Saturday, September 18, 2021
HomePatriot DispatchesSome thoughts on the GOP nominating contest to date.

Some thoughts on the GOP nominating contest to date.

Now that we’re through with the first several debates and have a short break before the next one, I thought I’d share my thoughts on where we stand.  I have been very surprised by some of the happenings, both in the debates and in the polls.

One of my early surprises is my comfort level with Mitt Romney.  I still don’t trust him, and will never be convinced that he is really a Conservative.  I believe he is trying to fulfill his father’s unrealized dream of becoming President, and his father (and mother) were quintessential country club Rockefeller Republicans who hated Barry Goldwater.  As they say, the apple never falls far from the tree.  That said, he comes across as very polished, practiced, and, dare I say, presidential.  I am not as pessimistic as some about his chances to win a general election vs Obama as some are.  However, I still do not see him rising above about 30% in the primary race, so his only saving grace will probably be the winner-take-all primary system.

I have also been surprised by the Icarus-like fall of Rick Perry.  I was very excited about the prospect of his candidacy, and was eager to see how he did once he jumped in.  He clearly has top-rank fundraising ability, and may yet make a comeback, but he seems so unable to spontaneously form an articulate defense of any conservative principles that I have a hard time seeing him getting to the top of the heap.  Lately, I have spent a lot of time closing my eyes and trying to visualize debates between Obama and the various candidates.  When it’s Rick Perry’s turn, I always have to open my eyes in disgust at the thought.  That’s a shame, because I do like Rick Perry.

Herman Cain has been a huge surprise.  I wrote him off initially as a fringe candidate with no real hope.  So did the entire news media, political punditry, and even the Conservative blogosphere.  But his 9-9-9 plan was a stroke of political genius (regardless of its intrinsic merits), and he has risen to the early lead almost exclusively on the newness of that plan and his likeability.  Don’t knock likeability, either, as it almost single-handedly elected GWB…twice.  I think Cain has a real shot at the nomination, but he better get some really smart advisors on board (a la Ed Rollins) VERY SOON before he inserts his foot any farther down his throat.

Michele Bachmann is finished, even before her annoying “Anderson! Anderson! Anderson!” performance last night.  I liked her much more before the campaign started…she hasn’t worn well on me.  Same with Rick Santorum.  I think he entered the race to raise his profile to perhaps run for the Senate again.  If so, he’s long past the point of helping himself.  Jon Huntsman should drop out…today.  And Ron Paul will never drop out, but has no chance.  Though I’m actually enjoying watching him in the debates.

That leaves Newt.  He has been the biggest surprise to me, even bigger than Cain.  I did not take his candidacy seriously when he first got in (and maybe he didn’t really, either!).  But looking at all the debates so far as a whole, I can safely say that Gingrich has won the debates.  By a mile.  It’s not…even…close.  When I close my eyes and think of him on the stage with Obama, it brings a smile to my face.  I can picture Obama running off the stage crying like a kindergardener who has been teased by a gang of mean playground kids.  Despite all this, he has not made huge gains in the polling, though he has moved into 3rd place in some of the polls.  Clearly, his baggage (infidelity, divorces, ethics issues, Pelosi couch incident) is keeping him from getting more traction.  But the more I reflect on his candidacy, the less that baggage seems to matter to me.  Frankly, I would feel less troubled pulling the lever for Gingrich than I would Romney.  Heck, at this point I’d be less troubled pulling the lever for Gingrich than for Perry.  And Perry’s an Eagle Scout.

So where does all this leave me?  I don’t know yet.  But I am more and more convinced that Gingrich should be on the ticket, one way or the other.  Right now, I would lean either Cain/Gingrich, Gingrich/Cain, or perhaps Gingrich/Rubio.

So that’s my two cents. Interested to hear yours.

Interesting analysis, azaeroprof. (Lady P – Ed.)

11 COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

11 COMMENTS

  1. Everything you said has validity, and your angst is probably shared by most of us here. We need a hero(ine). We want to win, we need to win, but we also need to be fulfilled, vindicated. Sometime early this spring, somebody needs to put up a leaderboard on an x/y axis with the greatest threats we see, grievances we have and tally things up. Unless we look up and see, out there on the horizon, riding hard……nah, that’s a cowboy analogy.

  2. I appreciate your sharing of your thoughts. One thing you don’t have to worry about at this site is being attacked for not supporting the site’s favorite. Actually the only common ground I see with the posters here is they want the GOP to have anyone but Romney be the party’s nominee.
    My thoughts are that I see candidates for more than how they have performed in the “debates.” Romney is a DC establishment GOP candidate. He’s not the only one the DC GOP lobbies love. They also love Huntsman, Santorum, and Gingrich. The one they fear the most is Herman Cain. Cain is not someone who acts and speaks like a politician. They don’t like Perry because he wants the 10th amendment to take the power out of DC. They don’t like Bachmann because she wants to have power instead of sharing it with the DC GOP lobbies. They don’t like Ron Paul, and he is libertarian instead of conservative.
    I lean to either Cain or Perry because I believe they are the ones who are serious about making what goes on in DC as inconsequential as possible to my life. Neither one has been stellar in their “debates” performances. They both have been doing well in getting campaign money and getting supporters who are strong instead of half-hearted in their support.

    • Yes, the establishment has many to love in the GOP field. I wish gamecock had a candidate to love. Now Cain is pro-choice and a gaffe-a-day. Why can’t the conservative movement produce just one candidate within 1-2 standard deviations of Reagan. I’ll be voting for the R against O in Nov 2012, probably with my nose held.

  3. Nice to see you here. . .

    I’m going to ride along with Perry. He’s been counted out in TX more than once and still has never lost a race.

    Different league here and so Perry must step it up. He can hang a good while. He has a national organization and money.

    If we could get these debates down to 3 or 4 players, I believe that would work to Perry’s advantage

  4. Fine analysis, thanks. I remain undecided. Anyone of our candidates is head & shoulders better than the SCOAMF, so I am still Anybody But Obama. I’d love to be enthused by one of our folks and still hold out hope for Perry, but will vote the R no matter who wins the nomination, and will be truly unhappy about it only if Romney prevails.

  5. I think secretly most of us agree with your position on Romney. I remember the ’64 convention (where Buckley threatened to knock Gore Vidal’s g-d block off…ah, live television) and the summer campaign questioning father George’s birth certificate, i think he was born in Mexico (as a child of embassy staff).

    There’s a 50/50 chance Mitt will not keep his promises, and a 100% chance he will not keep them 100%. But 50% is still better than the 100%-er we’re looking down the barrel of now.

    But Mitt is also the most likely to lose to Obama, in part because he will likely (intentionally) split the conservative vote insuring half stay home. (my own view is that Bachmann is the preferred patsy here, but it could any of them. I guess)

    This is why Obama most wants Mitt to get the nod…so he can prove once again that what GOP moderates do best is lose.

  6. I agree with your analysis wholeheartedly.

    And like you, I cringe at the thought of a Perry/Obama debate. OTOH, he has done the job, so I’m unwilling to write him off.

    My preferred ticket (for now) is Perry/Gingrich or Perry/Cain with a dose of Valium washed down with a tequila sunrise to get me through the worries of the election. And truly, any of ours (other than Bachmann, she might make me commit haricari; Paul, who isn’t ours at all; and Huntsman who I don’t even count) would be better than President Jobs Supporter.

  7. Thanks, everyone, for you feedback and comments! I haven’t been ignoring the comments, just been busy with work and family since I posted.
    For levity’s sake, I’m sharing below a somewhat humorous assessment of the 2012 race that I posted on facebook:

    2012 Presidential race in one phrase:

    • Mitt Romney: “So what I am today, liberal or conservative??”
    • Herman Cain: “Nahn-nahn-nahn!”
    • Rick Perry: “We has jobs in Texas, y’all.”
    • Newt Gingrich: “This is colossally stupid.”
    • Michele Bachmann: “Anderson! Anderson! Anderson!”
    • Ron Paul: “Vote for me, I’m nuts!”
    • Rick Santorum: “Why won’t you guys let me talk?!”
    • Jon Huntsman: “Republicans suck.”
    • Barack Obama: “Can I have a mulligan? Please!?”
  1. Everything you said has validity, and your angst is probably shared by most of us here. We need a hero(ine). We want to win, we need to win, but we also need to be fulfilled, vindicated. Sometime early this spring, somebody needs to put up a leaderboard on an x/y axis with the greatest threats we see, grievances we have and tally things up. Unless we look up and see, out there on the horizon, riding hard……nah, that’s a cowboy analogy.

  2. I appreciate your sharing of your thoughts. One thing you don’t have to worry about at this site is being attacked for not supporting the site’s favorite. Actually the only common ground I see with the posters here is they want the GOP to have anyone but Romney be the party’s nominee.
    My thoughts are that I see candidates for more than how they have performed in the “debates.” Romney is a DC establishment GOP candidate. He’s not the only one the DC GOP lobbies love. They also love Huntsman, Santorum, and Gingrich. The one they fear the most is Herman Cain. Cain is not someone who acts and speaks like a politician. They don’t like Perry because he wants the 10th amendment to take the power out of DC. They don’t like Bachmann because she wants to have power instead of sharing it with the DC GOP lobbies. They don’t like Ron Paul, and he is libertarian instead of conservative.
    I lean to either Cain or Perry because I believe they are the ones who are serious about making what goes on in DC as inconsequential as possible to my life. Neither one has been stellar in their “debates” performances. They both have been doing well in getting campaign money and getting supporters who are strong instead of half-hearted in their support.

    • Yes, the establishment has many to love in the GOP field. I wish gamecock had a candidate to love. Now Cain is pro-choice and a gaffe-a-day. Why can’t the conservative movement produce just one candidate within 1-2 standard deviations of Reagan. I’ll be voting for the R against O in Nov 2012, probably with my nose held.

  3. Nice to see you here. . .

    I’m going to ride along with Perry. He’s been counted out in TX more than once and still has never lost a race.

    Different league here and so Perry must step it up. He can hang a good while. He has a national organization and money.

    If we could get these debates down to 3 or 4 players, I believe that would work to Perry’s advantage

  4. Fine analysis, thanks. I remain undecided. Anyone of our candidates is head & shoulders better than the SCOAMF, so I am still Anybody But Obama. I’d love to be enthused by one of our folks and still hold out hope for Perry, but will vote the R no matter who wins the nomination, and will be truly unhappy about it only if Romney prevails.

  5. I think secretly most of us agree with your position on Romney. I remember the ’64 convention (where Buckley threatened to knock Gore Vidal’s g-d block off…ah, live television) and the summer campaign questioning father George’s birth certificate, i think he was born in Mexico (as a child of embassy staff).

    There’s a 50/50 chance Mitt will not keep his promises, and a 100% chance he will not keep them 100%. But 50% is still better than the 100%-er we’re looking down the barrel of now.

    But Mitt is also the most likely to lose to Obama, in part because he will likely (intentionally) split the conservative vote insuring half stay home. (my own view is that Bachmann is the preferred patsy here, but it could any of them. I guess)

    This is why Obama most wants Mitt to get the nod…so he can prove once again that what GOP moderates do best is lose.

  6. I agree with your analysis wholeheartedly.

    And like you, I cringe at the thought of a Perry/Obama debate. OTOH, he has done the job, so I’m unwilling to write him off.

    My preferred ticket (for now) is Perry/Gingrich or Perry/Cain with a dose of Valium washed down with a tequila sunrise to get me through the worries of the election. And truly, any of ours (other than Bachmann, she might make me commit haricari; Paul, who isn’t ours at all; and Huntsman who I don’t even count) would be better than President Jobs Supporter.

  7. Thanks, everyone, for you feedback and comments! I haven’t been ignoring the comments, just been busy with work and family since I posted.
    For levity’s sake, I’m sharing below a somewhat humorous assessment of the 2012 race that I posted on facebook:

    2012 Presidential race in one phrase:

    • Mitt Romney: “So what I am today, liberal or conservative??”
    • Herman Cain: “Nahn-nahn-nahn!”
    • Rick Perry: “We has jobs in Texas, y’all.”
    • Newt Gingrich: “This is colossally stupid.”
    • Michele Bachmann: “Anderson! Anderson! Anderson!”
    • Ron Paul: “Vote for me, I’m nuts!”
    • Rick Santorum: “Why won’t you guys let me talk?!”
    • Jon Huntsman: “Republicans suck.”
    • Barack Obama: “Can I have a mulligan? Please!?”

Must Read