The GOP Horserace for 2012
With two dozen potential Republican presidential candidates, the field obviously gets confusing. Jonah Goldberg, conservative political columnist, takes a look at these 24 hopefuls and whittles them down to a handful.
Here’s Goldberg’s list of hopefuls: Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, John Thune, Tim Pawlenty, Mitch Daniels, Mike Pence, Rick Santorum, Haley Barbour, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, David Petraeus, Ron Paul, Jeb Bush, John Bolton, Bob McDonnell, Jim DeMint, Chris Christie, Herman Cain, Gary Johnson, Judd Gregg, Marco Rubio and Rick Perry.
Is there anyone missing? Admittedly, this isn’t rocket science, and the Golberg lazily picks the standard frontrunners: Romney, Palin, Gingrich, Pawlenty and Daniels. But if you had to pick a fews serious contenders that would be in the race after New Hampshire, who would your picks be?
BTW, according to Wikipedia, here is a list of scheduled Republican debates for 2011.
- Spring 2011 – A national debate, hosted by the Reagan presidential library and NBC.
- May 5, 2011 – A South Carolina debate, hosted by the South Carolina Republican Party.
- June 7, 2011 – A New Hampshire debate, hosted by CNN, WMUR-TV and the Union Leader.
- Aug. 11, 2011 – An Iowa debate, hosted by the Iowa Republican Party and FOX News.
Tags: GOP, Presidential Election 2012
What remains of the Republican party will determine the nominee – which is why I can’t rule out Palin.
I say Patraeus as a dark horse. It would have to be his decision though. I dont see him as a rank and file republican who will do Newt’s bidding and run if called upon. I also dont, at present, see any signs of political ambition…. which is how George Washington was elected.
Who knows. There may be a shitstorm raining down on Obama, but he has a nice umbrella of potential GOP candidates made up entirely of T-tards, Racists, and Media Whores.
The problem of who is going to be left standing after New Hampshire is by allowing cross over votes,if it were just Repubs voting, then I would say Sarah Palin comes out on top. But with cross over voting permitted it could be anybody.
Gary Johnson 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If he runs, I’m switching my party registration from independent to Republican, so I can vote for him in the primary (why are the primaries closed in Delaware?)
History suggests it will be Romney.
1976: Reagan finished 2nd. He won the next open nomination.
1980: Bush finished 2nd. He won the next open nomination.
1988: Dole finished 2nd. He won the next open nomination.
1996: Buchanan finished 2nd and was effectively finished as an electoral force after 96′.
2000: McCain finished 2nd. He won the next open nomination.
Technically Huckabee placed 2nd but in reality Romney was the biggest threat to McCain but Huckabee simply hung on longer than Romney. The GOP is a very predictable, royalist, “wait your turn” party and history strongly suggests they will turn to Romney in 2012. Romney, while a profound hypocrite, definitely is a formidable candidate. I would much prefer running against Palin but I don’t see the establishment allowing that disaster to occur. If she ever takes the lead expect a quick “Stop Palin” movement to coalesce behind Romney.
I’m having trouble seeing Romney getting past the “real” christian base. The base will influence the primary, and they won’t be able to get past his being a Mormon.
I don’t even know why we’re talking about this. The media is salivating for it to be Palin. It’ll be Palin. The media will twist the narrative and knock down anybody else who could overtake her. The Howard Dean scream anyone?
Good point, V.
Christie, the fat sack of puke, will not be ableto resist the siren calls of the “not Romney” crowd.
Romney has trouble with conservatives. I think a dark horse like Thune could be the candidate alternative to a tea party nutter or Romney. Thune is handsome and he doesn’t have much of a record though I think he did vote for TARP.
I understand that the kids today are calling flip-flops, “Romneys”.
A Romney vs. Obama debate would be interesting:
Health Care: “I agree with my opponent.
Taxes: “I agree with my opponent.”
Flip-Flopping: “Next question please.”
Yeah, I think Romney would have a hard time defining himself vs. Obama.
Romney might finish in 3rd in New Hampshire, but he won’t show up in Iowa. I think he’d need a #1 finish in New Hampshire followed by a top two finish in South Carolina, which will never happen.
I’m calling it now. Palin. End of story. This primary is hers to decline/lose. Romney’s probably got the best shot in terms of cash, but he’s never been Fox News’ favorite so he won’t necessarily have their support. I really really think that the glass ceiling of major party top ticket prez candidate is going to be broken by a republican. It’d be a fantastic media narrative (look at the Rs! sexist claims untrue! Palin a role model for girls everywhere!). They want it SO bad.
I really want to agree with V on that it is Palin. Remember that Hillary was a shoe-in as well.
The competition for the most conservative will be intense as the already crazed Republicans try to out-crazy each other. One serious question though: How the heck will any of them get to the right of Obama on their signature issue, taxes? The GOP base will demand it.
Either they will be thrown into confusion by Obama’s tax capitulation, which will make Obama a tragic genius.
Or, which seems more likely, they will compete amongst themselves for a tax position even further to the right than Obama’s. And if one of them wins, that is what we will get.
Does Obama’s Deal push the GOP field even further to the right, creating a new center that now must be accommodated and compromised with?
The wild card is whatever Obama has in store for us when he says “tax reform.”
I’ll take Romney, Huckabee, Barbour, Daniels, or even Mickey Mouse. No Palin. I’ll vote for the libertarian if it’s Palin.
Bad news. Palin is not running. She has signed with TLC for aa second season of her reality show an is negotiating for $1 million per episode.
I’m not seeing this as a done deal.
http://www.popeater.com/2010/12/21/sarah-palin-alaska-season-two/
Love this quote: “Jennifer Aniston took home millions from ‘Friends’ and in Sarah’s eyes, she’s no different.”
Like I said, the only way Palin loses this is if she decides not to run. I think the show is actually an indicator she DOES want to run. I see it as her trying to up her likability factor (which is in the toliet for most of the country, especially women) so she can get more traction. How many middle-aged moms (who are the majority of TLC’s audience) are going to say “oh well you know I didn’t like her in 2008, but then i watched that show of her and she’s a regular mom like me! Her kids are cute!” And it’s perfectly feasible for her to bang out another seasion (or two) for HUGE cash before she has to seriously run all the time. She can do it in like a month.
It’s Palin’s if she wants it. That’s it. And I think she’s full of herself enough to want it.
And the lesson Palin’s recently learned is that she now can earn money any time, though that Presidential ring won’t be around forever.
I’m with Ben.
If the Repubs were really smart, assuming that’s possible (sorry), they should nominate Petreaus. He is something like another Ike politically, but more articulate, and very saavy and smart. I was really impressed with his piece on the NJ op/ed page the other day in praise of Richard Holbrooke. Moreover, Petreaus would pull from a large spectrum of voters, most Repubs, and penetrating well into the Dem voter base and independents. Petreaus v Obama would be quite an interesting campaign to experience, refreshing too, on a higher level, for a change.
Sorry–this nanosecond spotlight/memories Americans have morphed themselves into leads me to think it won’t be anyone seriously on the radar yet. It will once again be someone of a pop-star following who comes along just at the right time. If Petreaus lays low for now–there may be a chance, otherwise it is not yet “revealed”. IMHO.
Since it’s not up to liberal Democrats to decide who the GOP nominee is, instead, we should be pondering who liberal Democrats should be running in 2012.
… who liberal Democrats should be running in 2012
Delacrat makes Ed O’Donnell look sane:
http://thedartmouth.com/2007/04/04/news/hanover
http://dartmouthfreepress.com/2003/08/22/ed-odonnell-rides-again/
Maybe delacrat should primary Obama. It would make as much sense as his comments at DL.
As John Cole at Balloon Juice said, “First Responders Bill and START both pass. How anyone in their right mind could not look back at this as the most productive congress and two years of a Presidency in generations is beyond me.”
He ends up sarcastically with, “Time to primary that sumbitch.”
It is time to pause on the Obama criticism. The battle for more progressive taxation has been lost and the Democratic shift to the right is likely permanent. Time to adjust to the new reality. Some of us apparently find it easier than others; I guess they were halfway there all along.
Now, it is time for a faith-based approach that despite all evidence to the contrary, somehow the jobs will reappear and the contraction of the middle class will be reversed. Obama and Biden will fight for us… in two years.
Hey, it could happen. Everybody clap louder!!