Possible 2012 Republican Presidential Candidates: Part 1

Part 1 of a special 4-part series

BRADENTON – If you were watching election coverage on television last Tuesday, you probably heard the saying, "the 2012 race for the White House starts tomorrow," at least once and for a very simply reason – it's true. Presidential elections are a three-year process, the fist portion taking place off the grid for the most part, as potential candidates feel out respected advisors and party heavyweights before beginning to setup the complicated (and expensive) apparatuses required of the next step.

That next step has arrived. Those who have already made up their mind and whose current position would not suffer from an early announcement will begin to openly test the waters in the coming months. I'll note that front runners rarely fare well – especially in the age of the 24-hour news cycle. Remember what people were saying about George Allen in early 2006. Front runners go under the microscope early and are the target of every candidate late to the race. Neither President Obama nor John McCain were anything close to odds-on favorites at this point in 2008.

Candidates who announce early put the bull's eye on their back, hoping that the trade-off of a longer period to fundraise and build brand recognition pays off. Often times, they don't have much of a choice. The early polling favors those who've already enjoyed a national platform because most Americans don't recognize the names of the other viable contenders yet. Hence, it's no surprise who is at the top of early polls among average Americans – Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee and Newt Gingrich –political veterans with big audiences for their many books and frequent media appearances.

I'll go on record as saying that I don't believe any of them will be nominated in 2012, but in this column we'll discuss why. Over the next two weeks, I'll introduce you to the field of candidates that GOP insiders are very excited about, as well as some potential dark horses. Last week's results have not only given the GOP cause to be optimistic, but it's also forced Republicans to re-examine the kind of candidate that will be most likely to succeed.

Mitt Romney – The former governor of Massachussetts enjoys a comfortable lead in just about every early poll, which isn't a big surprise for a candidate that did well in the previous cycle and kind of lost steam, rather than imploding. He's also kept his nose clean in the two-year interim and avoided Huckabee and Palin's penchant for the kind of self-promotion that sometimes seems beneath a bona fide presidential candidate.

Not surprisingly, other potential candidates are already on the attack, consistently attempting to tie Romney to President Obama's health care reforms that have the far right in a frenzy. Obama frequently cited Romney's Massachusetts plan as a model, attempting to draw a bi-partisan line toward a policy that had been implemented by a Republican governor. Romney may end up becoming a casualty of that effort, at least in the primary where the most conservative Republicans tend to dominate, a factor that is likely to be even more potent this time out. One could only imagine that Romney would face stiff push back from Tea Party groups on this issue alone.

There's also the Mormon question. Mike Huckabee was consistently lauded for bringing out the evangelical vote in '08, though it wasn't as openly discussed how badly Mitt Romney was damaged by belonging to a minority religious group that has often been embroiled in controversy. While I don't think this would be too much of a factor in the general election, it could weigh him down when added to the health care issue and the fact the most of Romney's business experience is in the financial sector, not exactly America's favorite industry at the moment.

The biggest question for Romney and the rest of the field will be who is wielding the power of the primary vote as the election draws closer. If the Tea Party remains an organized force, it really changes the game. Romney might be tied to the old guard, especially since he has no governing achievements over the last four years to speak of, unlike an incumbent governor who is currently cutting taxes, balancing budgets and demanding the repeal of "Obamacare," of which there are several.

I think Romney's best chance is the most unorthodox route. Rather than jumping into the race as the front runner, he should hold out and weigh the national mood as the field thins. He has enough name recognition and fund raising clout to be a late entrant if times change, but if Republican voters look similar to the group we saw last week, Mitt's better off watching this one from the sidelines. Getting beaten badly would be political suicide for a second-time candidate.


Mike Huckabee – Huckabee has parlayed his unexpected success in the 2008 GOP primary into a successful career in television, radio and books. He has an avid fan base and enjoyed extremely loyal support from conservative Christians last time out, especially evangelicals. Huckabee has not announced his 2012 intentions, hinting only that he'd be out there somewhere, either for himself or another candidate.

Huckabee pulled a major upset in the '08 Iowa Caucus and did much better once Romney dropped out of the race, but ultimately was unable to be terribly competitive with McCain once the front running Romney was bumped off. There's not a lot of confidence that he could cross that threshold this time out, even with considerably better visibility and his involvement may once again have the effect of splitting the conservative Christian vote, opening the door for a trailing candidate with good moderate support like it did for McCain in 2008.

I'm not sure whether losing a second run would help or hurt Huckabee's broadcasting career. If he doesn't run, he might still get tapped as a running mate, especially by a candidate who needs to shore up evangelical participation. McCain came very close to selecting Huckabee last time around and probably wishes in hindsight that he had.


Newt Gingrich – I don't think that Newt will run and I don't think that if he were to run he'd win, but his name recognition puts him in the polls, so I'm obliged to ponder the possibility. Gingrich flirted with a 2008 run and at 67 this may well be his last shot, especially if a Republican were to win, which would make him 75 at the next likely opportunity.
 
Gingrich is one of the most influential conservative figures in America and has the opportunity to remain a behind the scenes power broker for the rest of his life. A loss, especially a bad one in the primary, would likely diminish that power. I think he knows that, but I also think his ego is big enough to again flirt with a run, if only to milk all of the press that is attached to the continual speculation.

The bottom line is that Gingrich is the kind of polarizing figure that can galvanize ailing opposition. He would bring credibility in the form of many fiscally conservative initiatives he championed as House Speaker, long before it became politically fashionable and can also brag that he was part of the last leadership team to produce a balanced budget, while pointing to hot-buttoned issues like Welfare reform that he also had a major hand in.

There are several scenarios where I can see him as a live opponent in the primaries, but I think he'd be virtually unelectable in a general election. His penchant for media attention has created vaults of controversial and even radical sound bites on religion and foreign policy that can be used against him. Also, Gingrich, who had been a life-long evangelical Baptist converted to Catholicism when he married his third wife in 2009, which should mean nothing, but still might cost him cred in some conservative circles, especially if a candidate like Huckabee was in the race. I'd expect Newt to be a well-compensated "analyst" once this thing heats up.


Sarah Palin – The head "Mamma Grizzly" wins the award for squeezing the most juice out of the 2010 elections and in truth, she was the only one who can really claim any part of Republican success – though how much is debatable. I haven't heard anyone actually talking about Romney since Tuesday's big win, nor Huckabee or Gingrich for that matter, but the former Governor of Alaska and GOP Vice-Presidential nominee was all over the news cycle.

Candidates that Palin actually worked closely with fared poorly for the most part, but in her defense most were terrible candidates even before she hitched her wagon to their campaigns. Palin did however, manage to successfully tie herself to a host of "endorsed" candidates and many media outlets are giving her some sort of credit for lending her sway. I've heard Marco Rubio mentioned as part of this group on several occasions and forgive me, but I don't think that Palin's endorsement was a factor in Rubio's success. In fact, it appears that the Senator-elect strategically avoided appearing with the self-described "maverick," even leaving the only event they both appeared at before Palin came on stage.

Palin will almost definitely run for the GOP nomination and she will command a ridiculous level of attention and even votes. Still, I firmly believe that a majority of Republicans are smart enough not to nominate her for President of the United States. In fact, I recall many independent  and even stalwart Republican voters saying that McCain single-handedly lost their vote by putting her on his ticket. McCain's age and ailing health made it a very realistic possibility that his VP could become Commander in Chief. That frightened many Americans and I don't think Palin has done much to make them more confident in her abilities.

To many, Palin's popularity symbolizes everything that is wrong with American politics and much of what is wrong with American culture on the whole. For some reason, we've come to celebrate mediocrity. It seems that the same mindset that has made wealthy stars out of people like Paris Hilton and the cast of Jersey Shore is what puts Sarah Palin in this race.

I consistently hear comments from her supporters expressing their enchantment with the fact that Palin is so much like them and the people they know. It's a sad state of affairs when such ordinariness is seen as a good quality for a world leader. Presidential candidates should not be ordinary, they should be extraordinary. They should possess high degrees of intelligence, voluminous experience and the cultural sophistication to be an international leader. An American president has arguably the most challenging job in the world and must be up to the task.  

Does that sound elitist? Maybe. Have we often failed to meet that bar? Absolutely, but telling the world that we see this person as someone suitable to sit at the helm of the most powerful nation on Earth is not a message we should be anxious to send. In truth, I felt somewhat sorry for Sarah Palin in having been the victim of a moronic decision that thrust her into a role that she was pitifully unprepared and hopelessly unqualified for. Had she faded into the political abyss or used her fame to suit other purposes than trying to elect Christie (I'm not a witch) O'Donnell to the United States Senate, history might have overlooked her long list of guffaws.

Much of the Republican establishment loathes Palin, though they are hesitant to publicly criticize her because quite frankly, they need every vote under the tent if they are to regain power. It had been said that the Tea Party lacked a face, a leader, but the commercial campaign Palin launched on November 3 made it clear that she is vying for that role – and may have even landed it in some eyes, simply by presumption and the fact that she was the only big-named face attached to the Republican's outside momentum that clearly had an impact at the polls. Again, I highly doubt she will get the nomination, but she's sure to add entertainment value to the race and may contribute to a sizable swell in voter participation among both those who want to keep her out of and those who seek to put her in the oval office. 
 
Read Part Two of the series, which includes Rick Perry, Tim Pawlenty, Mitch Daniels and John Thune.