The Real Winner Today was Romney

Virginia, New Jersey, and now Massachusetts. Romney's been a key reason Republicans won all three of these. I'd say he's odds on favorite to win the Republican nomination in 2012; and the Presidency depending almost entirely on how the economy does.

Daniels on Running

Strongest wording we've heard yet from Mitch Daniels:

But in Indiana we think about the next generation. We think about the future. We want this state to be better for our kids than it was for us. We don’t resign ourselves for a second to the idea of any decline. Any step back. And that’s the job that we have taken on as a party. That you have made possible. That you’re making possible by your attendence tonight. I cannot thank you enough for that.

I just want to tell you that we’re not going to default on the burden that falls on the party of hope. I read this great line. It’s been on my mind since I read it. In the book Lee’s Lieutenants, the classic study of Civil War generals under Robert E. Lee, there’s a great line. It’s about Gen. Beauregard, whose best battles were his first ones. Bull Run. Early days of the war. Then he gets cautious. Then he gets timid. Then he’s always looking at the newspapers to see how it’s all playing. Freman, the author, says, “A soldier is on the wane from the moment he begins to think more of reputation than opportunity.” A soldier is on the wane from the moment he begins to think more of reputation than opportunity. He meant if you start thinking more about yourself than the people you’re there to serve, the cause you’re there to serve, if you start worrying more about how it’ll look, how it’ll play, than about what’s the next challenge? What’s the next hill? What’s the next battle? What am I going to do for the benefit of the cause I’m a part of? Then you’re not the soldier you used to be. You’re not the soldier you ought to be.

We have to be soldiers who think always of opportunity, not of reputation. Who think always of the future and tomorrow. Not of things we already did. Not of preserving gains and any credit that might have come from it. I promise you tonight, on behalf of everybody who’s part of our team. On behalf of the Republican Senate majority that is and the Republican House majority that will be, we will think of opportunity, not reputation. We will think of tomorrow, not yesterday. We will think of yes, not no; hope, not memory. And we will create in this state a model of a party and a state that all of America looks to for greatness.

Thank you for your support and for being here tonight.

I am now ~70% confident that he will run in 2012. Yet he's still very cheaply priced on Intrade.

Mitch Daniels for President

As some of you know, I've been a big fan of Mitch Daniels, Governor of Indiana, and think he would make a great Republican Presidential candidate in 2012. The big issue with his campaign, though, has always been that he's been very reticent about running, citing family issues. These can be serious, as we found out with Colin Powell. Still, you don't make it as a two-term Governor without a little bit of political ambition.

He's been playing this very smartly too. He came out against the stimulus, but in a more principled and soft-spoken way than Perry and Sanford and the rest. He's been against the Health Bill, but again on very general grounds. He's been making his media appearances and WSJ op-eds. He already has a compelling story and record; this helps prepare some of the groundwork, much as Romney did his time appealing to evangelicals. But doing so in an off-key manner allows you to come in a little later, with far fewer negatives and with more of a post-partisan Obama feel. Jindal should be taking notes.

Anyway, now you're starting to read stuff like this:

Still, despite the dominance of the big three likely presidentials, some in the GOP are hoping for a new conservative face, particularly one being pushed by the activists who attended spring antitax tea parties and flooded summer town halls to demand a halt to government expansion. And for them, insiders say, that could be Daniels, the fiscal conservative and rare Republican governor to win re-election in a state President Obama won in 2008. We hear he's serious about considering a 2012 entry, so much so that he's consulting with some of those who once sat in the White House, like former Vice President Dan Quayle, also a Hoosier.

I suppose I should highlight why this is a good idea: Daniels has turned Indiana around; attracting jobs, balancing the budget, and reforming government. He has good ideas on transportation, healthcare, and education. This is exactly the sort of working-class agenda that can appeal to dying rust-belt states. Even if you're not a Republican, you know they have to win at some point, so it's better to have the party be functional. Nominating a no-nonsense technocrat would go a long way towards erasing the stains of fiscal irresponsibility and incompetence after Bush, and frankly would be exactly what the country needs after several rounds of bipartisan binge spending.

And no; Sarah Palin will not win the nomination. Zero chance.

Petraeus, Don't Betray Us

Ever since the last election, I've kept an eye on the 2012 race. Like many people, my attention has been mainly on current and former Republican governors--Mitch Daniels, Pawlenty, Jindal, Huckabee, Romney --who could plausibly run as pragmatic technocrats focusing on fiscal prudence and competence in governance.

Intrade has another possible pick--Petraeus is trading at just under a ten percent chance at the Republican nomination.

This would be pretty interesting. Republicans have a long history of nominating war heroes and generals--basically every nominee from Eisenhower to McCain was a general, war hero, war President, or played a war hero in Hollywood. Bush 2000 and Nixon are a couple of exceptions. The military is one of the most admired institutions, and Petraeus in particular is highly regarded.

Moreover, unlike some past candidates--Colin Powell--Petraeus is fairly political. He's great with the press, worked some serious politics to get to where he is today, and is on the record as expressing interests in the Presidency. Sure, half of Congress probably has Presidential interests depending on the day of the week, but it's a little rarer in the military.

He isn't known for any sentiments on domestic policy, but that's exactly his promise. It means no long record of incriminating or flip-flopping statements, so can enter the campaign with a blank slate. People will project whatever they want onto him, so he can be all things to all people until he gets elected (sounds familiar...). I'm sure he's a smart guy--put him in the room with a few advisors, and he'll learn everything he needs to.

Of course, the nominee, and winner, in 2012 will be determined by future events we can't predict. But it is possible to sketch out the path in which Petraeus would do very well:

The economy keeps getting worse. Debt keeps rising. Obama exits Afghanistan, and things get worse there and in Pakistan. Terrorists strike somewhere. People perceive the government as corrupt and ineffectual; and its stance on national security as weak.

Petraeus steps in as the candidate of authority. His patriotism and competence are beyond question. It really doesn't matter what he says, as long as he comes off as reasonably intelligent and competent. This would be another Obama-like "branded" campaign, in which the overall image and tone of the candidate overshadows everything else. McCain tried to run something like this (Country First), and almost won (and would still have won if not for the post-Lehman collapse. I'm surprised I don't see more conspiracy theories/spite about that.).

Can you imagine trying to run attack ads against a successful war general? Not fun. All of the other potential Republican candidates have pissed off someone else in the camp at some point or another. Petraeus is arguably the only Republican alive who earns the respect, if not the outright adulation, of not only most Republicans, but many others as well.

Of course, if things turn out differently--the economy gets better, the wars end up going well--there will be much less space for a Petraeus candidacy. Either way, civilian-military relations seem be decidedly chillier under Obama, and it'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

Which Republicans Are Running for President?

I think the 2008 election cycle furthered an entirely unhealthy obsession with the dynamics of political campaigning (myself included).  

Anyway, if you want to get a head start on 2012, the Republican governors who have serious intent to run have all revealed themselves.  They are the only ones to reject stimulus money.

 

By my count, I have Perry (Texas), Jindal (Lousiana), Sanford (South Carolina), Mississippi (Barbour), Otter (Idaho), and Palin (Alaska).  Maybe some of these guys are angling for top jobs among the Republican high command, not just the Presidency, but any serious Presidential contender will at least make some sort of anti-stimulus noise, even if the actual amount rejected is small.

I don't buy that they're rejected money because it will be more costly in the long-run.  It's easy enough to change the law in a few years and cut the programs; This is entirely politically oriented.