Book of the Month

From the Dagbloggers

more
Orlando's picture

Dagblog Duet: Singing the Praises of the 2012 Republican Presidential Field

by Orlando 5/25/2011 - 1:38 am   |

In the tradition of Paul McCartney teaming up with Michael Jackson for Say Say Say, dagblog is pleased to bring to you in all its original glory this dramatic e-mail exchange that brings together the political commentary of two of its bloggers.  Articleman contends that Orlando is Michael Jackson and that he is Paul McCartney in that metaphor, but that's beside the point.  So for their trenchant insights about the 2012 election, A and O:

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Articleman wrote:

Hey O.  How are you doing in Malaysia?  Still posting up the locals at the gym?  I definitely need to move to a country with smaller people in it for my pickup basketball game.  But I digress.
Anyhow, I don't know if you've noted this from your perch, but our Republican Presidential candidates are dropping like flies.  We never got to see your beloved Mike Pence run, nor John Thune.  Then no Trump.  Now even one of the frontrunners, Huckabee, took himself out.  (This means there's no one funny left, I think that dude was genuinely funny at times.)  So what's left?  Romney, the Chris Christie-who-won't-run, Palin, Gingrich (now an apostate for criticizing Paul Ryan and by implication the Tea Partiers taking on Medicare, and Ron Paul.

I say it's Romney in a walk.  The GOP follows a line of succession (think Reagan in 1980, GHW in 1988, and McCain in 2008).  Romney is Mr. Next.  The others?  Christie is a more attractive candidate (well, ok, bad word choice, a stronger candidate), but that's because he's the grass is always greener guy, and as long as he doesn't agree to run, the novelty of him, the unknown of him is nice.  So he can't run.  Palin is just awful.  I wish she'd run, because Obama would beat her 60-38, and it would be fun.  Ron Paul?  He could never get nominated, and also couldn't win, but it would be fun to have a Republican on the liberal side of the Afghanistan war debate.  And then there are the Dull as Paste Twins, T-Paw and your beloved Mitch Daniels.

Whoops, I fell asleep at the keyboard, sorry.  I wonder why.  Anyway, it's been a while.  Let me know if you've had anymore wild animal incidents, and also your thoughts on the GOPers.  Best, a

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Orlando wrote:

What's up, A-man. Malaysia is three months old now, so the shiny has worn off and I'm still 100% happy. That's a good sign. It's cute that you think I have access to a gym. I live in the middle of nowhere, remember? I have to drive a half hour just to get money out of an ATM machine. A gym membership is a nice dream.

As a matter of fact, I have been keeping an eye on the circus sideshow that is the GOP primary. In a few ways, it reminds me of 1996 and in other ways, reminds me of 1984 (the Orwell one). Remember in 1993 and 1994, the Republicans were so certain that Clinton would be a one-term president that everyone down to the Punxsutawney City Clerk was throwing his hat into the ring? Then, in 1995, Clinton's popularity started to recover and, one by one, they started to feel an intense desire to spend more time with their families.

It's a bit like that now, except that in 1996, Bob Dole was clearly out in front of the pack. The GOP likes their front runners, don't they? Early in a Democratic presidential primary, you can almost count on the fact that the media-declared front runner won't win while it's exactly the opposite for the party across the aisle. But this year I can't figure out for the life of me who the front runner is supposed to be. I don't think it's Romney. Yeah, he can raise a lot of money and he's got the kind of photogenic family Newt Gingrich would divorce his third wife for, but with all the shrieking from the right, I don't think he can overcome his health care mandate skeletons. If you're looking for a Mormon in the race, my money's on Huntsman. Even with his service in the Obama administration, he's got the pull-yourself-up-by-your-billionaire-father's-boot-strings story that Republicans can't get enough of.

I tell you, I would love to see somebody crazy get the nod almost as much as I would hate to see somebody crazy get the nod (Palin, Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum--oh the list is long). I'd love it for the hours of entertainment. I'd hate it for the months of stress I'd suffer, worrying that they just might win.

Ultimately, I think it's going to be one of your "dull-as-paste" twins, simply because they're going to be seen as safe and, because most of the field is beyond ridiculous, they look astute by comparison. They're not. Mitch Daniels is George Bush's mini-me (down to the mean streak that comes out when anybody disagrees with him). I honestly haven't been paying attention to Tim Pawlenty because of the moronic things that started coming out of his mouth as soon as he started running. He seems kinda dumb, but he can put a sentence together unlike Palin, doesn't flirt with the line between passion and involuntary commitment like Bachmann, and doesn't present his opponents with an anti-moral goldmine, like Gingrich.

On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Articleman wrote:

Is there a huge fee at the Malaysian ATM?  Inquiring minds want to know.  And what do the restaurants there serve?  These are the key questions.

T-Paw over Mitt?  I guess he is from a state adjacent to Iowa, which may help (or may kill him if he fails in Iowa), but then Mitt has New Hampshire likewise, and the Mormon following in Nevada that picked him up big in 2008.  T-Paw was a man deemed too dull or insufficiently acceptable to the base, thus necessitating the pick of Sarah Palin, too.  On the "positive" side, Tim didn't pass a Minnesota version of Romneycare, the gift about Mitt that just will not stop giving.

But have we ever had a President as dull as T-Paw?  Sure, when someone else put them there -- GHW Bush sorta, Gerald Ford...but the dull factor is just off the charts, like he was created in some Laboratory of Dull in the Alps by a mad scientist.

As far as Huntsman goes, I just can't see the centermost dude getting through their primaries. He's so running from the outside rail.  And there is some real Mormon money out there -- and it's all going to end up with Mitt, not Huntsman.  Never mind that Limbaugh would help tank Huntsman.

In the end, people win primaries, IMO, because a critical mass gets excited and enough other folk come on board.  I think Mitt will have some folks believing he's the guy, and the bandwagon will roll for the Mittster.  Pawlenty as an evangelical from a maybe-gettable state seems like a good veep pick for the GOP, though.

My favorite GOP primary moment ever:  Ron Paul in the 08 South Carolina debate saying we need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and seeing the CNN audience responses aggregate to a flatlined zero.  If any paramedics were watching from bars, they probably rushed over to the auditorium to revive everyone.

And I agree on 2012 reminding me of 1996 in Clinton surging and not having lots of rivals.  But with unemployment this high, I think Generic GOP will hang in there in the fall of 2012.  The real question is whether Romney bats above VORP -- the wacky baseball nerd stat of how the baseline generic performer does.  (It stands for value of replacement player.). I say Mitt performs right at VORP, or 46 percent.

Btw, kudos on the phrase "antimoral goldmine."  Speaking of which, now that the Rapture missed Arizona, I'm off to down some Oatmeal Stout. Cheers!  a

On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Orlando wrote:

Well, crap. I guess the Daniels stuff is out...

On Tues, May 24, 2011 at 9:15 PM, Articleman wrote:

Yeah, like the Bulls will be soon after that overtime loss tonight.  Bleh.

Seriously, after Trump and Daniels, I think if we wait any more days before posting this at dag, everyone we mentioned will be out except for Ron Paul and maybe Herman Cain.  Want to put it up now?  Alternative:  we can wait four more weeks and put up a post about how a dropping-out virus decimated the GOP Presidential field, leaving a post-apocalyptic political landscape dominated by Barack Obama.  We can call it 28 Days Later.  Anyhow, let me know.  a

An email was mysteriously omitted...maybe because it's mostly about a guy who, after a run-in with an inanimate piece of retangular wood, declined to enter the race. For posterity's sake, I've included it below.

 

On Sunday, May 22, at 8:52 am, Orlando wrote:

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the rapture missed us over here too. But since everybody in Malaysia is Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist, I'm not certain how to verify that. Your curiosity about Malaysia is adorable. The ATMs here are the same as in the west--no fee if you stick to your bank and a small fee if you don't. And the restaurants serve food. Duh. Staples here are rice and noodles with fish or chicken in some kind of yummy sauce-curry, rendang, laksa, etc. In my town, that's
about it. But in the cities, you can get sushi, fast food, and even horrible pizza. Also, Starbucks, which I now have about once a month. Geography is interfering with my addiction.

Did you see that Mitch Daniels got attacked by a door. Heh. I have a healthy dislike for that guy ever since he campaigned around Indiana in a big RV, pretending to be a populist. I'm not a big fan of term limits, but in his case, thank goodness. Indiana can use the break. But Indiana's gain might be the country's loss. He's good at pretending to be smart and serious about policy. At the moment, he's my nightmare candidate because if he wins the primary, he might be able to convince enough people that he's not an utter moron who is  largely responsible for the current debt/deficit problems that has the political media revving up their hamster wheels.

Pawlenty has better name recognition than Daniels at this point, but you're right that he has to win Iowa or he's done. He doesn't seem to have a lot of negatives on either side--maybe because he's so dull that he doesn't seem to stand for anything. I can't see Romney surviving the right wing hysteria.

You know what would be funny? If Ron Paul finally got it. For sheer carnival entertainment value, that would be cool. And if he won the general, at least we'd be out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

One thing's for sure: next year is gonna be interesting!

by Orlando 5/25/2011 - 7:14 am

Uh oh...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/24/romney-freedomworks-tea-party_n_866503.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/24/new-york-special-election-medicare-2012_n_866582.html

Poor Mitt. He can't win the primary without running to the right and he can't win the general if he endorses Ryan's collossally stupid plan.

Come to think of it, they're all in the same boat. What's a Republican to do? 

by Orlando 5/25/2011 - 8:10 am

This comment is basically the whole point of any discussion about this issue.

The extra credit question is what Democrats do to be the best Democrats they can be, given that fact.

by Articleman 5/25/2011 - 12:02 pm (re: Orlando)

Well, that was fun!  Not often we can latch onto other people's emails.  (Good thing you didn't talk about any of us.)  A-man's questions about Malaysia were the ones I probably would be asking, too.  It's those little things about a country they don't explain in travelogues -- ATM machines, normal food, etc.

But about those GOP guys.  Brilliant analyses, of course, but my gut tells me it'll be Romney with noses held, mainly because he's the only one who might even have a chance. 

I have to agree that Ron Paul would be a whole lot of fun.  He's fascinating to watch, what with eyebrows reaching up to his hairline, sucking spittle from the sides of his mouth, and a voice that heads toward high C when things get hot, which is most of the time.

Bachmann and Palin are girls and thus are fun to watch but none but teen-y minds are going to take them seriously.  (I have a feeling they'll never mature into real women, but they'll have a following, anyway.  Like Joan Rivers or Lady Gaga.)

Tim Pawlenty is a snoozer but that could mean he's also a sleeper.  Gingrich can't win and when he gets tired of not winning he'll quit.  Huntsman is an unknown at this point so anything's possible with him.  He's an attractive candidate who, if he can manage not to go beyond platitudes into real stuff, may just be the man.

But I think it'll be Romney

Addition:  Even after reading that FreedomWorks is going to go on the attack, I still think it'll be Romney.  The election in NY yesterday might be an indication that their days are numbered, anyway.  I would much rather see one of the others in the running, and maybe it's because I think Romney is actually the most normal of the bunch (which, if, God forbid, a Republican wins, would be important), but I just can't believe we'd actually be in danger of a nutcase presidency.

by Ramona 5/25/2011 - 8:38 am

This guy is thinking about running. McCotter from Michigan. The man is under the impression he's a towering intellect. My fav MI pol blogger says, uh, no.

The one Republican name that makes my ears perk up as a decent challenger is Nikki Haley of SC.

by flowerchild 5/25/2011 - 10:56 am

I will try to keep the news of a threatened Thaddeus McCotter run from my daughter as long as possible.  Though she lives in a suburb as blue collar as Archie Bunker's neighborhood, with redistricting, McCotter "represents" her Democratic stronghold, but caters to his constituents in  Bloomfield Hills and all points wealthy, making it clear her little burg doesn't matter and never will.

She has written to him so many times with complaints about the way he "represents" her and her neighbors, his office has blocked her emails.  They're not taking her phone calls, either.

This will not set well with her.  Poor thing.

by Ramona 5/25/2011 - 6:56 pm (re: flowerchild)

Hmmm.  right now I think Tim Pawlenty will win... if he can win in Iowa.  He is boring enough not to have outraged the far right and i think that's how he squeaks through the primaries.  The far right does not like Romney and they are the main primary voters.  Huntsman is going to feel too much like Obama, intelligent, and to the far right elite.  I don't think he can pull of winning the primary.

Now I would say Pawlenty could not beat President Obama if it werent for...

the voter supression laws, election law changes, redistricting, and having no ACORN... not to   mention that democrats might shoot themselves in the head and pass cuts to medicare or just get lost in how 'easy' the republicans are making it to win because of their stance on medicare so that they overlook that they are starting this election from behind... with many obstacles in the way.  If these obstacles are not taken seriously and dealt with the republican candidate for president will win and we will lose more seats in those states where republicans have erected these obstacles. 

Thanks for sharing your duet. Cute.

by synchronicity 5/25/2011 - 1:46 pm

t in 1996, Bob Dole was clearly out in front of the pack. The GOP likes their front runners, don't they?

Charlie Cook, May 24: says it's a new ball game:

Veto Power

Each faction of the GOP can stop a presidential candidacy in its tracks.

Trying to make sense of the unfolding Republican presidential nomination contest is a challenge.

Historically, Republicans have been hierarchical in their selection of presidential nominees, picking the candidate whose “turn” it is—the logical successor rather than having a real, open contest.  

This time that dynamic doesn’t seem to be in place....

by artappraiser 5/25/2011 - 5:10 pm

Charlie Cook is smart. (Mostly because he agrees with me!)

He's right that the dynamic has changed, and the new dynamic is totally of the old guard's making. When Regan and the party started courting the Religious Right, they would talk a good game on issues like abortion and gun control, but, at the national level at least, nothing changed. And why would it? Partly, I think the party leaders at that time didn't feel strongly one way or the other on the issue. And partly, it was an issue they could use as a stick to beat the left with. So, the religious conservatives started running at the local level, starting at school boards and working their way into state legislatures, where they could pass restrictive legislation themselves. 

Then, some of those state legislators ran for Congress and now the lunatics are running the assylum. Couple that with Fox News and talk radio working conservative voters into a tizzy about every little thing--imagined or real--and welcome to today. 

by Orlando 5/25/2011 - 7:39 pm (re: artappraiser)

Can't we just skip the whole thing and let Obama have it for another 4 years because the country was so *&#*@^ up when he took over that the first 4 years shouldn't really count? I don't know if I can take this again so soon! =)

by stillidealistic 5/25/2011 - 10:49 pm
It does seem soon to be back here, that's for sure...
by Articleman 5/26/2011 - 12:18 am (re: stillidealistic)

Latest Comments

more