« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

GOP Presidential Primary Rankings

1.  Perry - Gov. Rick Perry would be the nominee if the primary election were held today.  It will not be.  Perry is doing well, and remains a candidate who looks good on paper and has performed well.  He is leading in Iowa and SC, and victories in both these states would make it very likely for him to be the next GOP nominee.  He is doing as well as Secretary Clinton was this time 4 years ago.  In otherwords, he appears to be a lock, but it is far to early for that to have much meaning.  He needs to show he can raise money this quarter, that he has a solid opperation in place, and he needs to continue to poll well against Obama.

Perry continues to benefit from being attacked.  The statements in his book, and that he has made on the trail may have appeared outside the political main-stream in years past.  This election cycle there is a feeling that the voters want someone who is not lock-step with the PC-crowed.  3rd rails of politics were knocked down since Obama has been elected and we now live in world with the tea party.  By the time of the election we will likely live in a post tea-party world.  One where voters are looking for a president who is fed-up, just as they feel. 

All the above said, Perry’s got one advantage that none of the other GOP candidates have: the Texas economy.  People want jobs.  People want others to get to work and stop collecting government benefits.  They are willing to elect someone who they do not agree with, if they think that will get them a job.  Rick Perry has that huge advantage.  Short of an unforseeable economy recovery that drops unemployment by 3-4%, Perry remains the most likely nominee.  Perry has a record as governor of Texas for a decade and Texas has jobs; he has credibility that Romney and the others lack when he talks about economic issues.  Other people can say words, Perry has results.  That issue is more importaint than his lead in the polls, and remains why he is placed above Romney at this time. 

The other think Perry has is charisma.  He has one-liners that rival those of Reagan, and which make him (so far) make him appear to be made of teflon.  He is no Fred Thompson, and clearly did not fizzle out early.  This all said, many voters are not paying much attention.  When then do, polls will matter more. 

2.  Romney – Romney has actually campaigned well.  Although he is not leading in the polls, he has run a very smart campaign by staying out of the heat of the fight.  4 years ago he peaked too early.  The number 1 concern of most voters will have (other than jobs) is and will be having someone as president who is not Obama and who is acceptable to them.  Romney remains a viable candidate and is possitioning himself as a clear alternative to Obama.  Some have suggested that Romney should go on the attack against Perry.  I am not one of them.  I think Romney’s strongest assest in the GOP primary is that he is viewed as broadly acceptable to the party.  He will not win as someone’s first choice, but remains able to win if he can remain viewed as a lock to beat Obama who is tollerable. 

That said, I also do not agree with those people who think Romney should just sit around and wait and hope for Perry to mess up.  I doubt Perry will.  Furthermore, Romney needs to not campaign in either the primary or general election like Dewey.  He needs to come out with specific plans, and argue that his policies and plans are better.  His path to victory is in the details.  He needs specific plans, detailed budgets, and specific legislation proposals.  They need to be plans that could pass congress, and would make an impact on the economy.  Simply speaking, Romney needs to appear as though he is the geek, the planner, the analyst, the manager, and the person who can work at the detail level to help fix the economy.  Romney is not Reagan or Perry.  He cannot come out with general ideals and win an election on them.  Romney needs to run as the planner, the details guy.  The person who has a specific plan and who understands the economy.  Short of this as he will lose.  Likely to Perry, but if Perry falls, someone else will still beat him.  Romney cannot run on general ideas.  He must run on specifics to win.

3.  Bachmann — I don’t think she will win.  Frankly speaking, she is not and never was a governor.  Not even a Senator.  I am not sure that GOP primary voters would nominate someone who lacks executive experience.  Secondly, she polls were against Obama than do others.  If she is to have a shot, she needs to find a way to appeal to more pragmatic voters.  I am not sure of how she can do that.

4.  Paul –  I just do not see it happening for Paul.  That said, he has exceeded all expectations.  I think he is being listened to and that he is a viable candidate this year; unlike last year.  Paul is now within the GOP mainstream; something that was not the case even 2 years ago.  That said, he is a member of the House.  He is also old.  He, like Bachmann, lack an actual record of creating jobs.  He, like Bachmann, is running on ideas, not results.  He, like Bachmann is not a governor.  I don’t see him winning.

5.  Santorum — Rick Santorum outperformed my expectations greatly at Ames.  He has a history of being a fighter and made it past the cut as someone who is worth mentioning.  It is less likely, in my opinion, for him to win the GOP nomination than for Paul or Bachmann to.  As I think their chances are slim, I think Santorm’s chances are less.  Infact, I think his chances are between slim and none.  Since they are greater than none, I’m keeping him on the list….for now.

COMMENTS

  • acat

    I really don’t see how this conclusion is arrived at. There’s no real explanation for the conclusion in the article, it’s just asserted to be so.

    This calls into question the rest tof the conclusions, some of which appear valid… although it’s also asserted rather than explained just why Romney must run as a wonk.

    Mew

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    the mainstream has definitely moved in his direction.

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    Is he that aimlessly chattering old anti-semite that prattles on and on about the USA being culpable in the 9/11 attacks? Or, was he the nursing home escapee that blathers about Iran having a “right” to a nuclear weapon because everyone else does? Or, was he the old fart that sprays spittle on eveyone when he says the constitution isn’t clear about secession? I can’t keep him straight from George McGovern.

    Either way, I don’t think either guy is, well, a “republican”… “Democrat”, maybe. “Libertarian” maybe. “Whack-Job” definitely. “Republican”? Not so much…

  • kinghenry

    Its a total myth and total misunderstanding of who Ron Paul is and where he is coming from to think the GOP Mainstream is anywhere near Paul’s real positions.

    This is largely a combination of the Media who refuse to really vet and report on the man and the GOP mainstream simply wanting to appease the Paultards by basically ignoring Paul and when called on it claim they ‘agree with his domestic ideas’ but disagree on Foreign policy. Which is nothing but rhetoric.

    The GOP has moved towards the Tea Party, which is where Mark Levin is which is totally opposed to Ron Paul and would never support him.

  • aesthete

    but IMO, this move has very little to do with Ron Paul personally and more to do with the bankruptcy of political establishments in the US.

  • acat

    and .. sadly, they’ve gotten enough success to muddy up the tea…

    Mew

  • Scope

    If Paul were considered “mainstream” he would be getting the same vetting the other candidates are experiencing. If some of the stories about his supporters or their activities, they would be run out of dodge tonight if not sooner. I can’t even imagine what would happen to Perry or Bachmann for example, if they had an on air admitted paid Russian operative, having fundraisers for them while doing his broadcast on Russian TV. The host, Adam Kokesh, has had his program canceled, most likely because he is now being investigated due to a complaint filed with the FEC. In the past Paul has appeared on his show, which says alot about Paul’s still further connections to a known communist.

    There is most definitely a split between the Paul promoted Tea Party groups, and the Tea Parties populated by normal people. Levin is correct yet again.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    I don’t care if you hate Ron Paul, I am not a follower. But his ideas and views are as far removed from McGoverns as can be possible.

    Only in the one area of foreign policy is there any similarity, and even there it is different.

    You shouldn’t be so ruled by your emotions. Open your eyes, the party has indeed moved in a libertarian direction and will continue to do so because both the liberals and the big spending republicans, and the neocons and the do gooders, all of them have bankrupted us.

  • Scope

    he would be polling above single digits, mostly mid-single digits. It only appears that he has that much support because his small band of cultists are very very vocal, and are using the internet to try to destroy every other candidate in the race, while trying to prop grandpa up. No one ever denied that mom’s basements aren’t little hubs of ferocious internet activity, complete with alarms to get to your station, we have another article to hit.

  • acat

    The point is, the author of this diary has repeatedly given Ron Paul a pass, and has now concluded that he’s “in the mainstream of the GOP”.

    I do not accept this conclusion.

    Mew

  • Scope

    to correct you that Ron Paul is not a libertarian. We’ve had this discussion before, and can’t quite come up with a correct definition of his political ideology, as he seems to cherry pick between them all.

    I love it when some come running to his defense, using the same codewords that the Paul supporters use, emotional, hate filled, misunderstood, neocon.

    As kinghenry has said, it’s too bad that Paul doesn’t go through the same serious vetting that he deserves. If that ever happened, I don’t think he would even garner 6% in polling. Going back and reviewing his record over the last 30 years or so, starting with his racist newsletters, against blacks and Jews, his close associations and agreement with those such as Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell, the anarchists, his campaign supporters and donors, David Duke, the KKK, white supremecists, skin heads, Code Pink, Cynthia McKinney, Stormfront, nazi sympathizers, paid Russian agents, I think I can come up with a description of Paul’s political ideology, neonazi. He is a fraud marquerading as a freedom, liberty, and Constitution lover.

    I also love when some make it sound as though only the libertarians want freedom and liberty. Conservatives also desire the freedom and liberty that is necessary and required in an ordered society.