Republicans Running from 2012

[magickyleo101]

There's an interesting article in the times looking to explain why it is that a number of high-profile Republicans have declined to throw in their hat for the 2012 primaries. The article puts forth five explanations, but I thought two were especially interesting:

2. The economy. Mr. Obama’s approval ratings have dipped below 50 percent, but he remains personally popular and by many calculations the economy appears to be improving — if slowly. Even Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts and one of the handful of very likely candidates, said last September that Mr. Obama would be “difficult to beat” if the economy continued improving, which he predicted it would. (He later changed his tune and said Republicans should focus on the economy if they wanted to win.)

...

4. The Tea Party. The emergence of the Tea Party movement as a force inside the Republican Party requires potential presidential candidates to pick sides in an intraparty philosophical struggle. The risks are clear for some Republicans who may have to alter or modify earlier positions to get through a contentious primary. Less clear are the benefits of having that support during a general election, especially if it means alienating independents in the process. Some of the most high-profile Tea Party candidates in 2010 did not fare so well in the general election.

I find the tea party explanation especially interesting. There's some irony in a situation where a party is hurt by the vary fact that its base is so mobilized. I agree with the article's point that the tea party makes it kind of hard to run as a Republican nation wide - a Republican is going to have to win over the tea party to get through the primaries, but those very same positions will probably kill the candidate in the general election.

I also think there's a real sense in which a lot of tea party people are so caught up in the idea that Obama is so obviously a horrible and socialist president that anyone will be able to win against him. I think they'll feel emboldened to push for a candidate who's really extreme, and that's exactly the kind of candidate who doesn't have a chance nation wide.

[The.Delegate]

There's an interesting article in the times looking to explain why it is that a number of high-profile Republicans have declined to throw in their hat for the 2012 primaries. The article puts forth five explanations, but I thought two were especially interesting:



I find the tea party explanation especially interesting. There's some irony in a situation where a party is hurt by the vary fact that its base is so mobilized. I agree with the article's point that the tea party makes it kind of hard to run as a Republican nation wide - a Republican is going to have to win over the tea party to get through the primaries, but those very same positions will probably kill the candidate in the general election.

I also think there's a real sense in which a lot of tea party people are so caught up in the idea that Obama is so obviously a horrible and socialist president that anyone will be able to win against him. I think they'll feel emboldened to push for a candidate who's really extreme, and that's exactly the kind of candidate who doesn't have a chance nation wide.

Obama isnt a socialist, he's a neoliberal.

[Menelik_I]

Obama isnt a socialist, he's a neoliberal.

What is a Neo-Liberal ? Like the Yeti I ear a lot about it and never saw it.

ETA:

on the OP, it is just probably that the GOP candidates who are still young prefer to wait for the next election and the old guard was already overexposed in the last cycle and there is obviously defeatism involved.

[chilon]

What is a Neo-Liberal ? Like the Yeti I ear a lot about it and never saw it.

Then you clearly don't know much about US politics over the last 20 years. Clinton and Obama were both neo-liberals. If you don't know what that means, you are need to educate yourself more.

If moderates in the Republican Party get fired up enough about the primary elections, then a moderate like Romney will have a chance (course, Romney will be a "conservative" by that time).

I doubt Romney is really a moderate at heart. He simply was running for office in Mass. where he absolutely had to moderate his more social conservative views to get elected. I don't believe that Romney is a true moderate at all. He simply ran for office in Mass. Look at his job also. He was a total corporate raider (Bain Capital was kind of the epitome of Gordon Gecko style "greed is good" business model, raid a company then shut down plants and lay off thousands of workers). I would not trust Romney to instill moderate policies if he was ever elected President at all.

Bill Clinton is generally regarded as the paradigm example of a neo-liberal. Obama is just a 70s style modern liberal; in other words a progressive, who doesn't like capitalism.

Obama only talks like a progressive. Most of his policies have been staunchly neo-liberal "keep the business going".

[Kanaric]

Obama isnt a socialist, he's a neoliberal.

neo liberal? neo liberal = libertarian and that is not what obama is.

[DimeBagHo]

neo liberal? neo liberal = libertarian and that is not what obama is.

Not exactly. A neo-liberal is is a modern liberal who believes that markets work better than centralised planning; or in other words a progressive who likes capitalism. Bill Clinton is generally regarded as the paradigm example of a neo-liberal. Obama is just a 70s style modern liberal; in other words a progressive, who doesn't like capitalism.

[Dr Zoidberg]

Not exactly. A neo-liberal is is a modern liberal who believes that markets work better than centralised planning; or in other words a progressive who likes capitalism. Bill Clinton is generally regarded as the paradigm example of a neo-liberal. Obama is just a 70s style modern liberal; in other words a progressive, who doesn't like capitalism.

How does Obama not like capitalism?

[DimeBagHo]

How does Obama not like capitalism?

Beats me. I mean, what's not to like?

[PoleCat]

... I think they'll feel emboldened to push for a candidate who's really extreme, and that's exactly the kind of candidate who doesn't have a chance nation wide.

This is my greatest fear going into these elections. This Conservative versus Libertarian struggle going on in the GOP may just end up handing Obama another fours years if it keeps up. They need to cut that out now and look for anyone that will appeal to Centrists and Independents as well as the base if they want to win back the Presidency. I'm none too hopeful though at the moment.

[xcorps]

I was disappointed when Hailey Barbour withdrew. The man has some serious clout in the GOP and is conservative enough.

[Matthias]

If moderates in the Republican Party get fired up enough about the primary elections, then a moderate like Romney will have a chance (course, Romney will be a "conservative" by that time).

I kinda doubt that there will be a lot of motivation for moderate Republicans to vote in the primaries though, especially compared to conservatives and the Tea Party, who will have a very energetic base and lots of money to get the base out.

The GOP old guard will do what they can to get someone like Romney to win, but I don't know if they have the power to do so anymore. Maybe if another moderate who is a better candidate than Romney shows up, they'll have a chance, but once again, the problem then becomes for the moderate, if they do win, having to go right during the general election to secure the base. See McCain.

What is a Neo-Liberal ? Like the Yeti I ear a lot about it and never saw it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

Obama, like most Democrats, is a moderate neoliberal. His policies are those of a moderate Republican from the 90s. His policies are moderately conservative on an ideological scale.

[skh1]

Ron Paul's up for it —

Texas Congressman Ron Paul plans to announce on Tuesday in Iowa that he is forming a presidential exploratory committee.
Drew Ivers, Paul's 2008 Iowa caucus campaign manager, said the Republican congressman will announce his plans Tuesday afternoon at Des Moines hotel.

Paul also will name an Iowa campaign team at the event, Ivers said.

Paul, 75, finished fifth in the 2008 caucuses and has visited Iowa seven times since. He headlined an event in Sioux Center two weeks ago for a social conservative group, and he spoke at a rally for Christian home-school advocates at the Iowa Capitol in Des Moines last month.

Paul is a favorite among libertarians and enjoys strong backing by many tea party supporters.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42756099...decision_2012/

[Matthias]

Ron Paul's up for it —

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42756099...decision_2012/

Will also be interesting to see what candidates that drop out of the race will do (who they will tell their supporters to go to), since right now it looks like there will be a multitude of Tea Party candidates. As some drop out, if they pool their delegates to the strongest Tea Party candidate, the may have a chance as the race goes on. Should be interesting.

[skh1]

So far we seem to have for our consideration as "serious" Republican candidates for president (pace, Mr. Trump and Ms. "Eww, being governor of Alaska is hard therefore I quit" Palin):

Newt Gingerich who, while bidding for that all-important evangelical support, had to say in essence — "Yes, it is true. I am an egregious douchebag. But leaving that aside…"
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/...-Forgiveness-/

Someone called Tim Pawlenty who is apparently unkown outside his immediate family circle.
http://www.therepublic.com/view/stor...awlenty041311/

And, of course, the putative front-runner, Mitt Romney………………………………………………

Sorry, I seemed to have dozed off for a minute there. Anyway, where was I? Oh yes, Mitt Romney………………………………………………

[Admiral Piett]

The way its looking right now, if Paul is deciding to run again, I may just have to throw my support towards him again, even though it wont count for much. I like Gary Johnson as well (pro abortion, anti war, pro gay rights, pro marijuana) but he's not quite as popular as Paul is.