The last two weeks have been a flurry of activity. Gingrich and Pawlenty both formally announced their campaigns, while Trump, Daniels and most notably, Huckabee officially bowed out. We spent some time discussing who is most likely to pick up Huckabee's substantial share of voters, with most group members opining that Pawlenty will benefit unless Palin or Bachmann decide to throw their hat into the ring.
We also spent some time discussing Gingrich's rocky start, a bi-product of his controversial statements on Meet the Press where he came close to endorsing a federal mandate for health insurance and called the Ryan budget "right-wing social engineering." Some in the group argued that Gringrich still has plenty of time to recover (and the backpedaling began immediately) but also believe that these will only be the first of many verbal missteps from the gaffe-prone Gingrich.
One thing that became clear from the backfire is that support of the Ryan budget will likely be a litmus test for the party's conservative base. The last week has been filled with soundbites of other Republican nomination hopefuls tactfully trying to endorse the Ryan budget while still leaving themselves the wiggle room needed to triangulate with the general election audience, with whom the Ryan budget's proposed medicare changes polls very poorly.
This led the group to spend some time discussing the apparent division in the party between establishment members and party strategists, and the party purists and Tea Party contingent. Despite playing it cool for the press, the outcome of Tuesday's New York 26 congressional race no doubt has the attention of party leaders and Republican presidential nomination candidates as many pundits speculate that Republican candidate Jane Corwin's endorsement of the Ryan budget played a key role in Democrat Kathy Hochul's upset victory in a district that hasn't gone Democrat in over 40 years. Of course, if the majority of the 9% of votes that went to Tea Party candidate Jack Davis went instead to Corwin, she probably would have still pulled out a win. Some discussion of the Tea Party and their influence in both the presidential elections as well as the 2012 congressional elections ensued.
The meeting wrapped up with some discussion about historical campaigns and how it came to be that the Republican Party is dealing with the intra-party divisions that used to plaque the Democrats. The 2008 nomination campaign failed to produce a nominee that fired up the both the base and attracted independent voters. Of course, the extreme unpopularity of Bush and the Iraq war, as well as an economy spiraling out of control made it a tough contest for any Republican to win. Thus far, the field of declared candidates and potential candidates has failed to produce a Republican that seems suited to accomplish this goal in 2012 leaving some in the group to wonder why. Additionally, the emergence of the Tea Party in 2009 seems more likely to exacerbate these issues than to resolve them. The meeting closed with a discussion of the possibility that some of the GOP's strongest candidates are waiting for 2016 and an open contest rather than taking on the formidable Obama campaign machine.
Ah, finally, the kind of week we should have gotten months ago (oh, how I miss you 2007).
ReplyDeleteWhere Huckabee's supporters go is an interesting question. In the last National Poll Public Policy Polling did, they tested the field with and without Huckabee (they also did version with and without Palin and Trump). When Huckabee is removed, Gingrich is up 5, Ron Paul 4, Palin and Romney 3, Pawlenty 2, and Bachmann 1.
In other words, Huckabee's support gets wildly distributed among several ideologically different candidates, which is not something I would have expected (though it is extremely early). However, the fact that the best known candidates (Romney, Palin, and Gingrich) can't grab onto a large portion of that vote suggests to me that if it consolidates and gravitates to someone, it will be one of the lesser known candidates. Huckabee's personality and his positions suggest to me that Pawlenty and Bachmann are the likely recipients.
The problem with Newt Gingrich is Newt Gingrich. He believes that he is the smartest person in the room, and anyone who does not accept this clear reality either an idiot or some form of evil (concepts not mutually exclusive). The roll-out was a disaster, but everyone knew it would be, because Newt is Newt. If he hasn't changed the way he operates in 35 years, he probably isn't going to now. If he gets lucky, he'll be the Dick Gephardt (2004) of this race, though Alexander Haig (1988) seems more likely to me.
The Special Election in NY-26 was a significant shot across the bow to the Republicans. While much was made of the candidacy of "Tea Party" Jack Davis, Davis twice was the Democratic nominee in this district (2004 and 2006) and lost the Democratic Primary in 2008. Most of the name recognition he had to start with was as a Democrat. His campaign also centered on trade policy, and opposition to free trade agreements that "ship our jobs overseas," a traditional populist-Democratic position. In the two late polls conducted on the race (PPP and Sienna, which both posters pretty much nailed the final margin), a third to a half of Davis' supporters listed the Democrat as their 2nd choice. This implies that Hochul would have still won had Davis been thrown off the ballot at the last minute.
Second in a Two-Part Comment
ReplyDeleteHowever, it shouldn't have been that close anyway. This is a +6 Republican District, which means that in a 50-50 national election, the Republican candidate should get 56% here. The Democrats took weeks longer than the Republicans to find a candidate because no one really wanted to run in an "unwinnable race." The fact that Hochul got about the same percentage that the Democrat did in the heavily Democratic year of 2006 suggests that the Medicare issue is a really big deal, and Republicans either must find a new way to frame the issue or get rid of it entirely, or they could lose that House majority they so recently obtained.
On a presidential scale, I don't think the role of the Tea Party has changed much from the 2010 midterms. They are a very important part of the Republican coalition, and are more willing to accept agreeability over electability than the more mainline members of the party. This is the first time the Republicans have had to deal with this type of "insurrection" since the Reaganites in 1976, and while they were successful then, they also had an incumbent President to rally behind, and Mitt Romney, while a skilled politician, is no incumbent President.
One of the main reasons the Republican field is weak is because of the beating they took in 2006 and 2008. They lost 14 Senate seats (15 if you include Arlen Specter's switch), 54 House seats, and 7 governorships (Well, 8, but the Republicans gained Louisiana). While 2010 was a great year for them, those candidates are probably too new to be effective Presidential candidates in 2012.
Thinking about it, the "strongest" candidates who have declined a bid aren't all that great. Mike Huckabee hasn't won an election since 2002 as was governor of the 32nd most populous state (and his successor is a Democrat who won by 14 points). Mitch Daniels is the governor of the 15th most populous state and is best known for, well, something. Donald Trump is a businessman whose gone bankrupt 4 times. Those aren't very strong alternatives.
When Michele Bachmann, the 265th most Senior member of the House, whose tried twice to lose a strongly Republican district (R+7), Jeb Bush (last won election in 2002, happens to have a last name that isn't all that popular with the American electorate), Sarah Palin (served half a term as governor of the 47th most populous state and was elected with 49% of the vote in a very Republican state), and Rick Perry (who won his 2nd term with 39% of the vote) are the Knights poised to save the field, you have a weak field.
While I'm certain President Obama incumbency, monetary and organization advantages, and relative popularity are factoring into the decisions these candidates make, one lesson not to be overlooked, in my mind, that these are second tier candidates in a world with no first tier. Though any minute now Fred Thompson will declare his 2008 candidacy and clear the field.