This is a follow up to yesterday’s post on the Republican presidential candidate field. Jeff Zeleny at the New York Times and Michael Crowley at Time both write about the “Huntsman test,” which boils down to two questions — can a candidate the Republican base likes win the general election? Can a viable general election candidate win a Republican nomination?
Yes, that’s the same question asked two ways. In talking about the “Huntsman test,” they’re pointing to potential candidate Jon Huntsman, who represents the sort of candidate who might do well with moderate voters, and asking if someone that moderate could possibly be nominated.
Michael Crowley writes of Huntsman’s potential candidacy,
The first goal is to return the GOP back to pure conservative orthodoxy; this is the Tea Party mantra in a nutshell. The second is to defeat Barack Obama at all costs. I realize there are people who think that one naturally leads to the next. But there are more people–including most of the Republican Party establishment–who think that nominating a Tea Party hero/heroine will replicate Delaware’s Christine O’Donnell debacle on a national scale.
A Huntsman campaign might force Republican voters to decide between the two propositions. As Zeleny notes, his record is full of heresies–from gay rights to global warming to calling Barack Obama a “remarkable leader.†(You can also add conservative crankiness over his spending record as Utah governor to the list.) Jennifer Rubin thinks that Huntsman doesn’t even “pass the laugh test†with conservative voters, and that talk of his candidacy is a case of liberal-media wish fulfillment.
It’s hard to say whether Huntsman himself could ever catch on as a candidate, but the point is that he represents the type of candidate who could appeal to a broad enough spectrum of voters to actually win a national election. But it’s unlikely such a candidate could be nominated, and if he were nominated, it’s unlikely the baggers would work up enthusiasm for his candidacy. To a hard-core bagger, a moderate Republican is no different from a Democrat.
This is not to say that they won’t vote for the white guy over the black guy. But don’t expect them to show up at his rallies or donate money to his candidacy. And low-information voters often don’t bother to vote at all unless they are riled up about something.
Republicans have a shot a beating Barack Obama only if they have a candidate they can rally around and support with enthusiasm. Enthusiasm builds a bandwagon effect that can swing the mushy middle. If Republicans are conflicted about their guy, it doesn’t inspire much confidence in the mushies to dump the incumbent.
A lot depends on what the economy is doing next year and whether the issues surrounding the Ryan budget can be kept on the front burner. If the economy slows again, I think President Obama could be vulnerable to one of the “Fairfax Five” (Barbour, Daniels, Huntsman, Pawlenty and Romney). A close election could well come down to which side has the most enthusiasm.
Well, even a standard hard right Republican like McCain got little enthusiasm from the knuckledraggers (everyone in the media loved him, of course).
That’s why they had to add some cretinous inbred mannequin like Palin – to appease them (that, and the mistaken notion that anyone with a uterus who supported Clinton would immediately jump ship to support Sarah of Snowyschnook Farms).
I think a Teabagger would create problems for the Fairfax Five in the primaries, but have little chance in the general. And that’s why, if one of the Fairfax Five eventually wins over them, they’ll take somebody who the Tea Party likes as VP – someone like Rubio, Christie, Walker, or even Ryan. That would make the Teabaggers make sure that their Motorized Medicare Scooters were charged and ready for action on election day.
I also worry about Huck. He scares me more than the rest of them.
And I still think Jeb will his ugly Bushy head. And if he does, and he wins, I think he too will probably pick one of the group above. Or, maybe Cantor, for some Jewish votes.
All of this in their endless search for someone to march behind in lockstep.
All in all, this should at least be entertaining for the next year plus. Kind of like “American Idolatry” for the fawning lemming set in this country.
And those of us amused by them. But it’s amusement bordering on fear that they may win. There’s nothing funny about that at all.
Yeah, that could do it. But even there the GOP has to be careful. By election day 2008, I think Palin had scared off about as many voters as she attracted for the ticket. They’ll have to nominate some guy well known to the crazies but not so well known to everyone else, and then lock him in the basement until the votes are counted so that voters don’t get a good look at him.
The thought that the issues surrounding the Ryan budget will have to be “kept on the front burner” (thus implying that the GOP gets a do-over on everything), whereas we’ll be talking about Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama’s birth certificate in 2012, is deeply depressing yet true.
There’s two major components to getting a Teabagger elected. (No, I don’t think they will accept a moderate. See McCain.)
The plan is to get out the vote FOR their candidate by the faithful. That won’t be enough by a long shot. The other part of the campaign (which the nuts at FDL are supporting) is to get a significant portion of democrats and moderates to vote AGAINST Obama. That’s a subtle difference which the election could hang on. The choice is between two candidates. Which is better?
The sales rich against Obama
There’s two major components to getting a Teabagger elected. (No, I don’t think they will accept a moderate. See McCain.)
The plan is to get out the vote FOR their candidate by the faithful. That won’t be enough by a long shot. The other part of the campaign (which the nuts at FDL are supporting) is to get a significant portion of democrats and moderates to vote AGAINST Obama. That’s a subtle difference which the election could hang on. The choice is between two candidates. Which is better?
The sales rich against Obama is
Excuse me tech problems with a tablet.
The sales pitch against Obama already is “He’s not perfect so I will vote FOR the other guy.”
.WTF? Give me both options before you ask me to decide.