« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Reconciled To Tim Pawlenty

Soggy Wonder Bread For Everyone

By: Dan McLaughlin (Diary)  |  March 9th, 2011 at 10:17 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

As many of you may recall, I am not the biggest fan of Mitt Romney. Contra streiff, I don’t really expect Romney to be the last man standing in the 2012 primaries, even if they go relatively badly in terms of who gets in and who gets their act together once in. Romneycare, atop his many other defects, is too big a problem for too many voters.

But there is a candidate in the race who represents, to me, the lowest common denominator we can all learn to live with, and that’s Tim Pawlenty. Ramesh Ponnuru, whose opinion is never easily dismissed, makes the case for Pawlenty at length in the March 7, 2011 issue of National Review, and I urge you to read it.

As Ramesh notes, Pawlenty is pretty dull (check out the clips of him I collected in profiling him as a VP candidate in 2008), and runs the risk of coming off as insincere as Romney if he tries to cure that by trying to be someone or something he’s not. Not for nothing do I refer to Pawlenty as Governor Soggy Wonder Bread. In many ways he’s McCain without the interesting parts, for good and ill – minimally acceptable on all the big issues. And while that was a sad excuse for a candidate in 2008, it may be a very different story in 2012 if Obama is still unpopular and ends up banking entirely on his ability to discredit his opponent to win.

Fundamentally, Pawlenty is the one guy in the field with no potentially fatal weaknesses. He’s the most experienced candidate available – two terms as a blue-state governor and four years as a state house majority leader make him the rare presidential candidate experienced as a chief executive and a legislative leader. The media will try, but he can’t be effectively caricatured the way Palin, Barbour and Romney can. And like Romney, he has one crucial thing the rest of the field has yet to prove – he wants the job, badly, and is effectively already running.

I’m not trying to sell anybody just now on Pawlenty – as I’ll explain in a lengthier post on Palin I keep meaning to finish writing, I don’t think we should be committing ourselves to anybody in the field just yet, and I intend to keep hunting for a better alternative than Pawlenty. But we can most assuredly do worse, and if we’re stuck (as in 2008) with a last-man-standing least-of-evils anybody-but-Obama candidate, I think Pawlenty will prove to be a far more plausible choice than Romney or Huckabee or Jon Huntsman. I certainly want him to stick in the race so we have that option available.

So, just in case, save me a seat on the blandwagon.

Tags: ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • http://stixblog.com Black River Wolf

    But I do agree that Pawlenty is much better than Romney, and he does bring a lot of experience.

    • acat

      and I’d *love* to see a Cain – Obama debate.

      That said, I’d be very happy to see a Pawlenty/Cain ticket.

      Cain in the role of red-meat-thrower and fiscal policy wonk, Pawlenty playing hardball with the Dem minority in congress…

      Pawlenty’s a northern-plains guy, Cain is southeastern – they’ll do about as well among the New England GOP as anyone running could… and Pawlenty might just put Minnesota in play.

      I could definitely be happy about this.

      Mew

      • Dan McLaughlin

        Who is an impressive guy, I’m not about to sign on with a guy who has never won an election. Politics is a skill, and it takes time to develop.

        • jqcjones

          People are tired of the “Establishment.” Herman i s a CEO through and through and that is EXACTLY what the POTUS is… the CEO of the United States. We need someone who can present solutions to the problems of this country instead of just talking about them with an insincerity so common in the “establishment.” Even when Herman doesn’t know something directly, he knows enough to get the people who DO know to surround him and make the right decisions (as he has so often demonstrated in his past) and bring this country back into the black and out of China Red!

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            Public sentiment may be anti-established order…

            However… when it comes to fund-raising in a GOP primary, which accounts for everything when it comes to the ground game… Cain has some disadvantages in the established order of raising political contributions.

            I’m not saying it will happen, nor fair if it does… but its possible that Cain is marginalized due to funding issues.

        • acat

          that Cain ran a nationwide restaurant association? that one of the roles of said organization was lobbying the federal and various state governments?

          That Cain has a talk show (so is good at interacting, sometimes with hostile callers, able to think on his feet) on one of the high-wattage stations in a big market? That’s not a small audience, eh?

          I agree that Cain hasn’t won elections. Another Republican had similar trouble… guy named Abe. So, there’ s precedent… and 2012 is not going to be a politics-as-usual kind of a year…

          I’m not sure Cain can win… but I do expect him to both put some fear of the Tea into the RINOs in the race, and to maybe, finally, have some of those discussions about race that Obama has, thus far, utterly failed to start.

          Mew

          • mspector

            In 1846 he was elected to the House of Representatives. He developed an early plan for the abolition of slavery in D.C. which was shelved, and spoke against the Mexican-American war. He did lose twice in campaigns for the U.S. Senate but distinguished himself in the debates with Stephen Douglas.

            That said, I think the simple answer to any contention that Cain lacks experience is that the Democrats took “experience” off the table with the nomination and election of Barack Obama in 2008. Now we can focus on what the candidates really have to offer.

          • Dan McLaughlin

            First of all, Obama may have lowered the bar in the minds of voters, but the fact remains that his failures in many cases can be attributed to inexperience.

            Second, all the experiences mentioned are useful to Cain but running for office and managing negotiations with Congress requires a specific set of skills that are not the same as running a business or having a talk show. All my life, I have seen rookie candidates screw up. I’d rather see Herman run for a Gov or Senate job and win first.

          • rightwingmom52

            While the ideal candidate would be a principled fiscal, social and strong defense conservative with a proven track record who has won elections, I just don’t see that candidate in the field. Cain’s track record is business, and maybe he’s just “saying all the right things,” but the political records of most, if not all, of the other candidates are flawed to say the least, having said and done things that defied conservative principles. Cain was smart enough to surround himself with experienced people in the business world, and I’ve no doubt he would do the same if elected.

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            but have you considered the reason every candidate that has held political office is “flawed” due to the very fact that they have held political office? You don’t get elected without owing some favors, its just part of the game… if we have a consistent flow of precinct committee members coming from tea-party/conservative movement for the next 2 election cycles, then this issue may no longer be an issue… but for now… we have “front-runners” based solely on the fact that there is an established order of things.

            There’s a reason the Vast-Right-Wing-Conspiratorial network of Radio Hosts has rarely produced presidential candidates, even though they have a HUGE base of listeners and supporters built into their programs.

            Like it or not, Cain will have to face a degree of establishment order, which is… do your dues in office before running for ‘THE’ Office. Even “The Donald” will face this same issue during the primary.

          • Tbone

            a bunch of guys.

            A CEO talks to the CFO, COO and VP Sales/Marketing. His job is to find the pony in the load he gets from each of those guys everyday and make decisions based on that.

            Most importantly, he runs the Board in a manner that keeps them all from getting fired.

          • acat

            As Cain did not start at the top, your statements are a tad off key.

            Mew

          • Tbone

            doesn’t translate directly to the public sector and certainly doesn’t translate to political skills.

          • acat

            and private sector executive experience doesn’t directly translate…

            Thing is, your statement is that Cain just talks to the C-level folk and tries not to get fired may be how the board of a company that’s running along operates, but ..

            In a turn-around, which is where Cain’s experience is, there’s a lot more loads, a lot fewer ponies, and the CEO has to be diving down below the C-level to figure out what’s working and what’s not…

            I don’t disagree it’s not government experience, but .. I find your criticism a bit flat…

            Mew

          • aesthete

            By that token, a federal executive is someone who runs the 12 or so guys in the cabinet, who run others beneath them, etc.

            Business experience doesn’t translate to political experience, but delegation is something that all executives and CEOs must do (and very well) to be successful in large enterprises.

      • mspector

        Back in high school I had a debate partner who was a real slugger. Our gambit was that he would get up and say outrageous things and then when the other side responded in fluster I would get up and say “let’s be reasonable”. Worked almost every time.

        That’s Pawlenty/Cain. I like it that Pawlenty has a proven track record in a major midwest state, especially with all the fuss and feathers in Wisconsin. I like it that Cain comes roaring out of the south with his own success story firmly in place.

        • acat

          Northern plains, Southeastern states… wonkish numbers geek, charismatic red-meat-throwing speaker. …

          Guess we’ll see what happens, but I could be really happy with that ticket.

          Mew

    • ZootSuit

      Sorry but a candidate who has never one ANY major political office before is not qualified to be candidate. The only exception is if you lead a multinational invasion force against the Nazis and even then it can be argued that leading a multinational invasion force is itself a major political office.

      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
      • rightwingmom52

        We’ve certainly seen what career politicians have done to our country, so I’m more than willing to consider a solid businessman. However, the bottom line for me is whether or not the candidate has solid conservative principles. If so, I don’t care what color he or she is.

      • acat

        Honest Abe had a lousy track record winning elections too, eh?

        Yes, Cain is light on inside-government work. He’s from the business side, and the turnaround side of business at that. His national association had plenty of contact with governments state local and federal – he knows better than any of the legislative branch candidates what’s wrong with our business climate.

        I’d prefer a candidate who has some inside-government experience, but .. Cain is more of a three-legged conservative than most of the governors with experience in this race.. so far. Show me how Herman Cain is less conservative than Buddy Roemer or Mitt Romney, eh?

        So, while the argument can be made that Cain’s the token black guy, I’d argue that Herman Cain is no Alan Keyes.

        Mew

        • ZootSuit

          and ran and lost a famous one, too. For better or worse, you cannot say the same thing about Herman cain.

          My thing is, in reply to both you and rightwingmom52, is that until they actually have governed or even legislated something in politics (yes, even as opposed running a billion dollar business), you really don’t know what anyone’s political principles are. This is not a statement on race: This is the same criticism I would apply to Donald Trump.

          Interestingly enough, acat, you are doing here in this thread exactly what you agreed with me in condemning on another thread: following the rhetoric instead of the record. Herman Cain does not have a record.

          But to add race back into the picture, I do think many of Cain’s supporters are supporting him to convince themselves that they are not racist. It’s not to say that they like him because of his race; they will may agree with what he says and even how he says it. But it is to say that they support him over a Donald Trump or a Glenn Beck because he is Black. Indeed, what makes Cain stand out so much over a Trump or a Beck?

          • Finrod

            That’s an awfully serious charge to be making without any evidence whatsoever.

            I would guess, however, that one factor behind some support of him is to take away race-based support for Obama. I imagine there are a large number of independents who voted for Obama that could be persuaded to vote for Cain so they could say ‘I voted for the first and the second black president’.

            As for Trump and Beck, they are blowhards whereas Cain isn’t, and Beck isn’t even going to run, so comparing Cain to him is completely pointless.

          • ZootSuit

            I said that many support him to prove to themselves that they are not racist. And for the record, I stand by that assertion.

            Indeed, even you seem to be at least tacitly admitting that there would be some racial appeal to a Cain nomination. Fundamentally, that’s all that I am saying. The only difference is that you limit that appeal to “independents” when I say that the appeal would include — indeed, is including — “conservatives.”

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

            The only advantage of Cain’s skin color as far as I am concerned is that it would deflect at least some of the more obtuse cries of racism usually hurled at republicans, and it would tip the hand of many democrats as they fall all over themselves crying Uncle Tom.

            I think most people feel like I do, we really don’t care about race and look only to the slight tactical advantage a black candidate would give us.

            In my book the main thing he has going for him is that he is a natural leader, an experienced administrator, and NOT a lawyer.

          • ZootSuit

            Because it seems to me that you’re saying something like “we’re not playing ‘racial politics’ except to play ‘racial politics’ so the other guy can’t play r’racial politics’.”

            Reminds me of the mantra expressed among many conservatives both before and after Sarah Palin was nominated that Republicans weren’t playing “gender politics” but her nomination was good because it would get the “women’s vote,”

            That one made me laugh, too.

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

            The agressors always set the rules of any game.

            All I am saying is that it is a slight tactical advantage, not an overwhelming advantage,but certainly a mark in his favor. What I don’t buy is that it somehow makes white conservatives feel good about supporting Cain.

            I feel good about him because of what he says in his speeches.

          • Finrod

            Even though the media is trying to. Try reading recent articles on cnn.com about Herman Cain; they’ll describe him as the former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, and maybe as a talk show host, but the one thing they will AVOID mentioning for as long as possible is that he’s black.

            To me, it’s clear that the MSM absolutely does NOT want to see the narrative ‘Herman Cain, black man’ out there at all. They avoid running pictures of him when possible, and describe his past experience as a ‘businessman’. The racial issue is going to be there no matter what, so it’s pointless to try to pretend it doesn’t exist, which is what you seem to think conservatives should do. Trying to say that that means conservatives are trying to ‘convince themselves that they are not racist’ is nothing but you trying to add a narrative that’s just not there.

            I like Michael Williams a lot as well, ever since seeing him speak at the Redstate get-together in 2009. I think he’d make a great Senator from the state of Texas, and to me, the fact that he’s black is simply a bonus, because it means he has the additional power to make the liberals and the MSM choke on their racist rhetoric. The same goes for Herman Cain.

          • Finrod

            When Winston Churchill found out during World War II that Adolf Hitler was getting advice from astrologers, he promptly decided to get advice from astrologers too– not to tell him what to do, but to tell him what Hitler’s astrologers were telling him.

            Winston Churchill didn’t believe in astrology, but he was still able to use astrology to his benefit. Similarly with Herman Cain’s supporters: they don’t support him because he’s black, they support him because Cain being black will go a long ways towards neutralizing the subtext (and too often explicit text) that Obama and the Democrats are pushing, that Republicans are racists.

            Herman Cain supporters are not racist, and they’re not trying to prove that they’re not racist, just like Winston Churchill didn’t believe in astrology.

          • mspector

            I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again … and again ….

            I don’t want a white President, I don’t want a black President, I don’t want a woman President, I don’t want a male President. I want a President. I want someone who is willing to stand up, make tough decisions and stay the course. And in a candidate, I want someone who is not only willing to stand up and speak without TelePrompter, but someone who can actually do it.

            All of which is why I like Herman Cain. He’s clear-headed and vigorous on the public stage. He’s charismatic. He would be a tireless campaigner and impossible for the MSM to brush aside. The fact of his lack of experience in elected office is what makes me like him for VP on a ticket with Tim Pawlenty.

            The race aspect of that nomination to me would be mostly a source of almost unbounded amusement: watching the liberals babble doing their best not to say “Uncle Tom” would be worth the price of admission in and of itself.

          • acat

            Two, actually.

            First is the fiscal one – he’s succeeded in business. Broken glass ceilings along the way. He has a record of successfully turning around businesses, which means he knows how to do budgeting, how to lead a group with similar goals, how to make a buck.

            Yes, this is not government experience, and I agree (look around, I’ve said it) that I’d rather see him gain some inside-government instead of just outside-government lobbying .. but he is a great outside-the-box (or, better, outside-the-beltway) candidate. And I don’t give a damn for skin colour – that’s something you humans get hung up on. As a cat, I don’t care.

            Second is Cain’s admittedly rhetorical record. Business doesn’t give much chance to demonstrate social conservative positions, i.e. anti-abortion, opposition to changing the definition of marriage, etc. etc, so all we have to go on here is what Cain says.

            For me, those issues are of lesser importance than fiscal competence – we watched W, who was very good socially, get rolled *badly* by both the GOP “leadership” and the Dems on fiscal issues, eh? – so I’m willing to give Cain the benefit of the doubt that he means what he says here.

            Does that answer your questions?

            Mew

          • acat

            Why is Cain not a Donald Trump? Easy – Trump’s companies have gone bankrupt with disturbing reliability. Trump is a promoter, not a thinker – he’s one or two steps removed from the boardwalk hustler. Cain’s companies seem to be puttering along nicely, and his show is about ideas and ideals, not Herman Cain.

            Why is Cain not Glen Beck? This is a little trickier for me since I am not a Beck watcher, but .. while both Glen and Herman love their country, and while both Glen and Herman have radio shows that try to reach out to the citizens and get them involved, only Herman Cain succesfully ran companies and a national trade group prior to going on air… Beck’s resume is remarkably thin, although I’ll grant that he’s been studying like a college student during finals week since discovering conservative thought.

            Mew

          • http://www.thejoyofreason.com Greg Garrison

            That’s an interesting question asked in an ABC story that I saw earlier. Honestly, I can envision him making the presidential run purely for publicity reasons, as the article suggests.

            I don’t think that The Donald is mounting a serious effort. A single link from Mark Levin highlights his serious credibility problems with the GOP.

            That’s one difference between the two. I don’t think that Cain is a super-serious candidate because of his lack of government experience, though. He really should run for governor of GA or something first.

          • acat

            2012 is shaping up as a sea change election, and is the best window for outsiders in .. saying “in my lifetime” may not be too far off…

            That said, I will be very happy if Cain ends up with nothing more than a larger megaphone with which to run for governor of Georgia…

            Mew

          • ZootSuit
          • acat
          • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

            Someone I know quite well has been informally advising Cain and his advisors on ways that Herman Cain can capitalize on some of Herman’s accomplishments — accomplishments outside of government.

            For example, Herman and his campaign was urged to get out front on the “Herman single-handedly destroyed Hillarycare” theme back during the time when the House was considering the defunding of Obamacare vote. He could have highlighting then, along with the video clip (which is on YouTube), the following facts:

            The fight against socialized medicine from “the outside” in 1994 — who needed a political office to kill Hillarycare? Not Herman Cain.

            Herman’s political instincts were on full display way back in 1994 when he took on Bill Clinton and helped turn the tide against Hillarycare. That huge fact dispels the notion Herman has no “political experience.” He as more than “political experience” — he has “political results” — and one is a GIANT one — the stopping of Hillarycare. What better display of what one citizen can accomplish politically when one has a plan, a strategy, and common sense?

            The fight against socialize medicine from “the outside in 2011 and 2012 — who needs a political office to kill Obamacare? Not Herman Cain.

            The story of Herman’s “outsider” success against Hillarycare needs to be told and retold and needs to be made relevant to the current need to have our current crop of Republicans fight to undo Obamacare. With the Constitution, facts, common sense and a resolve to not give up until it’s been accomplished — and Herman is the guy to lead that charge. He stopped Hillarycare in its tracks without holding public office.

            Successfully leading the charge now against socialized medicine — Obamacare — again without a public office.

            A successful leadership effort on this front will also help to blunt the notion that one must have experience in holding political office before taking over the office of the presidency. Coupled with a tight explanation for his remarkable results in the race for the U.S. Senate, which also needs to be always at the ready. Herman can lead that way again. And, again, from the outside. And the American people will rally around him.

            * * *

            At the event in Iowa a few nights ago, Herman’s campaign included in Herman’s bio that he confronted Slick Willie at a townhall on the facts and that Newsweek wrote that Herman probably single-handedly killed Hillarycare. So that was good.

            As I have written elsewhere, Herman’s campaign has also been advised that he ought to “break away from the pack” by appealing directly to conservative Republicans to do more than just vote — to actually get involved in carry out their civic duty, if at all possible, by getting involved in party politics in their community by attending their local Republican committee meeting. My sense is that Sarah Palin may beat Herman to the punch on this. She has already mentioned that she plans to be an unconventional candidate with an unconventional campaign to do an “end around” the $1 B that Opuppet plans to raise and spend. How, exactly, she’ll be unconventional in the execution of her campaign, she hasn’t said. But I do know that grass roots campaigns can work — look at Jason Chaffetz’s success in Utah as well as how the 9.12 and tea party groups in Utah took out RINO Bob Bennett in the Utah primary nominating convention that they use there.

            Time will tell. Opuppet used the Precinct Strategy to blind side the Billary machine. One of the “unconventional” Republican primary candidates may blind side the establishment, “traditional” candidates with a similar strategy that appeals to all those grass roots conservatives who are desperate to know how to “do something” and how to unite politically to elect constitutional conservative candidates. By telling them how to unite politically.

            Thank you.

            ColdWarrior

          • ZootSuit

            Until he actually does something in politics — until anyone, Black or White, liberal or conservative, actually does something in politics — you really don’t know what their true political convictions are. And yes, I think many White conservatives are willing to “believe” in Herman Cain and give him a pass (or more accurately, believe a narrative for him) because he is Black.

            By the way, I never said you didn’t wish Cain had more political experience. My thing is, he has none. And if a lack of political experience (as well as other things) makes me think that Sarah Palin is not qualified to be President, then honesty forces me to say that a complete absence of political experience forces me to say Herman Cain is not qualified.

            And by the way, again, if we want to give such credence to business skills, then in all fairness, I have to put Mitt Romney at the head of the class. Although he was born in more privileged circumstances, Mitt Romney still created more wealth and saved more companies than Herman Cain. And more, like Cain, Romney is currently (mostly) saying the right things. Of course, you’ll have to overlook and deny Mitt Romney’s political record but at least he has a political record. Herman Cain, for better and for worse, does not. That’s my point.

          • acat

            and maybe not realizing it…

            I do use a different metric for Cain than you do. You’re right. To be fair, though, we should examine the splinters in both our eyes, not just the one in mine, eh? Re-stated, I believe you might be assigning a motive to me that is based on your perceptions… not upon reality.

            Look, I am not saying that he’s going to lower the seas or walk on them.. I am not saying that he’s the best qualified candidate. I am saying that Cain’s business experience is better than most other candidates, and Cain’s apparent (based on what he says, admittedly) conservative cred is better than most if only because he hasn’t had to walk anything back.

            Finally, I think you’re judging his political experience a little lightly… running a trade association is not running the country, or even a state, but it is very much politicial, and it is, in his case, nationwide…

            See also Cold Warrior’s post below.

            Mew

          • David123

            I don’t think the Democrats will run three separate presidential candidates in the 2012 general election though.

          • ZootSuit

            On at least two counts:

            1) The Democrats did not run three candidates in 1860. The Constitutional Union Party actually consisted mostly of former Whigs.

            2) If all the other candidates had combined their vote totals, they would have one the popular vote (about 60%) but still would have lost the Electoral College and thus the Presidency to Abraham Lincoln (123 to Lincoln’s 180).

        • ZootSuit

          Show me how Cain is more conservative than a Buddy Roemer or Mitt Romney?

          Truth be known, for good or for bad, Howard Cain simply doesn’t have a record to “prove” either one of us right or wrong, one way or another.

          • acat

            Roemer and Romney both turned around failing states. In *both cases* the states were once again failing, and in Roemer’s case, Jindal is now trying to turn Louisiana around again.

            In short – both Roemer and Romney did not manage to permanently fix the problems… while the companies Cain ran still seem to be puttering along.

            Admittedly, it’s something like comparing apples to ipods, but I’ll back the guy whose solutions are still working.

            Mew

          • ZootSuit

            If turning around private business is the criteria, then again, Mitt Romney must rank at least as well as Cain. Indeed, through in the great job (and I personally sincerely think he did a great job, no matter what else I think about the man) in turning around the Winter Olympics and Mitt Romney must be ranked ahead of Cain.

            Moreover, Mitt is now saying the right things. We must overlook his political record but aren’t you asking us to do the same thing with Herman Cain?

          • acat

            I discard Romney for many reasons – if you were to go to google and say something like romney acat site:redstate.com you’d see that, as far as I’m concerned, he’s a loser. He jumps the wrong way on issues… he’d be holding the Republican equivalent of beer summits…

            Saying Romney has all this experience doesn’t change that he’s, to me, not acceptable. I’d vote for him in the primary .. but grudgingly.

            Cain, on the other hand, has not had to walk back his position on issues, and has comparable (in results if not in scope) to Romney’s business experience.

            Cain doesn’t have a government record to analyze, and I agree that I’d much rather see one than make finger-in-the-air guesses…

            Mew

          • acat

            I’d grudgingly vote for Romney in the general….

            Mew

          • ZootSuit

            The thing is, I do not see Cain as having the necessary political experience, PERIOD.

            Moreover, as we explicitly agreed in another thread today, I do not give any credence to conservative rhetoric without a conservative record to back it up.

            Look, I would think it great if Cain ran for governor and after two successful terms of real conservative accomplishments ran for President; even if he did not accomplish everything and even did a few things I did not like. I will even go so far as to say that, as a Black conservative myself, I would feel a special pride and joy if that were the case. Does that make me racist?

            Don’t really care. I’m simply being honest about the way I would feel.

            But that is not the case. Right now, Herman Cain is “simply” a successful business person who espouses conservative ideas well but who does not have a record of accomplishing them. And for that reason, I cannot support now.

            Moreover, as I mentioned before, many (and please note that I did not specifically call out you or anyone else) are excusing Cain’s lack of political experience because he is Black. Does this make them racist?

            Actually I would say “no” but by that same token, I don’t care. I am simply stating what I honestly believe is the case.

            Indeed, to use another example, I think many people did vote for Barack Obama because he is Black. (As well, I think there were others who voted against him because he was Black, but that is perhaps another discussion), However, I definitely do not think most people voted for him (or against him) because of the color of his skin. But it was a factor with a few and it is silly to deny that.

            And again, yes, I think that is the case with Herman Cain now.

            (For some reason I feel I should add that, considering the political climate of 2008 and especially after the financial “meltdown” in September 2008, any Democrat would have defeated any Republican that year. Race, or even John McCain himself, had very little to do with Republicans’ defeats.)

          • acat

            I would be very happy if Cain comes out of the primary well positioned to run for Governor of Georgia. I’d be equally happy if he impresses the nominee sufficiently to get the veep slot (and with Pawlenty or Daniels I think Cain would be a good fit) or even one of the serious cabinet posts. I’d also be happy if he were the GOP nom for POTUS for 2012. For one thing, the debates would be epic…

            As to the Obama election, Ziegler has some thoughts. Racism and white racial guilt definitely played a role. (http://www.howobamagotelected.com/) Not a problem, just an observation.

            Finally, 2008 could have been won by the GOP had they run a candidate who, upon finding that the Dem nominee wasn’t Hillary, changed tactics appropriately. McCain never seemed to change tactics, never went on the offensive effectively. Struck me as odd that the only thing he managed to do right was to pick a veep.

            Mew

          • ZootSuit

            I will say that I am also concerned about Herman Cain being the VP nominee, too — I am of the “most be ready for the big chair on day one” mindset — but outside of that, I think we are in agreement with your first two paragraphs.

            As for the last paragraph — and we both are getting off topic here but to continue — John McCain actually did better in most areas than other Republican candidates in 2008. I think there was an article here or someone else about that, where the election results were broken down precinct by precinct: if I can find it, I will post it. 2008 was an absolutely abysmal year for Republicans (and for good reasons, I might add). Despite the myths to the contrary, John McCain actually over-performed in 2008.

          • ZootSuit

            When I say that John McCain “did better in most areas than other Republican candidates” I mean that in most precincts, John McCain received a higher percentage of votes than the Republican candidates running in other Federal offices, such as for the U.S. Senate and Congress. There were exceptions, of course, but more often than not, that was the case.

          • ZootSuit

            If you apparently agree that his race played a part in Obama’s support and election in 2008, why do you seem to take offense when I argue that race is playing a part in the support for Herman Cain now?

          • acat

            “Herman Cain is the candidate that White conservatives say they want to prove to themselves that they are not prejudiced”, eh?

            Had you initially said “Herman Cain is the candidate that some conservatives say they want to prove to themselves that they are not prejudiced”, it’d be more precise… and it’s the broad brush that I find problematic.

            Mew

          • ZootSuit

            I did say that not all White conservatives support Cain because he’s Black. My sincere apologies for not making that clear at first but again, I did so so afterwards.

            However, being picayune, I cannot let you get away with your own misstatement or misrepresentation of what I meant. I am saying, (correcting your otherwise accurate representation of my thinking):

            “Herman Cain is the candidate that some White conservatives say they want to prove to themselves that they are not prejudiced.?

            As you tacitly if not explicitly admit, such racial thinking is inherent with some (not all, but some) White liberals and independents in their support of Obama (even when these same White liberals and independents agree with Obama on many issues). Why can’t it be admitted that such racial thinking is inherent with some (not all, but some) White conservatives in their support for Cain (even when these same White conservatives agree with Cain on many issues)?

          • acat

            What you’re saying, and what I agree with, is that white racial guilt played some part in Obama’s victory and is playing a part in Cain’s success.

            I admit that I missed where you modified your statement from “all” to “some”.

            My point, and the reason I made two edits to your quote, is that it’s not just whites who have cultural biases. As I alluded to above, your thinking is just as directed by culture as mine, however because your culture is subtly different, your biases show up in different places than mine…

            Mew

          • ZootSuit

            We all have cultural biases. White, Black, liberal, conservative, it does not matter, we all have cultural biases. From my point of view, and I guess the gist of my argument with many in this thread, is that many (note, I did not say all) White conservatives cannot admit their’s.

            Moreover, the topic of this conversation — and dare I say, the overwhelming if not sole source of support for Herman Cain — is White conservatives. I will dare say that every Black conservatives I personally know thinks Cain’s kind of interesting but really do not support him for the caveats I raise. I am certain there are exceptions — not even all Black conservatives think alike :-) but that has been my observation. Indeed, that’s basically my own position on him.. If Cain was the nominee, we could vote for him but right now, don’t support him. (Much like my position on Romney.)

            Sorry, but from my own personal observations. this groundswell of support for Herman Cain is a White conservative phenomena and yes, I do think that “White conservative guilt” plays a part of it.

          • acat

            This is exactly the kind of conversation that we need more of, in this cat’s opinion anyway.

            Mew

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)
          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            in that case… You may want to research Romney’s experience with 2002 Olympics, and all of his time at BAIN Capital.

          • acat

            I’d forgotten about that… and I’m not sure, given the disaster that Wall Street has been for Main Street since 2006/2007-ish, I really don’t know that it’s a positive for Romney…

            Mew

          • silentcal2012

            Sometimes its quite amazing how far the GOP drifts into rank populism. Career politicians and lawyers have routinely attacked Romney for starting a business that grew into a major force for entrpeneurship and a major employer. Its a private equity firm based out of Boston and has nothing to do with Wall Street. In as world without the politics that stokes class baiting and class wnvy, it would be a major accomplishment. IThese days, its a source of scorn.

          • Dan McLaughlin

            although in a general election that populism can be a problem.

          • ZootSuit

            I despise Romney (although I too would grudgingly vote for him after I vomited and cut myself) but I must agree with you.

          • acat

            Any accomplishment in the field of finance has been marred by the outright criminal antics on wall street.

            http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/14/thedc-op-ed-one-nation-under-fraud/

            The entire sector needs to look squeaky .. but doesn’t. Even BoA, who ought to be a TARP success story, are mired in the next round of mortgage meltdowns…

            Romney’s affiliation with BAIN may not be the plus it is assumed to be…

            Mew

          • silentcal2012

            I said its not a plus, but a source of scorn.

            I just said its sad that a guy who creates and builds a business gets criticized for it. People think he is some rich CEO type, but he built that business.

            And that business is in the business of building businesses. There would be no Staples without Bain and I could name a dozen more similar companies. Private equity firms like Bain anre not shifty Wall Street traders. Bain is great for capitalism. They find small start-ups and give them resources to grow and find foundering businesses and help them become profitable.

            But like I said, in a world of career politicians, lawyers and academics, and their followeres who know nothing about business, Romney is scorned.

            Its a sad state of affairs and it embarasses me when it trickles into the GOP.

          • acat

            I gotta tell ya, while Bain may not be shifty, there’s a *lot* that are… if not shifty, then .. not necessarily having the best interest of the initial owners involved…

            You’re right about the cultural problem, by the way .. we do need to value people who create value, but .. that’s a much larger problem than just winning the 2012 primary…

            Mew

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            When a capital investment firm puts capital into your coffers as an investment… then yeah… they can begin to act in their own best interest, and not in the interests of “initial owners” when it comes to “how things are going to be done”… its all explicitly laid out in the fine print…

            word to “initial owners”… don’t take on angel investors or venture capitalists and assume you can’t or won’t be told what to do…

            I mean, you wouldn’t take your Mother-in-law into your house not knowing what you’re getting into… right? So why is it different when someone else has their dollars involved in your business?

            At worst Romney’s BAIN experience could be legitimately attacked for “hostile takeovers” and “gutting” or “stripping” or “mining” or “consolidating” assets that led to relatively large layoffs… but in the end… people with a brain and a proclivity for recognizing overall success should view this as a natural occurrence in the pruning of poorly run businesses with assets in a free market. Yes… its just business.

          • acat

            “you wouldn?t take your Mother-in-law into your house not knowing what you?re getting into” is the money quote…

            Well put.

            The point I was trying to make is that Mitt’s growing Bain into a powerhouse of a venture capital group, while admirable, may not be taken as the automatic plus this time …

            Mew

        • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

          So, while the argument can be made that Cain?s the token black guy, I?d argue that Herman Cain is no Alan Keyes.

          • ZootSuit

            And that is a plus for Cain, in my book.

            But why is anyone comparing Cain and Keyes in the first place?

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            because Keyes may very well have been viewed as the “token black republican” when looking for someone to go up against Obama in his Illinois senate run in ’04.

            So its relevant to your original thought that follows the “Cain is a token black republican to go up against the first black president”.

            I was simply stating agreeing that Cain is no Keyes in that regard, and similarly Keyes is no Cain when it comes to legitimate candidacies.

          • acat

            I was actually referencing Keyes’ presidential run in 1996. I’d forgotten that he also ran in 2000, and 2008…

            Otherwise, dead on.

            Mew

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            Keyes really seemed like he fell off a ladder and suffered some “dain bramage” ever after from the 2004 campaign against Obama… I mean he ran in ’08, then jumped the GOP ship and attempted to become a constitution, then independent… and then became a birther… its sad… he really had a great career until he was drafted in 2004 to go up against BHO.

          • rightwingmom52

            I voted for Keyes in the 1996 primary? Not admitting I did, but that was way before Keyes went third party.

          • acat

            I did vote for him in the 2004 Illinois Senate race.

            Alan Keyes was poorly treated in 1996, and was disgracefully used by the Illinois RINOs in 2004.

            It is very sad to see where he’s ended.

            Does that answer your question?

            Mew

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)
          • rightwingmom52
          • acat

            President Ron Paul (R) would do it…

            Mew

      • http://stixblog.com Black River Wolf

        That has nothing to do with why I like Herman Cain. He could be blue , red orange or any various other colors. I could care less about the skin color of a candidate. I look at the content of a person not the skin color,and anyone that thinks that I would pick someone for skin color should be ashamed of themselves.

        He is the best at epsousing Conservative thought out there now. Pawlenty is good, but very boring and that will be his downfall. Think Al Gore, but on the Conservative side.

        And someone downthread said ,”how is he more Conservative than Romney?” Do I even need to answer that question. Romneycare anyone???

      • LDahl752

        Just how well has that been working for us so far? There are a handful of long-serving senators and representatives who still seem focused on doing what’s right for the country and what their constituents want them to do. Most of them, however, are more concerned with their next re-election.

        Perhaps I’m naive, but I’m ready for a businessman who has true conservative principles and who is willing to listen to the American people. There is far too much evidence that politicians take on the attitude of “they know best” what is good for us, yet they don’t legislate as if they have clue #1.

        There’s only a certain amount of money in this country. At the rate Congress has been spending and obligated us to future liabilities, I believe they have no idea what that means. At some point they can confiscate ALL the money generated and there won’t be enough. Okay, the Fed will simply priint more. Will that work? Have you ever seen what happens when a publicly-traded company announces a stock split? Usually, the value/share the next day is less than half. Shareholders then have to wait for the per-share value to recover. Dilution of the dollar will work similarly. We can have “x” amount of dollars in our pocket, but each one of them might be worth only a portion of what the value was yesterday.

        • ZootSuit

          Because he says so and speak eloquently?

          Sorry, but what GOP candidate doesn’t say they are conservative?

          As acat agreed earlier today in another thread, I’m looking for an actual record of accomplishment. Sorry but the rhetoric doesn’t cut it.

          And yes, I do believe that there are some here who are more accepting or more likely to believe Herman Cain;s rhetoric without a record because they want to believe in a Black man who espouses them.

          To make myself clear, the “problem” I have with Herman Cain and his supporters is not that he is Black. My “problem” is that he has no record of political accomplishment. Moreover, what I am also saying is that many (not all, maybe not even most, but most definitely more than a few) of Cain’s supporters are willing to overlook his lack of a political record primarily because he is Black.

          • LDahl752

            His business expertise and positive outcomes say a lot. And the ideas he’s expressed so far make a lot of sense to me.

            Whether the R’s nominate a black candidate shouldn’t matter at all, but at least that would take race out of the race.

      • lineholder

        is that he genuinely loves this country. He’s passionate in that love, and it rings in his voice when he speaks. He isn’t ashamed of that love for our nation either. He ashamed of our history. He’s very realistic in his outlook that events of the past are exactly that…events of the past. They do not necessarily define the future…that is up to us to decide of our own accord.

        He isn’t a “status quo” politician. He isn’t driven by the “approval” and/or “survival” mechanisms that most politicians find becoming ingrained into their very souls over time. He isn’t bound to those mechanisms in the manner that most politicians tend to be. He’s more open-minded in his outlook on situations, which could be a true blessing for this nation if it is applied in a positive way.

        And as much people present that this nation can’t be run as a business, it is the survival of freedom regarding business, particularly in the private sector, that will have the greatest influence over our economy in the years to come.

        With each day that passes, I’m looking more favorably at Cain.

        I couldn’t care less about the color of the man’s skin….it’s what is on the inside that matters most to me.

        • lineholder

          “He isn’t ashamed of our history”.

        • ZootSuit

          And how do you know what Howard Cain or anyone, conservative or liberal, feels and loves?

          For the record, I am not questioning Cain’s love of country or whatnot but I am saying that this support for him based on such ephemeral qualities without any record of political accomplishment is ridiculous. And yes, I am also saying that many of his supporters are engaging in it as a way to assuage any (and for the most part, I will even add, unwarranted) feeling of White racial guilt.

          Indeed, at the risk of starting another line of argument here, it reminds me of the silly comments to draft J.C. Watts as a VP candidate a few years ago when if you knew the man or even knew anything about him, you would know that he was simply not interested (to say the least) and was not going to do it. But at least J.C. Watts had a record.

          Quite frankly, this is beginning to remind me of the stupidity of some of the Palinbots when she was first chosen as a VP candidate (and even now persists among a few). She gives a good speech so just project anything you want on her, all the great qualities that you would like to see. Never mind the reality. But hey, at least Sarah Palin has some sort of political record.

          • lineholder

            The degree of corruption that currently exists in our government is extremely high and it comes from both sides of the aisle, not just Democrats. Until such time as a series of events takes place that this particular pattern of behavior is changed, we the people can literally count on it that not only will what power and authority that is granted to elected officials will be misused and abused, but also that the pattern of reckless spending within our government will continue, as the expenditure of public funds is being used for the purpose of accumulating political power.

            All of the above is true and is a direct reflection of the general mindset that has been established amongst politicians….to the point that this is considered not only to be acceptable behavior but also “good” behavior.

            That’s the nature of modern politics. That’s the reality that exists among politicians.

            Can you truly blame those of who can and are open-minded enough to consider the qualities that a non-traditional candidate, one who has NOT become entrenched in the current mentality of corruption that does exist in the political realm of this country, might have to offer to our nation? Because if you do, then you are the one being naive and closed-minded on this issue, not me and not others who are willing to consider what a non-traditional candidate such as Cain has to offer.

            And to even remotely judge or condemn what I have said about Cain’s very obvious belief and love for this nation is beyond the pale, sir.

        • SoFiMil

          all of a 10 second hi, hello. But his genuineness and humility were there. Good guy and good roots. He’s there for the right reasons.

  • Bill S

    I like

    I’m on the Blandwagon, baby.

    • acat

      And “on the blandwagon” is a great way to turn a negative into a rallying point.

      He’s not been an exciting speaker, but .. well, I don’t see how the non-substantive “cool” of Obama will work a second time.

      Mew

    • conservativemusician

      That’s good stuff from Pawlenty. And Daniels was a bonehead for calling a truce on social issues and then sticking to his ill-conceived statement which will come back to haunt him in the primaries. Not.prudent.

  • shelbysbest

    I was taking a serious look at Tim Pawlenty. I knew he wasn’t the perfect candidate, but yesterday race42012 divulged some prior statements made by Pawlenty. I’m a principled Fred Thompson conservative, and if these statements are true, it would appear that Pawlenty is not rooted in conservatism. Here’s the article in case you missed it.

    http://race42012.com/2011/03/09/flashback-pawlentys-record/

    I’ve got go to with a candidate who has a core belief system that resembles mine. I know he had to govern a very blue state, but a real conservative would never utter some of the words he chose or reference Jimmy Carter. Pawlenty is likeable and appears to be a social conservative but some of his past statements can only ring true of a RINO. He would have to do some “TALL” explaining!

    • conservativecurmudgeon

      …smothering “green energy mandates”, hustling with the teachers unions, gratuitous preening in front of Jimmy Carter, tax and revenue increases. This man is a liberal, at least if these things mentioned in the article are even HALF true…

      • LibertarianHawk

        So you may as well stop looking for it.

        Sure, you might find it in one of the minor candidates — Cain or somebody along those lines. But, really, they’re irrelevant to this process…and I mean no disrespect when I say that.

        From a conservative standpoint, we can go down the line candidate by candidate and find heresies from each candidate with a serious chance. I wouldn’t let it deter you from the task at hand.

        • shelbysbest

          how do you reconcile this statement, “?The era of small government is over . . . government has to be more proactive, more aggressive.?
          as being even closely related to conservatism?

          When you make statements like that, it matters!

          • LibertarianHawk

            But, then, I’m a firm believe in actions speaking louder than words. And the Cato Institute — no supporter of aggressive, proactive government — gave Pawlenty’s term in office a pretty glowing review.

            Seriously, we could go down the line of candidates and find a major strike against each one of them. Mitt has MittCare, Daniels has his truce, Barbour has lobbied in favor of amnesty, Huntsman worked for Obama and supports gay marriage, etc. etc.

            It’s a pointless exercise, IMO. All of them would be preferable to what we have now and the name of the game here needs to be winning.

          • shelbysbest

            He got an A from CATO in 2010, but his other years were not as stellar. I had been tweeting for Pawlenty, supporting him on facebook, bought the man’s book and had followed every article and video that had been released, But when I saw these comments, I could no longer look the other way. If he’s the nominee, of course I’ll support him.

            His statements in that article, originally taken from a WSJ article written by Jason Lewis, are disappointing to say the least.

          • LDahl752

            in my opinion. I think it’s the nature of the beast.

            It’s possible that his remarks in 2006 were made because he was running for re-election. Or, that’s what he really thought. He was McCain’s spokesman. Was that because he wanted more national exposure, or did he really believe in McCain as a candidate? I’d like to know if he had favored any other R’s during the 2008 primary season.

            He also will have to do some honest explaining of his prior positions. I like him a lot (I’m a former Minnesotan) and I know he had to battle a Dem-controlled legislature during ALL OF HIS 8 YEARS as governor. That means something to me. I’m also impressed with his strong positions on social issues.

            Now, he will have to come out with some believable opposition to radical environmentalism, call for an end to ethanol subsidies, encourage more oil drilling and refining in the USA, speak to the benefits of clean coal power plants, and promote the benefit of the nuclear power plant that’s been functioning for many years in Minn., just an hour or so north of the Twin Cities. If he can take strong and vocal positions on these matters, while admitting his past mistakes and clarifying the “why”, I’d be one of his biggest fans. He definitely needs to attack the growth of the central government and the massive costs and intrusion that has caused.

            As of now, I’m still “searching” and I’m praying that Allen West will be convinced (primarily by his constituents) to enter the fray. I think he is the one the country needs.

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            Huntsman supports gay marriage? Out of curiosity, do you have something to point me to on this… I’m not challenging… I’m just sincerely interested in the basis of that remark.

    • Dan McLaughlin

      and why I’m still looking for a better option.

      My point is, he’s a safe port in a storm, and we may yet find ourselves in a very unpleasant storm.

      Also, recall that he was in Minnesota. That’s not a complete defense, any more than it is for Mitt (or Rudy 08, or Christie if he runs) but it’s a mitigating factor. Also that you have to look at his record since that 2008 piece was written, especially with regard to things that were just proposals at the time or are just individual pieces of his overall spending record.

      As Ramesh put it: conservative, but not a conservative. I’d like to do better, but I’m not sure we will. And experience does matter; people run for president, ideas don’t.

      • red_oakster

        Like Alexander, he could match up well against the incumbent in a general election, but will need some breaks to do well in nomination contest.

        The most important break Pawlenty needs is for both Huckabee and Palin to sit out the race. Pawlenty must do very well in Iowa to have a chance. If either Palin of Huckabee run, he’ll have a hard time doing that. And without a strong performance in Iowa, Pawlenty will have little opportunity to do well in New Hampshire. Indeed without a great performance in Iowa, Pawlenty probably would be out of the race.

        If Palin and Huckabee pass on the race, then Pawlenty could finish in the top two in Iowa and go all the way. But he needs a little help from two potential opponents.

        While I prefer Pawlenty to Romney, Romney has a better shot. If Iowa produces a Huckabee or Palin victory, Romney merely needs to win New Hampshire to get into the finals. If that happens, Romney will roll up blue state delegates while splitting the rest with Palin or Huckabee. The system would work in Romney’s favor.

        Now Romney could lose New Hampshire, but if he does, he will lose it either to a Pawlenty who did well in Iowa or to an opponent who ignored Iowa and instead bet the farm on an economic issues campaign in New Hampshire. Daniels is the guy for that role or Chris Christie (if he ran), with Giuliani as a more remote possibility (I mention Rudy only because he has said he might run if Palin does and currently he shows up a distant second to Romney in New Hampshire polls).

        • chihank

          Even if Huck and Palin pass on 2012, Michelle Bachmann is making the moves for 2012. This month, Bachmann is headlining a GOP fundraiser in NH. Bachmann could suppress T-Paw in Iowa.

          • red_oakster

            Even though Bachmann has no chance to win the nomination, she could win a significant slice of votes in Iowa. Pawlenty has a tough hand.

            But it could have been worse. If Pence had run, Pawlenty would have been finished before he began.

          • johnconradarens

            At this point, judging by the complete lack of enthusiasm for ANY candidate, it sure seems that anyone can break out. Including Michele Bachmann.

          • red_oakster

            Bachmann could do very well in a caucus state like Iowa with a decisive evangelical constituency. But you’re kidding yourself if you think Bachmann could break out in California or Ohio or Pennsylvania or Florida. She has no appeal to the party establishment. The successful insurgent campaigns (Goldwater, Reagan in 80) had enough roots in the establishment to attract support. Bachmann doesn’t. She’s never been elected to statewide office. Whoever emerged as the establishment alternative (Romney, Pawlenty, Barbour, etc.) would swamp her.

        • Dan McLaughlin

          like Romney’s, was his transparent insincerity. Lamar was my least favorite serious GOP presidential contender until Mitt, and may still be.

          • red_oakster

            I think Pawlenty’s position in the horse race resembles Alexander’s in 1996.

  • LibertarianHawk

    …Pawlenty is probably my second. Huntsman third.

    I’ve got nothing against Romney or Barbour. But I just don’t see either of them happening.

    The rest don’t matter.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    I’m looking forward to the T-Paw-Romney showdown…

    But since they’re both going to garner the same type of voters… I think the winner of the two will come down to who fairs better in Iowa and New Hampshire… By the time New Hampshire has been digested… the winner will likely muster the South Carolina crowd that’s pro-fiscal credentials in a candidate… it may still come down to Florida… to finally separate the wide field…

    The strategy remains “be the front runner” with delegates before Super Tuesday…

    I believe this thing is Romney’s to lose, and T-Paw’s to run away with… I’d like to say if Barbour got real serious his personality would go a long way for him… but I’m afraid he’s going to be the Fred Thompson of this cycle… and do himself in by not jumping in with both feet early on.

    As for this diary in general… two great quotes:

    And like Romney, he has one crucial thing the rest of the field has yet to prove – he wants the job, badly, and is effectively already running.

    So, just in case, save me a seat on the blandwagon.

    • Dan McLaughlin

      and I do like him and have not ruled out backing him ahead of Pawlenty. But I have serious concerns about the electability of a guy with the baggage of being a Mississippi Republican who looks and sounds like every bad caricature of the same, and who was a tobacco lobbyist to boot. Also, Barbour’s record is not exactly one of principled fiscal conservatism – see Ben’s piece on his position on health care exchanges. I don’t really see much evidence that Barbour is any more of a fiscal conservative than Pawlenty.

      • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

        from jumping both feet in, is fund-raising.

        Great piece by Ben, thanks for sharing…

        I wasn’t endorsing Barbour by any means, I just see him as the same “Business” mentality to fiscal governance, which is what seems to be the desire of the “anti-Obama” movement at large.

        Personally… I am hoping that the primaries are civilized enough to not give too much ammunition to the MSM, and yet elucidative enough to cause a “Sword in the Stone” moment… where we see something of a Reagan’s mantle falling upon someone to the degree that the entire base is galvanized… unfortunately we’re likely going to hear a lot of “zombie Reagan” jokes coming from the left as every single candidate invokes his memory.

        Pragmatically speaking I think my hope is in vain… but I’m willing to admit a lack of faith more than I’m willing to announce the second coming of Reagan.

        • Tavern Keeper

          I don’t see fundraising holding Barbour back at all. In fact, that’s a real strength. And he’s proven his fiscal conservatism as governor.

          Here’s analysis I did of his chances stacked up against other potential candidates, although it didn’t really address T-Paw.

          http://www.redstate.com/thelefty/2011/03/03/haley-barbour-a-viable-candidacy/

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            and primarily the reason Dan linked to Ben Domenech’s article is that Haley Barbour is supportive of Health Exchanges at the state level… which really is the crux of RomneyCare… which minimizes his ability to credibly criticize Mitt… and for some fiscal conservatives that buy into Obamacare is our #1 asset in attacking Obama in the general… it becomes in the least a small-liability for Barbour…

            I mention fund-raising… not because Haley Barbour can’t raise funds… its just I think the areas he’d be getting a large portion of his donations… will come from the same money trees that Romney, and T-Paw will be shaking… and although many will donate to all and see which does the best… they also run the risk of “split-primary support” that Huckabee and Palin face with so-cons. For this reason… I mean to suggest that at the end of the first series of fund raising… Romney will likely with the “horserace” narrative from the MSM, and thus the spoils go to the “frontrunner” of similar archetypes.

          • Dan McLaughlin

            Remember, having been head of the RNC in 94 and the RGA in 2010, he has an almost bottomless bank of favors to call in and knows everyone you need to know to raise the big dollar.

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            Romney will ultimately win the narrative of “fundraiser” with a bright big footnote that says:

            [1] Romney matched dollar for dollar contributions from personal funds.

  • Goldwater_Conservative

    lets settle on Pawlenty before we have to settle on something much worse. No matter where you are on the conservative spectrum, you will say we could do much worse than Pawlenty.

    • red_oakster

      As always, Iowa and New Hampshire narrow the choice. Once we know who the candidates are and the relative strength of candidates against their rivals in Iowa and New Hampshire, we’ll have a better sense of things. We won’t know those two things until at least the end of the summer. Until then, nothing gets settled.

      • acat

        Reagan settled 1980 in 1976… simply by not stopping after he lost to Ford.

        Unfortunately, the direct parallel would say that Romney settled 2012 in 2008 .. because he never really stopped running after losing to McCain.

        Mew

  • azaeroprof

    I’d be about as excited as Chevy Chase in National Lampoon’s Vacation eating the soggy sandwiches.

    One flaw in your analysis, though. You said:

    “…it may be a very different story in 2012 if Obama is still unpopular and ends up banking entirely on his ability to discredit his opponent to win.”

    The fact of the matter is that Obama is still quite popular. His approval rating is rather anemic, though not totally in the tank, and there are a fair number of people who really dislike what he has done, but he remains personally popular and a very effective campaigner. And there is still a sizeable population that thinks he walks on water. All that, plus a billion dollars, and we’ll need more than “soggy bread” to beat him…much more.

  • Change Jar Conservative

    along with Daniels and Santorium.

    Pawlenty and Daniels are the “been there (exec experience) done that” candidates that we need while Santorium is my Quixiote candidate who probably doesn’t hvae the resume.

    Herman Cain is somewhere and I like him, but I don’t see a scenario where he gains traction.

    President Pawlenty … I could live with it.

  • ZootSuit

    One thing to note, however, is that Barack Obama is not unpopular. He is probably the most polarizing President in history — which, quite frankly, is almost to be expected — but all in all, he really is not that unpopular. And bluntly, conservatives are deluding themselves if they think he is.

    Barack Obama has an approval/disapproval rate of about 50/50 and if anything, lately, it has tended more towards the positive. The really interesting thing about him is that very, very few people have no opinion on him. This indicates that he doesn’t have much room to improve but it also indicates that he doesn’t have much fear of falling.

    We can even talk about his policies as much as we want be even then, his record is mixed. For example, most people oppose ObamaCare (although even here, some people oppose it because it does not go far enough) but most people also support many parts of it. Conservatives may successfully argue against individual mandates but who is going to take up the banner against coverage for pre-existing conditions and for young adults until age 24?

    And frankly, although I personally have concerns about the constitutionality of individual mandates (indeed, unless I am mistaken, I am opposed to ObamaCare in general, including the other parts of it I mention here) but enforcing coverage for pre-existing conditions and for family members over 24 is even more disastrous from an economical and health care perspective. Yet,no conservative elected official is willing to lead against them because they know (and Barack Obama knows) that they are popular.

    Barack Obama may not be cruising to a landslide re-election but, strictly from a political point of view, I would rather be him than any potential rival. Although it’s very early, consider the following links:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html

  • Darin_H

    Pretty good speech and if he keeps it up, he’s got enough fire in the belly to stave off *some* of the bland.

    He’s probably at the top of the “they’re running or thinking about it and have a shot at the nomination” ahead of Romney, Huckabee, Palin, or Barbour.

    • Dan McLaughlin

      nt

  • Finrod

    This quote always seems to come to mind when I hear folks touting Pawlenty, usually when they’re trying to pass off his blandness as a good thing or his seeming lack of any major flaws as a good thing.

    Tell me why Pawlenty would make a good President, not why he wouldn’t make a bad one. Otherwise I’m looking for someone else that I think is worthy of my support.

    • Dan McLaughlin

      which is why I’m not telling anybody to commit to him. I’m saying that he starts off well-positioned in terms of experience and lack of killer weaknesses, and that means we should give him a hearing to make his case.

  • chihank

    Of the fresh faces for 2012, T-Paw looks the best. Unlike Mitch Daniels, T-Paw knows enough not to anger the base. Back in 2005, I thought a Mark Sanford / T-Paw would be great for 2008. A balanced ticket with a Southern Governor and Midwestern Governor. Of course Mark Sanford disgraced himself andT-Paw is left standing. I think Mike Huckabee could fill in the role of Southern Governor. A T-Paw/Huck or Huck/T-Paw would be a good balance of Midwestern and Southern regions. The key to winning the White HOuse is to sweep the South and win the Big Ten states. We will never win the West and East Coasts.

    • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

      but Huck was no southern republican governor… he was a “dixie-crat in republican clothing” and as far as his record as governor goes… he espoused social conservatism… and not much else for conservatives…

      His T.V. show has provided him an excellent opportunity to re-brand himself as a “conservative”… which was his biggest problem in 2008… but I just don’t trust a single thing he says… and that’s due to a lot of sleazy comments made that were unnecessary (in the grand scheme) about many other republicans that may get in the way of his own egotistical bid for the White-house. I don’t think he has any pure intent… he’s lusting for power in my view is just as tainted as any of the 2008 “also-ran” category.

      • Remington_Steele
  • fedsocdan

    Cain is the only potential candidate who is different than all the rest. There is something so special about him. When he’s making a speech I get the same feeling as when I watch a clip of Reagan. That goes for Allen West too; leadership qualities off the charts. Same can be said for Chris Christie to some extent (except he’s RINO unfortunately).

    I completely understand Dan’s argument regarding the lack of any significant campaigning under his belt. However, McCain was one of the worst campaigners I’d ever witnessed and he captured tens of millions of votes. Cain can motivate people like no other. In KY humble opinion, there’s no reason he couldn’t garner more votes than McCain did.

  • conservativemusician

    And yes, Pawlenty strikes me as pretty boring as well, but that doesn’t matter to me as much as his stands on the issues. At least he won’t have to defend starting socialized medicine in his state like Romney did in Massachusetts. I think that issue more than any other will put the stake in Romney. Obama will have a field day with that issue.

    I’ll look forward to finding out more about Pawlenty as we get going in earnest on reviewing all the serious and electable candidates.

  • aesthete

    Midwest Gov minus his last two years, where he really gave the Dems whatfor. I could live with that, though I’d certainly like to get better. I agree with your “soggy wonder bread” descriptor.

  • SoFiMil

    Also, your description of T-Paw captured by sentiments perfectly and better than I could articulate – “the lowest common denominator.” Not the ideal, but also definitely passes all my tests. Nice guy — make that a very nice guy, and not a squish. A VP candidate in the likes of Mike Pence or Herman Cain would seal the deal. In my opinion, Gov. Pawlety meets the definition of a conservative.

    And he’s definitely light-years better than Romney, Huntsman, etc. Here’s hoping Romney and Huntsman split their vote.

  • nvrepub

    nt

    • ktsub

      or Brian Sandoval