« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Can we elect a proven winner in 2012?

By: pilgrim (Diary)  |  November 8th, 2010 at 03:56 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

In 2008 the GOP candidate for President was picked by the moderates and the beltway establishment. The calendar of primaries and caucuses had the effect of keeping any conservative candidate from having any chance of getting some traction and winning. It was like American Idol process for winnowing down the field. We should have a better way to look at filling this job. Why don’t we look for someone who has experience winning election as Governor of a State and success as the State’s chief executive of having the lowest unemployment rate, the best economy, and the lowest net tax supported debt?

I let Google be my friend, and I found a ranking of the unemployment rates for states

  1. North Dakota 3.7%
  2. South Dakota 4.4%
  3. Nebraska 4.6%
  4. New Hampshire 5.5%
  5. Vermont 5.8%

I found a ranking of the best economy for states

  1. Texas
  2. New York
  3. North Dakota
  4. South Dakota
  5. Minnesota

I found a ranking of the lowest Net Tax-Supported Debt AS A % OF 2008 PERSONAL INCOME for states

  1. Nebraska 0.0
  2. Wyoming 0.2%
  3. Iowa 0.2%
  4. South Dakota 0.4%
  5. North Dakota 0.8%

I have provided a photo of the three Governors I think have been the most successful in putting their State on the right track instead of the wrong track for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These three are not well known inside the beltway. They do not appear on the Sunday morning talk shows. They do not travel to Washington with a hand out for Federal dollars and assistance. The few news stories have to do with them opposing more Federal taxes and interference in their State. I do not know if any of these three have any political aspirations to be President. Could someone ask them? Can we have an opportunity to elect a proven winner in 2012? It would be a wonderful change from what 2008 brought us.

John Hoeven  Senator-elect John Hoeven North Dakota

Governor Mike Rounds  former Governor Mike Rounds South Dakota

Governor Dave Heineman  current Governor Dave Heineman Nebraska

Cross-posted at The Minority Report

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • davidabippus

    I am very glad that you researched this issue and posted this entry. These are some of the names that I have been interested in as well. I think that our next president needs to be a governor and not a legislator. Christie has said in no uncertain terms that he is not going to run, so I think that we need to put an end to that speculation. I am a huge supporter of DeMint and Rubio and Ryan and others, but they need to continue their efforts in the legislative bodies. I think that we need a Harding-Coolidge type return to normalcy with an administration that will focus on the business at hand within Constitutional boundaries and not get swept away by a myriad of distractions and media frenzy. I also have no desire for a re-tread from 2008. We need some new faces and new ideas from proven leaders that have successful track records. I, too, have no idea if these people are interested in running or not. I also understand that it will be very a difficult undertaking for the aforementioned to gain the exposure and name recognition that will be necessary with the Romney/Huckabee/Palin/Gingrich crowd grabbing all of the headlines. However, in my opinion we need people like this to run. I’d also very much like to see a business executive or two such as Herman Cain enter the fray. We need people that can motivate and solve complex problems. We don’t need Romneycare or populism or platitudes. I certainly believe that we can and we must do better than the current so-called frontrunners that are jockeying for position. Thanks again, Pilgrim. Great effort and nice work.

    • skepticalal

      The statistics you cite are interesting, but much like being CEO of Exxon when oil prices went through the roof, you need to separate out what someone DID to create good performance vs. what they inherited and merely rode.

      I’m more impressed by someone that takes a union state and turns it into a right-to-work state, then someone who reaps the reward of state that is already that way for instance. One takes far more courage and initiative than the other, and measures more highly to me.

      I haven’t examined them in enough detail to have an opinion. However, I do like very much what Mitch Daniels has done in Indiana. Among other things, its a larger population state, it has a larger manufacturing base that was more heavily impacted by the recession. So to me, its a better test, and it has nearby states like Ohio and Michigan with similar economies to compare too.

      It, like Texas, has outsized job growth gains during this period. Meaning that very few states are actually creating jobs right now. and these two states are doing an outsized job. However, I am not impressed by Perry’s fiscal performance as shown by Texas’ budget woes.

      Further, if you read what Daniels did – he took a lot of very intelligent, fact-driven, numbers-driven, government union-reducing actions to improve government. The Weekly Standard has a decent profile that should be read.

      I’m not knocking the folks mentioned, and I’d love to learn more in-depth. But I do think Mitch deserves to be on the same list.

      • pilgrim

        Mitch Daniels was the first Republican in 16 years of Democrat rule by Bayh and O’Bannon to govern Indiana. Yes in terms of what he inherited he has improved Indiana to the 11th best state in terms of lowest tax-supported debt. In terms of unemployment Indiana is ranked #43 better than its neighbor, Michigan #50. In terms of economy it is #41 and Michigan is #47.

        John Hoeven has also improved North Dakota from what he started with. The key for North Dakota is it became an oil producing state under his watch.

  • texasgalt

    but it is much easier to govern in states where there is not much underclass to support.

    Sorry, but there it is. I’ll admit they would likely be better than an empty suit like Thune.

    Here’s a can-do governor: Haley Barbour . . . but would they vote for him in PA?

    • pilgrim

      They have had problems in some of their meat processing plants and in some of their cities with an underclass looking to be supported. It has been dealt with better than California. I think if they can get early support they have a winning record that will resonate with a voter from PA as well as GA.

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

        In many ways this is good, as I think the Dem Party process that nominates who they fall in love with this year is also pathetic.

        But, there is some value to a level playing field where the one that connects gets the nomination, and it is also a leg up to have candidates that have proven themselves competent and winners in the past.

        more later

        • red_oakster

          The overriding rule remains: Do well in either Iowa or New Hampshire, or go home.

          Right now Iowa looks like a fight between Huckabee and Palin (and maybe Pence or Rubio (were he to defy expectations and jump in)). Every other candidate is going to need to hang around the pubs and diners of New Hampshire for two years.

          It certainly isn’t the best way for the Republicans to choose our nominee, but we’re stuck with it.

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

            would probably slightly lean to Huckabee for electability reasons.

            Rubio as a presidential candidate is a joke to me, as much as I am thrilled he is in the Senate. I also wish that JC Watts or Ken Blackwell would run.

            I supported Fred and Mitt last time.

            But Barbour would be my first choice.

          • acat

            I’m just curious what about Barbour you like over, say, Daniels, or Pawlenty, or Herman Cain.

            Just interested in discussing, not trying to put anyone on the spot. What I know of Barbour is pretty limited…

            Mew

          • aesthete

            who has lots of experience successfully enacting conservative successes in executive and organizational positions both nationally and in the state that he currently governs (Mississippi). He turned a budget deficit into a surplus largely by cutting Medicaid spending, and did so without raising a single tax. (He recently raised cigarette taxes, but on the whole, his record on taxes and spending is excellent.) Personally, I prefer Daniels by a hair ATM, but Barbour is certainly worthy of serious consideration.

          • pilgrim

            He was the only grown up local official in Katrina aftermath. The LA gov and NO mayor were childlike compared to Barbour. How you conduct yourself during a crisis is important.

          • calgacus

            Especially if Huckabee wins, he will have a hard time winning in either Iowa or S. Carolina; and I’m pretty sure that he will not be winning New Hampshire. As for Mitch Daniels, I think it is likely he will run, and could be a decent President, but as a candidate and campaigner I think he is pretty weak. Herman Cain has never been elected to anything, and while experience isn’t everything, it is fairly important. Sarah Palin, I think, is unlikely to run and is not electable. Polls repeatedly show her down by 5 – 10 points, and much worse than other Republicans. Mitt Romney is an okay fallback, but I would really prefer someone better, especially someone who will be able to hit ObamaCare. For now, I am still shopping.

          • edintexas

            Isn’t Huckabee almost the quintessential oxymoron – a big spending, big taxing social “conservative”? Or am I having another “senior moment”?

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

            had my conservative epiphany. Do I think he would make a good president? Yes

            I think Daniels has done a good job in Indiana but he doesn’t inspire me and seems a bit of a flake. He also shows poor judgment in his unsolicited and unnecessary call for a “truce” on social issues while we are in this economic crisis. Truce? With whom and in what form? It takes two to have a truce. Think the Left will stop pushing abortion and gay marriage?

            We can walk and chew gum and get more votes by being conservatives on all issues all the time.

            Barbour, like Cain, seem to be pretty solid on all issues. Barbour knows DC but is not of it and has more relevant experience that Cain and Barbour strikes me as the kind of man people innately trust. I think if he ran, he would do fine in NH and Iowa and SC etc.

            I have no problems with Pawlenty, but Barbour is probably more conservative on more issues.

            I don’t want Daniels to be President. He’s good right where he is.

          • StandardCandle

            5^5

          • red_oakster

            My real point is that the calendar squeezes and contorts the race. I don’t see a guy like Barbour breaking through in either Iowa or New Hampshire if Huckabee and Palin are sucking up all the oxygen in Iowa.

            Somebody could catch a wave in New Hampshire, but there are going to six or seven guys trying to do the same thing. Could a Pawlenty or Daniels do that? Sure, but so conceivably could a Romney or John Bolton or Rubio. And most of them may be trying.

            But my main point is that all the posting over who’s the best candidate means nothing if one can’t identify a path or scenario to winning the nomination.

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

            for the natural choices of those states, we would be better off if we got behind the more conservative candidates earlier, and preferably if we would galvanize behind one, as early as possible and/or change the schedule.

            We got Reagan, finally, thru that gauntlet, but no other real conservative movement types. I could settle for Mitt or Tim. I love Palin and have since years before America knew here, but I worry about her electability. She reminds me of the Guliani mistake (one of them), and that was overexposure in the media acting like a talking head. yak, yal, yak

            Reagan and Clinton knew how to leave people wanting more!

            as does gamecock…?…more later

          • red_oakster

            The schedule will never be changed. Iowa and New Hampshire are heavily invested and any candidate who suggests altering it commits political suicide.

            So that leaves your notion of uniting behind one candidate earlier than in the past. But that’s also virtually impossible-unless you accept that Iowa and New Hampshire are the rules we must play by. This site is composed of all kinds of folks of goodwill and who are conservative, and there’s no consensus. Better to acceot the fact that Iowa and New Hampshire do the winnowing and strategize accordingly.

            You mention Reagan, but his case isn’t much help. Reagan did get through the gauntlet, but look how that happened. Reagan challenged a sitting president in 1976 for the nomination and lost a close race. He came into 1980 as a front-runner, lost Iowa, won New Hampshire, and cruised to victory. No one has that advantage in 2012.

            So we’re back to trying the best we can to helping a candidate who we believe could be a good president and who realistically has a chance to do well in either Iowa or New Hampshire.

            As I look at the field, Huckabee and Palin look like they will crowd out everyone in Iowa. If one or both don’t run, maybe a Perry or a Barbour could sneak in and become a contender in Iowa. Maybe Pence. But if it’s Huckabee and Palin in Iowa, then anyone who wants to be the nominee needs to do very well in New Hampshire.

            As I look at the Republican primary electorate in New Hampshire, I see a an opening for a tax-cutting shrink the government advocate who will take down Romney with RomneyCare and move to battle the Iowa winner for the nomination. Like wine that doesn’t travel well, I don’t see either Barbour or Perry (let alone Thune) connecting with voters in New Hampshire. So who will be the anti-Romney? It might be Daniels or Pawlenty or John Bolton or even Giuliani (he’s been making noises).

            Then we have a two way race (or three way in the unlikely event Palin and Huckabee effectively tie in Iowa) between the winner of Iowa and the winner of New Hampshire.

            So what’s a conservative to do? I would argue that we wait until summer to:

            1. See whether Palin and Huckabee both run. If they do, then we look to the New Hampshire contenders and see if there’s someone clearly superior to Palin (since in my mind she’s better than Huckabee by a country mile).

            2. If there is someone in New Hampshire that’s better than Palin, we back that candidate to the hilt starting in the summer of 2011.

            3. If either Palin or Huckabee don’t run, see who fills the vacuum and repeat #1 and #2.

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

            I want a candidate more conservative than Huckabee and more electable than Palin and will do all I can before then to promote same. I guess I endorse your #2.

            God bless

  • AceInTX

    I’ve wanted to see a movement started to make that happen but don’t know where to start…

    I’d put Perry in the mix as well Pil.

    • pilgrim

      Definitely Perry is in the mix, and almost everyone knows who Rick Perry is. I just wanted to write a diary about folks while everyone doesn’t know them they are proven winners.

      • AceInTX

        Perry has done a few un-conservative things here but over the last four years or so…he’s been rock solid…

        • edintexas

          You know “Methinks he doth protest too much.” With Perry repeating that he has no interest in running for President, does that apply? Or is he telling the truth ( though I don’t remember his saying he wouldn’t run for the Senate)?

  • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

    Here in NH I have seen three candidates for President here recruiting activists, meeting voters and supporting local candidates. That would be Romney, Pawlenty and Santorum. If any of these fine gentlemen listed here want to have a shot in 2012 I hope to see them here soon. These guys are largely unknowns in the Northeast.

    No the beltway establishment did not pick McCain, the voters did.

    • pilgrim

      from the Moody’s source in my diary:

      Net Tax-Supported Debt

      Massachusetts 9.2%
      Connecticut 8.7%
      Rhode Island 5.2%
      Maine 2.2%
      Vermont 1.8%
      New Hampshire 1.6%

      NH is twice what N. Dakota is on tax supported debt

      The voters in NH IA MI and FL picked McCain. Had the voters in TX and TN voted before MI and FL did the outcome may have been different.

    • Scope

      You say that you have seen three candidates there recruiting activists. Then you say that if Romney, Pawlenty and Santorum want to have a shot at 2012, they would show up there soon. Huh?

      • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

        Hoeven, Rounds and Heineman are not well known in NH so if they are going to get in the race the time is now.

        Romney, Pawlenty and Santorum have already begun campaigning in NH.

  • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

    You are right about taxpayer funded debt. It wasn’t long ago this state ran a tight ship. Hopefully with the new GOP super majorities in the NH Legislature we can return to that.

    As far as the Pres Primary schedule for 2012 is concerned.the schedule is already been set. What I am surprised is that they are so many other states outside of the leading primary states that don’t show the tenacity for primary reform that NH has for keeping its first in the nation primary.

  • victrola

    It’s much easier to achieve success when you’re tackling an easy problem. If someone say turned around California, I’d find that MUCH more of a feat than North Dakota.

    I think the GOP needs to look at candidates that are proven electoral winners in “purple” or “blue” states. At the end of the day, those are the states we have to win in order to capture the White House. I’m really not impressed with a conservative that comes from a state like South Carolina or Mississippi, it’s very easy to be an outspoken conservative and win in that region. They haven’t really been tested in battle.

    If a conservative Republican though can win a state like Minnesota, Pennsylvania or New Jersey for example, that’s impressive to me.

    • Illinicon

      he seems to in his 2nd term atleast to walked the walk on budgeting issues (as personified in the several A grades he has gotten from CATO in their annual Governor’s scorecard) in a state that is very left and the fact that as he leaves office, the GOP now controls the State Legiaslature for the first time since the 1930′s it looks like he may have left Minnesota to the right of were he found it. That said he will have to explain his previous support of cap& trade and why he was wrong, as in a an interview with Glenn Reynolds on Instavision he stated he was opposed to the current bill on the issue. But in a primary with Huckabee, Romney, Palin, Gingrich and Daniels, he looks like the most conservative electable candidate.

      • pilgrim

        Minnesota ranked #5 for states with the best economy. AK, AR, IN, and MA did not make the grade. Newt has legislative instead of executive experience.

    • Scope

      You count Chris Christie as a conservative Republican. Christie has gone full bore against the Teachers and, to a lesser degree, State Government workers Unions. I fully support him in that position.

      You have neglected to mention that Christie was supported by the largest Environmental organization in NJ, during his campaign, He has simply shifted money away from the Union interests, Teachers and State workers, and, put those monies into his Green Environmentalist efforts. He shifted money to a Green Company that he hired to build windmills off the coast of NJ. He has mandated that the states waste facilities convert to Solar energy.

      From what I’ve read, Christie is for open Borders, and amnesty. I would have to believe that with his remarks in support of the GZ Mosque. I understand that NJ has more Mosques than even NY.

      Gov. Christie came out in support of Mike Castle in DE. He sure didn’t need to support O’Donnell, but, he didn’t need to make his voice known about Castle. Not necessary to once again bring up Castle’s record.

      I love Christies record against the Unions. What I have to wonder about is, where would Christie be if his state was flush with cash. It’s very easy to cut stuff when your ass is against the wall. What would he do if/when the state is in a much better financial position? That’s when the real Christie will be known. I don’t think conservatives will be so quick to promote him for the Presidency when all the masks come off.

    • calgacus

      He was mentioned as a possible VP candidate in 2008. He was a two term governor and a rock solid conservative.

  • Oz

    How about making a list of current and former governors who have cut the size of government during their time.

    I don’t have a list or a method, but of the names already floated around, MITCH DANIELS, has already cut the size of government.

    He already is a “proven winner” as well since he was relected with a high percentage even in a year when Obama was taking Indiana.

    • Oz

      To measure people, you need to look at a starting point from when they entered office to what the state looked like when they were done (or currently).

      ND, SD, Nebraska …. no one lives there (relatively speaking) so it’s not that difficult to have low unemployment.

      • pilgrim

        If you click on my link for rankings of unemployment rates you will find that the bottom states include Rhode Island and Nevada. Nebraska has a larger populatioin than both of those states. The states in the top 21 are not all low population states. Texas and Virginia are at #21 and #8. California and Michigan are at #49 and #50. What you are doing to govern your state is more important than how many people are in your state.

  • LibertarianHawk

    He’s the real deal, so far as I’m concerned. Whether or not he could be elected, I don’t know.

    But I’ve been watching him pretty closely since he got into office and I think he’s extremely impressive.

  • http://thesandsinstitute.org Vassar Bushmills

    …and you are one handicapper I give a green light to year-round. Your senses are very acute. Still, let’s look for wisdom, courage and vision for awhile.

  • zornorph

    The only time I’ve ever not had a candidate to root for was 1996. From when I was a kid back in 1980, I’ve always known early who i wanted. In order: 80-Reagan, 88-DuPont, 00 Kasich then McCain and 08 McCain. But now…no one really inspires me. At least, not among those who are running. I want to win, too, so electability is also a big factor for me.
    The person who I really want to run is Jeb Bush. I think he could overcome his name and win. But I don’t think he will, so I’ll have to try and get excited about somebody else.