nationally in 2012 will be looking for the same thing Iowans are looking for in 2010: proven leadership. In that vein, you’d have to view Governors Barbour and Perry in a very good light. They’ve seen their states through terrible natural disasters, grown their economies, and stood up to Washington’s heavy hand. They’re strong, they know who they are, and they know how to lead,” Haus said
9. Bobby Jindal: Many Republicans thought the well-spoken Jindal was there answer to President Obama. However an awkward response to President Obama’s first address to a joint session of congress was a flop, and since then, he has been almost non-existent.
10. Mike Pence/Other House Member: Only one person from the House of Representatives has been elected President – James Garfield. He only spent 199 days in office. While there always seems to be a number of congressmen who run for President, most of the serious contenders are current or former Senators and Governors.
That said, Congressman Mike Pence is different from his former colleagues (Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter) who ran in 2008. Pence is a well-spoken and intelligent candidate who couldn’t be perceived as a single-issue candidate. What makes Pence different is that he has the ability to raise his profile to a level where he could compete with candidates who come from the Senate or Governors’ mansions.
There you have it. Agree or Disagree I would love to read what you have to say in the comment section.
About the Author
Craig Robinson has written 700 stories on this site.
Craig Robinson serves as the founder and Editor-in-Chief of TheIowaRepublican.com. Prior to founding Iowa's largest conservative news site, Robinson served as the Political Director of the Republican Party of Iowa during the 2008 Iowa Caucuses. In that capacity, Robinson planned and organized the largest political event in 2007, the Iowa Straw Poll, in Ames, Iowa. Robinson also organized the 2008 Republican caucuses in Iowa, and was later dispatched to Nevada to help with the caucuses there. Robinson cut his teeth in Iowa politics during the 2000 caucus campaign of businessman Steve Forbes and has been involved with most major campaigns in the state since then. His extensive political background and rolodex give him a unique perspective from which to monitor the political pulse of Iowa.
29 Comments on “An Early look at the 2012 Caucuses”
Write a Comment
Gravatars are small images that can show your personality. You can get your gravatar for free today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Given that this he is biased against the GOP, his analysis isn’t too far off. I agree with his asessment of Pawlenty, I think he is a guy to watch.
Actually, it’s kinda refreshing to have the opinions from the other side around here, it gives us achance to re-asess ours. Unfortunately, that and reasoned debate are lost on most around here.
This social conservative was very impressed with Barbour’s remarks. It showed how he was able to use those less conservative to help attain his own personal goals. This is something we MUST be able to do to win elections.
Barbour showed us the road to victory and showed us he knows how to use it.
Newt thinks along lines of solutions, which is also necessary.
“As we now know, Mike Huckabee was able to consolidate social conservatives behind his campaign and won rather easily. That might not have been the case had John McCain remained a viable Iowa candidate through the entire process.” What!!! What would John Mc Cain taken away from Huckabee in terms of Social Conservatives? That’s what Fred Thompson’s role was here and in South Carolina as a buffer for McCain. I don’t see your point with that one. DVFO: Every Social Conservative that I have heard from that was at the Rising Stars event was mad as a hornet at the comments of Barbour. You are crazy as the day is long if you think Social COnservatives are excited about someone who tells them that voting for Baby-killers isn’t giving up their principles.
Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee and Haley Barbour have zero chance of ever being president. Of those three, Haley Barbour would get trounced in Goldwater/Mondale fashion.
Some day the party and our candidates will begin skipping Iowa, because people with no chance elsewhere win our caucuses, and we’ll only have ourselves to blame. Unless we get realistic quickly, Iowa’s influence will continue to wane.
So far I like Sarah Palin. True she will have to answer why she didn’t complete her first term but I want a real Conservative and she is it…
I am sick to death of these RINO’s like John McCain trying to make the Republican party Dim Lite. After his performance in the Senate with Gang of 14, and how ” The media love John McCain” so we can finally get a fair shake in reporting on the GOP. Well it just didn’t work out that way now did it? The only time the Media liked McCain was when he was trashing Republicans which he did at nearly every turn.
What I love about Sarah is she is straight Meat and Potatoes True Republican… When It comes to Voting on issues the Party Platform should be your Bible. And this Getting along to get along like Grassley is doing is just disgusting. Doing Nothing is a Good thing. And in most cases anything the government wants to do is probably bad so just not doing anything is a Great Option. Rule number 1 is “do no harm” and I can see Sarah Standing up and stopping lots of Harm.
This social conservative was not mad at Barbour. I appreciated his remarks and was impressed by them. Why not? He showed how he used what we would call RINOs to get to where he wanted to go?
Why throw success out the window?
I can assure you, you are not more pro-life than I. I am trying to get everyone to realize that in order for us to achieve majorities, we are going to be faced with the possibility of voting for a Republican with whom we are not happy with.
Maybe you’ve read my exchange with Tyler. He’s trying to portray himself as a better Christian than others and yet he attends a church which has actually had ministers bless an abortion clinic. Would you vote for Tyler? VP attends the same church. Would you vote for VP, or are you skeptical of his sincerity?
Where are you going to find enough perfect candidates to ever achieve a majority?
Barbour is a SUCCESS in governing the post-Katrina mess in Miississippi. He has turned the economy around in that state and has a thick national Roladex. Why anyone would discount him is beyond me? Remember–HE HAS PROVEN HIMSELF.
I love Craig’s premise that the journalist Cityview chose couldn’t possibly be impartial, because he thinks Steve King is crazy. It’s pretty typical GOP strategy to attack anyone who delivers truth, since truth has always had a distinct left-wing bias.
I thought and have always thought the journalists in this state do a pretty good job. They certainly beats the anonymous rants and Craig’s obvious pandering.
I do notice Craig didn’t take issue with anything Cityview wrote. If you have no problem with the content, then I don’t see what your problem is. Why don’t you write an article about the racists and homophobes that make up the rest of this blog’s writing team?
DVFO~ We don’t need a majority, just a few good ones who will champion the issue. Once they bring it up and start lit dropping and calling their constituents, they will behave better. Pro-choice can be useful to the cause if they will vote for pro-life legislation. I believe and always will that they are going to have to get pro-choicers to get them there. You cannot have a principled voter guilted into voting by proxy for killing babies!
Christian: I’m not sure exactly what you’re saying here. It is IMPOSSIBLE to get any kind of pro-life legislation past the committee process with Democrats in charge. Also in this situation, a pro-life Dim is useless. A pro-life Dim may have value if Republicans are in control.
The reality is that we MUST have a Republican majority to achieve success on economic issues, as well.
This is the truth.
What Barbour did was exactly what you stated–he used pro-choice Republicans to make Mississippi into the most pro-life state in the country. I call that success. He is to be congratulated on his success–not criticized for it.
Maybe we’re pretty close to agreement.
saraf,
Look at their list of candidates and look at mine. It’s different. I have people like Rick Perry and John Thune on my list, and they have Eric Cantor and Chuck Grassley, so yes I took issue with some of their content.
Additionally, if Senator Grassley is having a hard time dealing with the heat he is receiving over the issue of Health Care, I don’t know how he would fare in a presidential race, or if he could win the Iowa caucuses for that matter.
“I love Craig’s premise that the journalist Cityview chose couldn’t possibly be impartial, because he thinks Steve King is crazy. It’s pretty typical GOP strategy to attack anyone who delivers truth, since truth has always had a distinct left-wing bias.” –saraf
Sara,
There is an entire team of western Iowa ‘journalists’ who have made it their life’s work to unseat Cong. King with Doug Burns being one of their ring leaders. He did a lot of behind-the-scenes work for King’s opponent in the last election including writing and compiling a newspaper style flyer that went out with numerous western Iowa newspapers just days before the election.
Let me also remind everyone that Burns had or still has a blog solely about Sarah Palin, usually mocking her every move and utterance.
Mr. Hawk…
McCain tried the skipping Iowa strategy back in 2000…so did Rudy Giuliani in 2008…guess what..neither one of them received the nomination.
As long as Iowa continues to be the First in the Nation….it will play a HUGE role in determining who the GOP nominee is. That’s why we need to have big turnouts at the caucuses..
DVFO,
I’m not sure you want to start labeling entire denomination based on what one rogue pastor might say or do.
I am familiar with the Reformed Church which you so often criticize, and, for a long time, it was one of the few protestant denominations that explicitly opposed abortion, and it still does. I know you’re going to bring up this agreement with some other more liberal churchs to allow congregants to worship there, but lots of churches allow members of other churches to worship with them, and I don’t think you can make a rational argument that that means one church has adopted all the position of the other, especially when the first church never changed its stated position on things like abortion.
If we go with your logic, I guess all Catholics must secretly support pedophilia since some of there priests engaged in it and covered it up.
No, Lydia, you have it backwards. It is the denomination that is corrupted–not particularly any one specific church. They may still have pastors who preach the gospel but the trend in these kinds of churches is that once they start down the slippery slope, the slide continues. In another 10 years, the denomination is likely to be more liberal than it is now.
The official position of the denomination is that they do not specifically condemn abortion. They also had two married “ministers” who blessed an abortion clinic and I do not recall reading of any discipline being brought upon the ministers.
The hierarchy of the church also entered into a full fellowship with the ELCA who does ordain homosexuals. There will be a vote by the ELCA this month to make it official. The way it is now is that they are already doing it but without any discipline.
With a full fellowship, any ELCA pastor can go into a Reformed church and preach. This is different from worshipping there. As far as I know anyone is allowed to worship in any church they want.
There is also the issue of communing which is also different.
Your statement about Catholics supporting pedophila because some priests engage in it is not an appropriate analogy at all.
Believe me, I would never have brought up this topic at all if it hadn’t been for the Christian elites here on this forum that are trying to claim they are better Christians than others. I have only done it to make a point.
God help us is the Huckster gets the nomination. Everyone likes to point out Mitt Romney’s flip-flops, which are significant.
What about the “genuine, authentic, decent” Huckster?
–As governor…wanted to lift the Cuba embargo
–An candidate….wanted to strengthen it even more than Bush, as a pander to the Cuban exiles in Florida
–As governor, favored giving college scholarships to the children of illegals
–As candidate, wanted to amend the Constitution, to prevent children of illegals from immediately becoming U.S. citizens
–Attacked Fred Thompson for saying abortion should be left up to the states
–One week later, said this, ““I’ve never felt that it was a legitimate manner in which to address this and, first of all, it should be left to the states, the 10th Amendment. . .”
I could go on and on. The guy is worse than a used car salesman.
“McCain tried the skipping Iowa strategy back in 2000…so did Rudy Giuliani in 2008…guess what..neither one of them received the nomination.”
And the winner of Iowa in 2008 didn’t get the nomination either. Thus, my point.
“Let me also remind everyone that Burns had or still has a blog solely about Sarah Palin, usually mocking her every move and utterance.”
It is just too easy to do. The first debate question to her would be, “Will you even finish your first term?” No way the republican party will nominater her now. Besides, she is looking to cash in, in my opinion. I see more talk shows and less campaigning in her future. the republicans will also never nominate a mormon, so momney is out. Huckabee, not conservative enough, too much of a liberal spender, you know helping the poor and needy, for too many in the party. Bobby Jendel, “Happy Mardi Gras!” Need I say more. I see the party rallying to Newt, “I am on my third wife” Gingrich He will make it different for the traditional family values party line. Perry isn’t even popular in his own party in Texas. Barbour is just a little too W too soon, although I will give him this, at least he has been successful at some things in his life. That brings me to Pawlenty, good future, I question whether he is conservative enough to win in the republican primaries, Minn. doesn’t elect far right people, I am sure he isn’t popular with the far right on this board. The other thing, if Obama is holding strong in the polls, he may dip his toe in, but he is young enough he can wait to run later. If I was a betting man, I would guess Newt now.
Silence
Hawk, you forget, Obama did win Iowa. Iowa can be a springboard if someone can do well who wasn’t expected to do well. Huckabee was a no name until he showed strong.
Silence
And Huck went on to win no state of any consequence.
What a sad list…Palin is a moron and a quitter, Romney is plastic and corporate and Mormon, Perry is known as Gov. Goodhair (his only redeeming quality, although he’s rumored to be gay so that may be another), Huck is likable but can’t win nationally, Newt is a retread and a hypocrite, Jindal=Urkel and Barbour is a lobbyist and from….Mississippi, consistently rank lowest in every quality metric. Pawlenty is the only one of any redeeming value and I don’t even think he could beat Obama in Minnesota. I do hope that the lack of a Dem primary will moderate the Repub caucuses however. Would be nice if you all didn’t pick the biggest loser in the group once and a while. Face it, you’re out until 2016, focus on the House.
GayDem – who cares what you think, we already know who you support and he doesn’t have an “R” behind his name.
I’m not sure Huckabee is doing himself any favors with his Fox News show, and they do need to be concerned HuckPAC ability to raise funds – which shows he hasn’t improved in that area.
Mitt Romney – Two words – Romney Care and no thanks
Sarah Palin – I think we assume she’s running, I’m not sure. Full disclosure – I’m a Palin supporter, and I think she’s going to be a huge asset in 2010 for conservative candidates and with fundraising (keep in mind with Romney’s PAC – he’s been doing this full time, Palin has not). I think she could be a strong contender, but I also there are areas where she needs to grow. Whether resigning hurt her or not, I’d argue that remaining as governor would have hurt her. We’ll see… if again she even decides to run.
Newt Gingrich – too much personal baggage, very smart, but not real personable. Policy wonks don’t always make good leaders. I think he would be an asset in a Republican administration though.
Pawlenty – sound, but lacks the Charisma of Huckabee and Palin
Perry – I don’t think he’s going to run, but I agree if he doesn’t win his primary he is sunk.
Mike Pence – I wouldn’t vote for any member of Congress (in the Caucus) – didn’t we learn our lesson last time? Choose someone with executive experience.
Mitch Daniels name has been bandied around a little. That could be interesting.
Sorry, forgot that Repubs don’t like alternate points of view. Just trying to show how people view the line up outside the GOP echo chamber. I’m not lock-step Dem. Actually, I’d probably be a Republican or an Independent if you all didn’t make it your job to hate everyone who isn’t a straight WASP. I guess I’ll grant that you’ve expanded your “Big Tent” to include Catholics and unchurched rednecks to some extent.
I actually think you’re on to something with Mitch Daniels though.
I was an alternate McCain delegate to the GOP national convention in MN last year. For a long list of reasons, my favorite for the 2012 GOP nomination is someone who has not been mentioned in this thread: General David Petraeus.
Unfortunately, so far he has given a very clear ”Lori Morgan” response to the media types who have asked him if he might run; i.e.: ”What part of no don’t you understand”. . . . And unlike most run-of-the-mill politicians on the national stage, he probably won’t change his mind. [sigh].
Let’s face it, we got “out-idea’ed” in the 2008 election. Obama had a ton of ideas. Now we know that most of them were BAD ideas, but they were better to the electorate than the “no-new-idea” campaign of McCain. Huckabee and Palin are not likely to be elected. Barbour was out of line with his comments, as I could never support a pro-choice politician. Newt Gingrich, I believe, is our BEST shot to beat Obama. The man is brilliant, MUCH smarter than Obama. He would eat Obama alive in a debate, particularly if you can get Obama off prompter. Everyone has seen Obama struggle without his precious teleprompter. I would like to see a Gingrich-Pawlentey ticket. Maybe we could even pick off Minnesota, who hasn’t voted Republican since 1972, the longest for any state. Or how about Gingrich and Condi Rice? Wouldn’t THAT make things interesting?
Informative piece here. On Mike Pence at #10, I would also note for the trivia buffs out there that no less than Abraham Lincoln was another (the only other, beyond Garfield) man who went from the House to the White House. Although, he ran unsuccessfully for the Senate in between. I think Pence is presidential material, although I’d be somewhat surprised at this point if he jumps in this time around. Barring that, I like Romney. We need a guy who knows economic issues and isn’t afraid to take the gloves off against Mr. Obama.
ChiefsFan,
Keep underestimating Obama. Ask Hillary and McCain how that works out. Gingrich…seriously? On his third wife I think and wasn’t that popular to begin with. I’ll grant that he is intelligent and has ideas. But he is a Clinton era relic, I don’t understand why you people insist on recycling politicians as you do. If we did that, we’d have another President Clinton. I’m pretty sure you’d hate her more than you do Obama at this point. Obama built a movement, absent a very prolonged economic plunge, he will be close to unbeatable. Hope for your sake that you all have a decent line-up by 2016 cause this group doesn’t cut it.
Huntsman from Utah woulda been good, but Obama was SMART enough to neutralize him. Pence is a blowhard and not charismatic. Again, Pawlenty is the only one on the list that could even hope to make it close. Romney maybe could if he flopped back to moderation for the general. Palin or the Huckster would result in 40-45 state landslide.
if we’re going to look at members of congress, why wouldn’t we put our very own Steve King on the list. He’s preferable to Pence. I know there are people in DC who claim King is presidential material. Everyone is looking for a new RR and he’s right here under our noses.
chiefsfan, really think newt would eat obama up in a debate, apparently you missed him on This Week with old georgy boy who ate him for lunch, If newt can’t handle george without looking ridiculous, how do you think he will “eat obama up?”
Silence