Post 6 - Presidential Campaign Choices for 2012
Now that the midterms are over, people are starting to seriously consider the question, "Who should the Republicans put forward to challenge Barack Obama in 2012?"
Here is a link to the Washington Post's discussion:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/21/AR2010112103779.html?hpid=topnews
Do your own research and consider who the WP puts forward but don't forget also about Huckabee, Palin, Pawlenty, and Romney.
Then answer the following questions for your post:
1. What should the Republicans do (and what should someone wanting to run for president do) to gear up for the 2012 presidential election?
2. Who should the Republicans put forward and why?
3. Which Republican candidate do you think Obama would have the easiest time beating and why?
Due on Friday, December 3rd. Enjoy your Thanksgiving holiday!
posted by maby-keirstead @ 8:14 AM
40 Comments:
This comment has been removed by the author.
Uh just saying guys: I'm the first to post on the blog this week and it's WEDNESDAY. You guys need to get on top of your stuff if you're procrastinating worse than I am, because I am the most procrastinatory (I just made that word up) person of all time. Anthony, this is directed at you, because with cross country season over I simply can't fathom what else could be occupying your time. I mean it's not like people focus on more than one activity, and your one activity is over, so what's the excuse going to be? Anyways, I'm tired of ranting about you lazy AP Government students, so I'll instead begin ranting about the Republicans and their 2012 Presidential election hopes and my three point plan for guaranteed victory:
1) Get the Nobama Propaganda Machine rolling- NOW. President Obama's biggest fault, aside from being a devout Socialist, of course, is that he doesn't listen to more people like the John from Nobama.com, who know that Mr. Obama is the most narcissistic man on the planet and that he is bringing terrorists into our nation, causing "incalculable damage" to our nation (1). Additionally, the Republicans finally have the proof they need to show the public that President Obama hates America:
instead of doing his job, he's more concerned about playing basketball (2)! Can we impeach him yet?!
2) Nominate Donald Trump. Not only has "The Donald" considered making a presidential run, but he has "great respect" for the Tea Party movement and a massive star power that no other legitimate candidate in the field could throw around (3)! Who cares if he had at one point driven him self so far into debt that he needed a bail-out from his creditors (4), or if he has blamed the economic downturn on God and cited that as a reason why he should not have to repay a $40 million dollar loan to Deutsche Bank (5), his hit television show The Apprentice and his snazzy catch phrase "You're Fired" absolutely qualify Mr. Trump for the job. With such a popular candidate, there is no way that Obama and the Socialist Democrats could trump the GOP!
3) Stay away from Sarah Palin. Many consider Sarah Palin as a lunatic, and frankly, that's because she is one. Despite her terrible attempts to cover up the fact that she's running in 2012, she still has yet to visit New Hampshire, a key primary state, where other 2012 hopefuls Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, and Newt Gingrich have spent plenty of time in recent months (6). According to the article, Palin has even repeatedly ignored requests for her to make appearances. Giving voters the impression that she intends to run a media-based campaign over a grassroots campaign, Palin is starting to turn off some supporters (6), which would mean an even smaller voter base in 2012. Palin has even lashed out at First Lady Michelle Obama's Let's Move program aimed at reducing childhood obesity by going on the radio and proclaiming that Americans have the God-given right to be fat and that the government has no business advising people or helping people to achieve healthy lifestyles through eating better, eating less, and exercising more (7). With childhood obesity tripling in the past 30 years and instances of diabetes and cardiovascular disease rising amount American youth (7), is there anyone out there loony enough to agree with Palin that American parents have been making the right decisions? If there are people who agree with this stance, there aren't enough of them out there to get Palin elected to the Presidency. Don't touch her with a ten-foot pole, GOP, or you'll regret it.
Sources
(1) http://nobama.com/?p=11325
(2) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40384019/ns/politics-white_house/?GT1=43001
(3) http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=7407
(4) http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,972889,00.html
(5) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/05/business/05norris.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&sq=donald%20trump&st=cse&scp=8
(6) http://news.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/20101201sarah_palin_leaves_nh_out_in_cold_for_now/srvc=home&position=recent
(7) http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20024104-10391704.html
I liked how Eric highlighted the main points of each paragraph in the first sentence so I’m going to do the same....
1. Name recognition, check. Massive amounts of funds, check. Iowa and New Hampshire, check. Nomination, .... The main things that a Republican candidate needs to do at this early stage is get their name out there. Many candidates have already done so, donating money to states where the first caucuses and primaries take place (4). Governor Tim Pawlenty spent the last couple of weeks of the election season campaigning for Republican candidates across the country and donating upwards of $300,000 to campaigns (5). While donating to candidates can help, a potential Presidential candidate needs millions of dollars to spend on their own campaign. It is very important at this stage for the potentials to start fundraising. Although a good showing in the early primaries and caucuses can boost funding significantly the candidates, they need funding to fund campaigns in these early states. I also think that it is important for the candidates to establish why they are different from Obama and in what ways they can improve the country with their policies.
2. My dark horse for 2012....Mississippi governor Haley Barbour. Runner-up.....Newt Gingrich. After 2008, the Republican’s decided that they had to change face in order to win in 2012. The equation for Republican revival? Unrecognizable + cool + Hispanics + Twitter + being nice to gays + Facebook (1). Well...a lot has changed in two years and while Barbour is being coy about running, he could definitely have success. Barbour is white, 63, wealthy, Southern, and moderately moderate (no pun intended), exactly opposite of what the Republican’s appear to want (2). But he also helped to turn the South red in the 70’s, worked as the White House political director under Ronald Reagan in the 80’s, and was elected chairman of the GOP in 1992, overseeing the rise of Newt Gingrich to Speaker of the House in 1994 (1). On top of all that he is the chairman of the Republican Governors Association, was elected governor of Mississippi in 2003, and oversaw one of the more successful Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts (1,2). Barbour has an uncanny ability to reach out to moderates, a scary idea for some Tea Party loyalists, and new-Republicans and also for the Democrats. He is also a terrific fundraiser and a more traditional Republican candidate. I think that while Barbour is not super conservative, I think that he is a good moderate candidate who could draw in a lot of votes in 2012. Huckabee and Romney have already run and while they had success at some points they didn’t pick up the nomination, the Republicans are looking for new blood and I don’t think that either of these guys are ideal. Pawlenty is new to the national stage, younger, and from a fairly moderate state. However, I think that he will struggle with fundraising compared to other candidates and with recent reports that he pardoned a sex offender who repeatedly molested a young girl before and after the pardoning I would say that his record is relatively tarnished for now (5,6). The candidates mentioned in the Washington Post article all appeared either too Conservative or way too inexperienced, characteristics that are frowned upon by the general public (3). While I personally feel that we will probably be surprised by who ends up being the Republican nominee in 2012, I think that Barbour has a strong chance and could give President Obama a run for his money.
3. Obama’s ideal opponent....Sarah “Maverick” Palin. Her family is featured on a TLC show “Sarah Palin’s Alaska”, her daughter, surprisingly, made it to the final round of “Dancing with the Stars”, and she is the author of the best-selling book “Going Rouge”. Oh, and did I mention that she has never completed a term besides her mayorship of the town of Wasilla, Alaska (population approximately 10,000 people). While she has championed the Tea Party, Palin has little experience in politics. She served as mayor of Alaska for three years and was on the Republican Presidential ticket in 2008...not exactly dealing with national issues on a daily basis. On top of all that, Palin recently “accidentally” mixed up North and South Korea and has made numerous geographical gaffes and other noteworthy mistakes (8). While Palin may criticize the “gotcha journalism” more should be expected of her, and she should know what she is talking about (8). She butchers English, galavants around the country doing book signings like Lauren Conrad, and thinks she could be the President of the United States. I think Obama could beat her in a heartbeat, and she is the candidate that the Democrats should hope is on the ballot in 2012.
(1)http://www.newsweek.com/2010/01/01/the-anti-obama.html
(2)http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2020798,00.html?xid=rss-politics
(3)http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/21/AR2010112103779.html?hpid=topnews
(4)http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/45884.html
(5)http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/02/tim-pawlenty-by-the-numbers/
(6)http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/12/1/924578/-Pawlenty-pardoned-serial-child-molester-so-wife-could-open-up-day-care-center
(7)http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/11/29/5543721-2012-palin-in-iowa
(8)http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mitchell-bard/why-sarah-palins-north-ko_b_788647.html
Kathy: You didn’t bold your stuff like you said you were :(
1. What should the Republicans do (and what should someone wanting to run for president do) to gear up for the 2012 presidential election?
-I believe that the Republican Party needs to find a candidate that appeals to many people. I feel like a lot of the frontrunners for the Republican Party only appeal to certain political groups (1). The frontrunners for the Republican Party according to a Gallup Poll, are Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, and Mike Huckabee. Mitt Romney is leading the voting by 26% (2). I believe that they should look at this holistically and find somebody else who best represents the nation, and not just certain groups. For example, Mike Huckabee really only favors the people from the south and Sarah Palin’s followers are almost only in the tea party (1).
2. Who should the Republicans put forward and why?
-I believe that the Republican should put forward Tim Pawlenty. I believe that he should be put forward because he represent the majority of the Republican’s views, and he sides well with the public’s opinion (3). I believe that he is a moderate conservative, which allows him to see the value in compromise. He isn’t too extreme, but he is conservative enough to where we will see proper legislation get passed. I also believe that he has a good amount of experience, both in government and the business world (3). He was the Vice-President of Wizmo, Inc. which is a technology company, majority leader of the house in 1999, and he was the Governor of Minnesota from 2002-2010. One of his main accomplishments while in the state of Minnesota was that he balanced a 4.3 billion dollar deficit without raising taxes. He is the frontrunner in my mind to win this thing (3). The only bad thing about Pawlenty, is that he is too soft with policy, and isn’t that nationally recognized, yet he won in a democratic state…
3. Which Republican candidate do you think Obama would have the easiest time beating and why?
- I believe that the easiest candidate for Obama would be Sarah Palin. Her inexperience in Government, her lack of determination to finish a term, and that she has already lost to Obama, makes her the easiest threat for Obama. Palin has done many stupid things throughout her life, and many people have, but if you are going to be the President of the United States, you shouldn’t mix up who we are allies with. She messed up with South Korea and North Korea (4). Sometimes, I feel like she is too dumb to be the President of the United States. All of the publicity that she has makes her seem like there is no way that she has the power or the knowledge to run the United States. I personally would not feel safe having her run our country.
Sources:
(1) http://www.thepresidentialcandidates.us/mitt-romney-sarah-palin-mike-huckabee-early-2012-gop-frontrunners/1101/
(2) http://www.gallup.com/poll/121715/Romney-Edges-Palin-Huckabee-Early-2012-GOP-Test.aspx
(3) http://2012.presidential-candidates.org/biography
(4) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mitchell-bard/why-sarah-palins-north-ko_b_788647.html
The Republicans will have to provide a lot of real change in the government in the next two years in order to have any real chance of winning the presidency. Although the incumbent nearly always wins reelection, the Republicans might have a chance of winning if they create policies that have immediate positive effects on the U.S. economy. One way I think they should do this is by making some compromises. This year, there was a historically low percentage of Americans that considered themselves to be Republicans, and polls have shown that a majority of the public still trust the Democrats over the Republicans on several key issues [1]. Many people are concerned that the party is becoming too conservative, pushing away a large amount of right-leaning voters that the party will need [1]. I personally think that the Republicans should make some compromises so the government can run more smoothly and pass the legislation that is needed to improve the economy. I think it would be easy for the Republicans to spin the improvements that result from compromised legislation in their favor because they can portray themselves as the people that brought change after the past two years of Democratic rule. The Republicans have already began the process of compromising with Obama's bipartisan deficit commission, and it seems like Obama is willing to give the Republicans a lot of what they want if they agree to increase the amount of tax revenue the federal government collects[2]. If the Republicans don't make any compromises, they will not get any effective legislation passed to help the economy, which will definitely hurt their chances in 2012.
I may be a little biased, but I think Tim Pawlenty would make an excellent choice for the Republicans to run for president in two years. He has done a lot for Minnesota in the past seven years, including fixing a $4 billion dollar budget deficit without raising taxes [3]. This shows that he would have the ability to fix the U.S. budget deficit as president. He may not have the "star power and charisma" other Republicans considering running for president have, but Americans ultimately want their president to be "competent and cool," so he seems like a logical choice for me [3]. Pawlenty also has a good reputation in the Republican party and has a blue-collar background, which could help him gather more votes [4]. Although he is not as conservative as many Republican politicians, he can still appeal to them because he is very socially conservative [4]. Pawlenty's personality and competence make him a good choice for the Republican party and make it hard for me not to think he wouldn't be an effective president.
The Democrats would be absolutely relieved if Sarah Palin was chosen by the Republicans to run for President in 2012. To me, it seems like everyone thinks Sarah Palin is incompetent in politics and a joke, but apparently she may be serious about running for president and there are actually a lot of people that would vote for her [5]. She has made numerous mistakes in her interviews and debates, which has given her the reputation of being uninformed in the world of politics [5]. She doesn't really have much experience in government, so I don't think she would make a good choice for the Republicans to nominate for president.
1) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/07/AR2009110703468.html
2) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/01/AR2010120107445.html
3)http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/08/tim-pawlenty-skipped-mccain-set-billing/
4)http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2003956-2,00.html
5)http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/25/politics/main7089486.shtml
The 2012 Presidential elections are quickly coming up, (though it feels like Obama just got elected) and the media is already buzzing with gossip and rumors about who should and who might run. They already have a list of possible candidates and even a list of possible dark horses that would most likely appear in this upcoming election. The media is convinced that there will be another dark horse ever since last year’s Mike Huckabee who surprisingly won in Iowa but then later lost to Senator John McCain (1).
However the media’s lists on who they believe could be running as candidates is incredibly long: Rick Santorum, Mike Pence, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Mitch Daniels, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich… and the list goes on and on (2).
But all these politicians share something in common: no one is answering the “candidate” question (2).
I believe that the Republican Party needs to find out who their frontrunner is. Since there is no current frontrunner there is no sense of urgency, which would explain why all these popular Republicans are simply putting off the question saying that they still have time (2). I think that this will hurt their chances of winning since head starts can’t really do much harm.
As for who I think the Republican Party should put forward I think that they should pick Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee. They both very well known, and they both have experience in running presidential campaigns. I also believe they should since they already have a large group of people already willingly to vote for them (2).
The person who I think that the Republican Party shouldn’t choose is Sarah Palin, even though she has been getting a lot of hype because of her book signing tour that conveniently stops in politically important states: Iowa and South Carolina (3). But she doesn’t have much political experience and as much as some people like her, a lot of people don’t. I also believe that she would be an easier candidate to beat because she is know more for the quotes in which she says something completely incorrect, rather than the political work she has done in Alaska (3).
1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/21/AR2010112103779.html?hpid=topnews
2. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/23/no-rush-to-jump-into-the-2012-race-for-white-house/
3. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/01/palins-intentions-questioned-as-she-heads-back-to-iowa/
1. With numerous wins under their belt from the recent mid-term elections, Republicans shouldn’t prepare for the presidential elections quite yet. To win big in 2012, Republicans should focus on what they are doing right now. With a majority in the House soon, they will be able to block legislature they don’t want, and try to pass more conservative friendly material. They need to focus on what is happening now, and wait until later to focus on the election of 2012. The party is anxious to get their candidates out there and campaigning hard, but the best idea for them right now is to stay put and focus on their current position. When asked if she was at all interested in the Presidential race in 2012, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour made a good point.” I’m going to tell you something. One of the worst things that can happen to the Republican Party in our effort to rebuild is for a bunch of people to start running for president. Anybody harboring that ambition needs to squelch it until after 2010” (6).
2.Republicans should put forward former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee as their candidate for the 2012 election. A recent CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey stated that 42 percent of people see Huckabee in a positive light, with 26 percent saying they hold a negative view and just over three in 10 are unsure (4). Huckabee has no problem getting the media’s attention. He has his own talk show on Fox, is recording an album in Tennessee, and an already successful author (5). The Republicans should put him forward because he is already well known by the people from the media, which usually bodes well for candidates. He also has more experience than other candidates because of his unsuccessful attempt at the White House in 2008. Also Mike would be a good candidate because he doesn’t always stick with the GOP on some issues. For example, he had different immigration views. He has not joined the conservative bandwagon to change the 14th Amendment to prohibit automatic citizenship for children of illegal immigrants (5). The fact that Mike has views that are a little more liberal and moderate than the other candidates will hopefully lead to some Democratic support as well.
3.When asked if she could beat Obama in 2012, Sarah Palin confidently answered “I believe so” (3). Her optimism is sweet, but realistically (at least at this point in time) Obama would have an easy time beating her in the election. Sarah Palin has done a lot in the past to get herself the prime spotlight in the media. Even with her reality show and the release of two books, Americans don’t believe she is ready for a presidency. A Gallup survey conducted in the days after the Nov. 2 election found more than half of Americans -- 52 percent -- hold a negative opinion of the former Alaska governor(1). There is more to blame for this low approval rating than just politics. Her reputation has been degraded by all the media “attacks” as well (2). Almost every word she speaks is scrutinized and made into jokes. 2011 calendars are being made of all the slip-ups she has made in the past year that have been pointed out. When interviewed for the New York Times, Sarah was quoted saying, "I know that a hurdle I would have to cross, that some other potential candidates wouldn't have to cross right out of the chute, is proving my record. That's the most frustrating thing for me - the warped and perverted description of my record and what I've accomplished over the last two decades" (3.) With her tea party affiliation, her politics, and her negative media attention all combined, President Obama could definitely have an easier time beating the ex-Alaskan governor.
1.http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11/12/sarah-palins-unfavorability-numbers-hit-new-high-survey-finds/
2.http://rightwingnews.com/2010/11/palin-i-could-beat-obama-but-could-she/
3.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/11/18/2010-11-18_palin_i_could_beat_obama_in_2012_elections_dem_billionaire_george_soros_support_.html#ixzz16zypcT54
4.http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/04/poll.2012.candidates/index.html
5.http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/20/mike-huckabee-and-2012-under-the-radar-over-the-airwaves/
6.http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15451.html
In response to Eric: I had my blog done yesterday. I just didn't want to be the first to post for the umpteenth time.
Nowwww for Post 6:
With the 2010 midterm election past us, politicians are already looking towards the 2012 presidential election. The big question is, who will run on the Republican ticket for president? More pressing, who should run, and how should candidates approach the race?
First of all, the Republicans shouldn’t let their success in the recent midterm elections go to their heads. They were successful, most prominently in The House, but that doesn’t mean anything yet. Time will only tell how their success in Congress will play out, starting in January when the 112th Congress begins its session. Regardless, The Republicans should pick someone who is a politician first- someone who is passionate about the issues and vows to do his or her best to be successful. So far, though the election is two years away, the Republicans lack a front-runner (1). If a dark- horse happens to come up, it shouldn’t matter if people find his or her stance on issues favorable. If a dark horse happens to be the best choice, then I see that as the only choice. Just because a candidate is well known doesn’t mean he or she is necessarily a good politician. It is crucial that the Republicans pick someone who they believe will do a favorable job as president, because if they don’t, they are sure to lose. Likewise, the possible candidates need to make their stances clear as well as ensuring they don’t do anything stupid and that they maintain an approving status during the campaign. Once a candidate is chosen, it is my opinion that he or she needs to first, find out what the American people want. I also think they have the opportunity to use Obama’s “change” campaign against him (assuming Obama will run for reelection), because so far, much of that hasn’t been happening. Although I’m not fond of bashing the other candidate the Republicans definitely have Obama’s failure to make any “major change” to their advantage. That is to say, I believe they will have to use it wisely. There is a difference between completely bashing and making a rational argument. If the Republicans are smart about this possible strategy, they have the possibility of being successful.
As for whom the Republicans should put forward, I think there are a couple worthy candidates. Of the possible candidates, I see Minnesota Governor, Tim Pawlenty (no I did not just choose him because he is our Governor) and Indiana Congressman, Mike Pence as possible contenders. Of all the possible candidates on a list I found at abcnews.com, I found them to be two of the most promising. Although Pawlenty stated,
"I'm not going to make up my mind internally for a couple months yet. The decision is not imminent,” I see him as worthy for the candidacy (2). Pawlenty has a record as being a fiscal conservative governor, yet he his ‘brand’ of “common sense conservatism” has given him the ability to reach out to moderates and independents in the past (2). There are concerns about whether he can raise enough money for a legitimate and well-run campaign, but only time will tell if he can do that. Besides, I think this early in deciding candidates, it is more important to look at the possible candidates as politicians.
Mike Pence of Indiana is well liked among social conservatives. It is also noted that he is a solid communicator and that he is part of a GOP establishment that is known for standing up for the party when it comes to spending issues (2). He is known for saying “If you can’t communicate, you can’t govern,” a statement that I absolutely agree with (3). It is also worthy to note that he was named “conservative on the year” in 2007 (3). Although Pence isn’t well known in Washington, I think it’s important to not underestimate the power of a dark horse candidate. Although I feel Pawlenty is an overall better candidate, Pence has the communication note as an important booster. It also appears that Pence incorporates religion into dealing with politics, which I’m not fond of, but despite that, I think he is a reasonable possible candidate that the Republicans should consider putting forward.
There are a few possible candidates who the Democrats would most definitely benefit from if the Republicans put them forward. Chief among this crowd is Sarah Palin. Palin, in my opinion, has quite a few points against her. First of all, she did not finish her tenure as governor of Alaska (2). It alarms me that someone who is setting their eyes on the candidacy for president didn’t finish out their term as governor! The only reason she became well known was because she was chosen as John McCain’s vice presidential nominee during the 2008 campaign, and if that hadn’t of happened she probably wouldn’t be nearly as famous as she is now. I feel like a lot of people in the country view her as slightly crazy and I don’t see how she could win the 2012 election if she was on the ticket. Even prominent members within in the Republican Party seem to be against Palin running. Former First Lady, Barbara Bush stated, “I sat next to her once, thought she was beautiful, and I think she is very happy in Alaska, and I hope she’ll stay there” (4). In my opinion, just the fact that Palin has a reality show lowers her credibility. Many people already have issues with her, and I think that by having a reality show it makes her look as if she is trying to hard to be known. As a politician, she should be focusing more on politics. All in all, I don’t think Sarah Palin is qualified enough, and I don’t think she has her head completely in the game. To me it seems as if she is almost more about her ‘celebrity status’ than doing anything productive. Therefore, the Democrats would definitely have an advantage in the 2012 election if the Republicans nominate Sarah Palin for the Republican candidate.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Whoever is nominated on the Republican ticket for the 2012 election, it will definitely be interesting especially if Obama does run for reelection. Only time will tell whether the American people will chose to stick with a Democratic president or if they will again vote in a Republican. Regardless, whomever the Republicans choose as their candidate will without a doubt have an effect on how they succeed in the race.
(1)http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2010/11/21/AR2010112103779.html?hpid=topnews
(2) http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2012-republican-presidential-candidates-abc-news-guidebook/story?id=12164311
(3) http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Mike_Pence
(4) http://www.kansascity.com/2010/11/27/2476407/the-buzz-barbara-bushs-advice.html
This comment has been removed by the author.
1. As days are counting down for the 2012 election the Republicans are preparing to put a candidate to defeat Obama. The Republicans victory in the midterm elections has set the first steps for Republicans control of the government and the Republicans are in a good position in the game of politics. The Republicans need to gather and choose a candidate soon and promote the candidate. Promoting a candidate during a time like this when the Democrats haven’t achieved anything; it would help the Republicans big time in gearing up for the 2012 election. I think its time for the Republicans to start their work on promoting candidates and raising funds for the 2012 election. Since the Republicans are in control due to the midterm election they can block legislative process they don’t support; this would make Obama administration not getting anything done at all and it would make public favor the Republicans.
2. Republicans should promote Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas, because he is a well known candidate around the United States and recent poll show that he has a lot of support. Huckabee also has his own talk show, where is discusses issues ongoing in the country and answers questions from the audience. This type of image in the media gains him a lot of support from people and he is already making a clear picture of himself, which makes him more recognizable by the public.
3. I don’t think I need to clearly point out who would have the worst chance of winning against Obama. People and the press criticize her day and night for countless of mistakes she makes and how much dumb she is in the media. I think she was the main reason McCain lost in 2008 election; if McCain won she would be one heartbeat away from becoming the president of the United States. I don’t know how this type of person is even in politics at least now she kind of moved away to reality TV with her own shows. Sarah Palin without a doubt one of the most stupid people to be elected into office. She is too dumb and doesn’t even know Africa is a continent and not a country. If she becomes the candidate in 2012 I’m sure Obama will crush her in debates and defeat her in a blink of an eye.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/21/AR2010112103779.html?hpid=topnews
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/eye-on-2012/sarah-palin-the-lamestream-med.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/02/mo2012-president-49-hucka_n_791324.html
Two years ago, the American people voted for a man running on the promise of change. The economy had been falling out of control and the populace was looking for a new direction; one that would get them out of the recession they’d been dug into over the past decade. Now, today, it’s questionable to what degree that man, President Obama, has succeeded. Many see legislation like his health care reform as evidence of him backing up his promises, but many point to other decisions like his lack of action on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, as proof he hasn’t performed up to snuff. This isn’t even mentioning the fact that we’re still in a recession, with unemployment rate still at 9.6% (1). Whether or not President Obama is responsible for this is largely irrelevant; presidents have historically been connected with the economic state during their presidency. That is to say, whether or not it was even possible for Obama to get us out of the recession faster than he currently is, he will be blamed for not doing so. This, I believe is a large part of what Republicans are going to want to emphasize. Many moderates voted with Obama in the 2008 election (2), and their disillusionment with Obama was shown perfectly clearly with the midterm election results. Republicans capitalizing on how Obama has not delivered all he promised will be a strong way to sway moderate voters. Another facet of swaying moderate voters will be pointing out how much the national debt has gone up under Obama: $3 trillion (which, even as a liberal, is somewhat crazy) (4). It will also be important for the Republican party to identify their potential candidates very early, because incumbents have many advantages over challengers, one of which is the higher name recognition associated with someone who’s already served. A part of this will be getting immense amounts of funding for interstate campaigning and advertising as soon as possible. These four things take away an extremely large portion of the advantage Obama carries with his incumbency, which, combined with the already-Republican climate after the midterm elections, could very well make Obama a one-term president.
Who to choose, however, is a much more difficult and dicey question. According to a Gallup poll, some of the most popular choices are: Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, David Petraeus, and Rudy Giuliani (3). Of these, I think Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani would make strong candidates. They both have experience as governor, which is especially crucial with Giuliani, the governor of New York after 9/11. Both did great work in their positions as governor (Giuliani coping with 9/11 quite effectively and Romney going from a large deficit to a surplus, with tax cuts) (3). These give both candidates a marketability that will be important in the 2012 election. A particularly poignant comparison to make would be an ad that talks about Romney’s cut of Massachusetts’ debt compared to Obama’s raising on the national debt. In fact, such a comparison would be so effective that I would say Romney should be the first choice for the Republicans. Most of Romney’s views mesh with the traditional Republicans, and some of his stances could rope in moderates just on their own (such as his health care reform for Massachusetts (5) and his support of alternative energies (6)). He also has $1 billion saved from the PAC he set up for his 2008 presidential campaign and other sources since that is rumored to be allocated to a 2012 campaign (7).
The question of who would be the easiest real candidate for Obama to defeat, when compared with the above, might as well be two plus two. No matter how much some people pretend, Sarah Palin is moving more and more towards being a political joke. As recently as August, even the Republicans, the only group of people prior who took her seriously, have started dwindling in their support (8). This will only keep compounding with her political mess-ups (such as recently saying we need to stand by North Korea (9)) and her new reality TV show that paints her in a generally positive light but takes away from her serious credibility as a politician. A year ago, it’s possible Palin might have had a chance at getting elected, but right now, it’s basically impossible, and the chances are only going to get worse.
1. http://www.bls.gov/cps/
2. http://obamaindependent.blogspot.com/2010/11/moderate-voters-decide-elections.html
3. http://hubpages.com/hub/2012-Republican-Candidates
4. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20019931-503544.html
5. http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2subtopic&L=4&L0=Home&L1=Resident&L2=Health&L3=Health+Care+Reform&sid=massgov2
6. http://alternativeenergysources.brighterplanet.org/alternative-energy-sources/mitt-romney-alternative-energy-sources-will-help-the-planet/
7. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/magazine/articles/2009/08/30/the_long_distance_runner/
8. http://www.politicususa.com/en/palin-poll-nosedive
9. http://www.news.com.au/world/sarah-palin-says-us-should-stand-by-north-korean-allies/story-e6frfkyi-1225961065827
To give themselves the best chance for success in the 2012 Presidential Campaign, the Republican Party must follow three simple rules: Don’t nominate Sarah Palin, she isn’t popular outside of the Tea Party; Offer real change and compromise; and DON’T NOMINATE SARAH PALIN!
Not only do liberals think that she’s unqualified (her half-term as governor doesn’t help), her own party does too. 47% of GOP voters agree, according to the latest ABC/Washington Post poll. Her national results aren’t much better, 67% of the nation see her as unqualified, her favorability rating is a dismal 39%-54%. These polls make it very unlikely for Republicans to waste a ballot on her, especially if they really want to win. (1)
More likely candidates include Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and Newt Gingrich. It appears that Mitt Romney may be a better, more popular choice. In a recent poll, investigating which possible Republican candidate could beat President Obama in an election, Mitt Romney would win by a slim margin of 45% to 44%. Sarah Palin on the other hand would not win, losing by a larger margin, 49% to 43%. He also does better in a favorability poll among independents, 22%, while Sarah Palin polls unfavorably by 54% (2).
What the President can do to help his chances in the election: Start forcing Congress to work everything out, make deals if he has to, as long as things get done; Begin talking to the people the way he did when he was campaigning, the people need the hope he promised us, we need his words of encouragement and not the critics’ threats; and, above all, Mr. President needs to show his opponents weaknesses, in their plans, promises, and their qualifications.
(1) http://www.americasnewsonline.com/presidential-politics-at-its-finest-a-look-ahead-to-2012-912/
(2)
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2010/1122/Poll-Sarah-Palin-can-t-beat-Obama.-But-Mitt-Romney-can
1. The To-Do List. Basically what needs to happen in the coming months is exactly what Eric said, some serious Obama-bashing. Start up on the political ads again and remind the voters what terrible condition our country is still in. Remind them of anything you (the Republicans) could possibly twist into something negative that Obama has done or is planning on doing. One of the best things you can do is make your party look like the only feasible option for the next president of the United States. The other thing you can do is set up a clear agenda for things you would like to get done in the next two years, and then actively work on getting at least a few of these done. Show the voters that you have credibility, that you can actually get things done when you say you are going to.
2. I never thought I would ever say this but... The best presidential candidate would be Tim Pawlenty. I don’t agree with his policies, but the man has serious potential for being the ‘dark-horse’ of the race. Admittedly, he hasn’t got much for charisma or name recognition but this just makes me think that he has a lot of room to make a very positive impression on the American people in the coming years (1). Governor Pawlenty also has managed to win two terms as Governor, being a Republican in a progressive state with a strong concentration of liberals and independents (2). Not only this, but he has experience as the majority leader in the MN House of Representatives, has fulfilled his promises as Governor, and is trying to get Republicans to shed their decades old stereotype of being ‘the country club members’ (2). Another potential benefit of Governor Pawlenty is that he effectively avoids stereotypes that can be detrimental to candidates, such as the fact that he’s a northern conservative in a progressive state (1). He has no accent to make him seem less intelligent or more intimidating to Democrats and liberals. Despite his low approval rating in MN, I believe that it could be ignored or given excuses effectively enough so it will really not be an issue.
3. Put a whole ‘lotta gone between you and Sarah Palin. As Jesse Ventura said, Palin is a quitter (3). She was mayor of a town of 10,000 people in a state that isn’t even a part of the continental U.S, then she gets elected Governor and she quits about two years into it because she decides that she could get paid more if she sells her family’s personal life to a national television network. She’s also vastly unqualified to run for president because she continually demonstrates that she knows nothing about what’s going on around her. During interviews she has demonstrated that she has no idea what Bush’s most basic foreign policy was, has mistaken North Korea for South Korea, and has made massive errors when talking about Middle Eastern affairs (4). She also doesn’t write her own arguments,books, or even rebuttals to presidential addresses and decisions (5). She has an overall approval rating of 22 percent as of October 2010 and if only under one quarter of the country likes you, you really shouldn’t try to be democratically elected as their leader for the following four years (6). For all of these reasons, you, the Grand Old Party, need to put as much distance between yourself and Caribou Barbie as physically possible.
2.http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/tim_pawlenty/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=tim%20pawlenty&st=cse
1.http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/eye-on-2012/the-biggest-vulnerability-for.html
4.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/the-irrefutable-stupidity_b_382213.html
3.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/16/jesse-ventura-sarah-palin_n_764658.html
6. http://www.politicususa.com/en/palin-record-disapproval
5.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-dunn/palin-no-longer-writing-h_b_280161.html
The Republicans have a lot of planning to do before the 2012 Presidential Election. Republicans need to find a candidate that can unite the party as a whole while still appealing to the ever important independent voters. Republicans could find themselves in a sticky situation if they nominate a Tea Party candidate, but could also alienate the Tea Party if they nominate a moderate candidate. I feel if the Republican Party alienates the Tea Party, The Tea Party would nominate their own candidate. This would be a public relations nightmare for the Republicans. I think this division will make it hard for the Republicans to recapture the presidency.
I think that the Republicans should nominate Gov. Bobby Jindal for president. Bobby has many accomplishments he has spent 2 terms in congress, was head of The Department of Health and Health and Hospitals (DHH), and was appointed by George W. Bush as the Assistant Secretary of the U.S. of Health and Human Services. (1) His most well know accomplishment has been turning a DHH deficit of over 400 million dollars, into a 220 million dollar surplus. (1) He rose to national prominence with his response to President Obama’s State of the Union address. Jindal could be the Republicans version of Obama as he is a young, charismatic, minority politician who could ride minority and young peoples support to the White House.
I think Sarah Palin would be the easiest candidate to defeat. I think her numerous speaking errors such as calling North Korea an ally (3) will give the media and Democrats all the ammunition they need to destroy her. The fact that she did not finish up her first term as governor hurts her creditability. In my opinion she has become a person who a person with a reality TV. show, and a part time commentator on Fox News. I think she has been over exposed, and her luster is gone. She does have one thing going for her in that in this day of the 24/7 news cycle, she remains visible and is well known.
(1) http://www.bobbyjindal.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=89&Itemid=93
(2) http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/j/bobby_jindal/index.html
(3) Sarah Palin Calls North Korea Ally on Glenn Beck’s Show
http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Sarah-Palin-calls-North-Korea-a-US-ally-on-Glenn-Becks-show-110790514.html
My advice for the Republican party to prepare for the 2012 presidential election is to focus on what they think Obama is doing wrong and clearly propose how to improve it. Generally, as seen in the recent midterm election, when the state of the country like the economy is in a bad place people tend to put the blame on the party in charge. This applies especially to the president because he is the most visible part of the national government. Just as Obama campaigned for “change” in the 2008 elections, the Republicans can also focus on what they will do to put the country on the right track. A large part of this is nominating an electable candidate. I think the Republican party should nominate someone who is not really extreme so he/she appeals to a wider part of the electorate, but the candidate also needs to have firm support from the GOP.
Someone who wants to run for president needs to fundraise a lot because they will need a huge amount of money to fund their campaign. Getting their name out there is very important because most Americans do not do any political research. The Internet is a good source of advertisement, but they should use other forms too in order to reach everyone. Name recognition is very important.
I think that Tim Pawlenty would be an excellent candidate for the 2012 presidential elections. He is rated as one of the country’s top innovative, reform-minded and accomplished governors(1). He is also a very good communicator. His talent for campaigning and reaching out to moderates is clear through the fact that he serves as governor in a traditionally liberal state(1). However, Pawlenty is fiscally conservative and still appeals to Republicans. Pawlenty has already made a start in campaigning with multiple visits to Iowa and New Hampshire and by forming a PAC(1). Pawlenty has a lot of experience serving in the Minnesota House of Representatives, governor for 2 terms, and co-chairman of McCain’s campaign(1). His relatively moderate position would help him to appeal to more people and attract some independent voters. I believe that Tim Pawlenty would be a very good candidate for 2012.
Marco Rubio is another possible candidate. His surprising success in the midterm elections demonstrates his strength as a campaigner. He raised 18 million dollars to run for Senate. He won the Senate seat over the Republican governor Crist (who was forced to run as an independent)(2). Rubio is relatively young and inexperienced. This could be good for Republicans in that it is unexpected, but I think it is generally more of a deterrent. However, Rubio has already become a sort of national star(2). Rubio is a favorite of Republicans because he is very conservative(2). This ensures support from the party, but it does not bode well for attracting other votes. I think that Rubio has a chance, but he is not as good of a candidate as Pawlenty.
I think that Obama would have the easiest time beating Sarah Palin. Most Americans view Sarah Palin as a joke. She doesn’t help her image at all by having a reality TV show and putting her daughter on Dancing with the Stars. Palin did not make a good first impression in the 2008 elections. A 2008 poll showed that 55% of people thought she was unqualified for vice president(3). Sarah Palin is extremely conservative and a supporter of the Tea Party(3). This defeats practically any hope of gaining support from independent voters and even moderate Republicans. The fact that she resigned from her position as governor of Alaska could show that she is not very dependable. Sarah Palin lacks many positive qualities that the American people look for in a president such as competency, intelligence, and stability. She would be easy for Obama to beat because almost no one takes her seriously.
1. http://2012obama.com/2012-candidate-information/tim-pawlenty-2012-candidate-information/tim-pawlenty-2012-republican-presidential-candidate/
2. http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Marco_Rubio
3. http://www.nndb.com/people/845/000118491/
To gear up for the 2012 presidential election, candidates will need to do several things. First, all candidates who are serious about running for office should get up front and heard. Visibility is very important so constituents know who candidates are, how they promise to vote, and what they are going to do while in office. Also, all candidates need to take a more moderate stance on issues to establish a wider base. This will help in Santorum’s case especially, since one of his only established bases is among social conservatives. Also, you need to have much money to run for the presidency. It would also be important to be a good candidate who is somewhat liked. From what I have read about Scott Brown, he just isn’t presidential material. Mike Huckabee may do particularly well due to his support of hispanics and even large support by blacks. This is because of a few of his positions on immigration laws, etc (3). However, many people feel that he is too religious to be president, as he says: “My faith is my life -- it defines me. My faith doesn't influence my decisions, it drives them.” (2) Pawlenty is gaining more visibility as his approval ratings have gone up. Still, there is one very important thing to note: As Pawlenty is gaining visibility he is also gaining more people who have an unfavorable opinion of him. In one poll, 61% of Minnesotans felt that he should not run for President! That is tough love for a fellow Minnesotan to take (4). As for Romney, he isn’t as visible as some of the other candidates if he has Presidential intentions. He needs to get out there and heard (5).
I believe that the Republicans should put forth Rubio. I know that he is a black horse, but I think that he characterizes the discontent with party lines well, and at the same time does not alienate voters. I do think that he needs lots more visibility though (6).
I think that Obama will have the easiest time beating Palin because she has been involved in more radical movements such as The Tea Party. Even if The Tea Party is not considered a radical party by all voters, it is considered a radical party by a huge portion of our voting population. This will affect Palin: It will both hurt and help her. It will help in the sense that more visibility for her. However, to many Americans, it may be bad visibility that she gets. Also, I believe personally that she is unqualified to do her job. I think that she should have more experience in politics. I feel that she should have had some prior experience in Congress before she runs for the presidency (1). Also, as much as I do not want to say this, I feel that the United States of America is not ready for a female president. Go ahead and surprise me with these upcoming elections, USA.
1.)http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/sarah-palin
2.)http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/candidates/mike.huckabee.html
3.)http://www.mikehuckabee.com/
4.)http://www.governor.state.mn.us/welcome/aboutgovernorpawlenty/index.htm
5.)http://www.necn.com/12/02/10/Mitt-Romney-in-2012/landing_politics.html?blockID=365182&feedID=4212
6.)http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Marco_Rubio
1. What the republicans need to do to be successful is to help the country realize the very small amount of stuff the democrats have accomplished. They run a change campaign much like the one President Obama ran in 2008. They should point out the very little amount of positive change the Obama administration has actually made and make a convincing argument for the positive change a new president will bring. [3]
2. If I was in charge of the republicans I would defiantly choose to put forward Mitt Romney. First off, the former Massachusetts Governor probably has the most experience when it comes to taking part in campaigns he is no stranger and has proven during the 2008 campaign that he has republican support after he came in second after John McCain. Since it does not look like John McCain will be running for president in 2012, Mitt Romney is the republicans’ next best choice. On top of this he has been showing recent support for other members of his party such as Christine O’Donnell [1]
3. By far the worst candidate the republicans can put forth is Sarah Palin. Ever since she stepped into public view when she was announced to be John McCain’s running mate her popularity has gone down. I personally believe that she is a large factor to the republicans’ loss in 2008. This is because American people were frightened when they found out that with John McCain’s health problems she had a good chance of actually being president. For some people that’s what the 2008 election became and if she didn’t win then, she without a doubt will not win in 2012. She is by far the least qualified possible candidate. On top of this, she has a very narrow appeal according to the polls.[2] I don’t understand how anyone in the world could taker her seriously as a political figure.
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2010/09/16/GA2010091606753.html?sid=ST2010112202769#photo=1
[2] http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/eye-on-2012/sarah-palin-the-lamestream-med.html
[3]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2010/11/21/AR2010112103779.html?hpid=topnews
The article that was so generously provided for us made a great point that the Republicans need a "dark horse" in 2012 (1). Given the current dissatisfaction with Obama and the government in general, the Republicans need a contender that doesn't have deep ties with the White House. The GOP also needs to think about reaching across party lines. There are a lot of Democrats and liberals that are also dissatisfied with Obama, so the Republicans should try to unite them as much as possible. Sarah Palin seems to be trying to do that, based on her various book tour stops (2).
I think the Republicans' best bet is Tim Pawlenty. Now, I know I said they need a dark horse, and Pawlenty doesn't exactly fit the description, but I think he's enough of an underdog while still reaping the benefits of name recognition. He has a strong history of reaching across party lines and attracting independents. He's also very fiscally conservative. In 2003 he cut the Minnesota budget by $3 billion instead of cutting taxes (3). A move like that has got to be impressive to Republican voters. His fairly moderate stances will appeal to the most voters possible. Unlike Newt Gingrich, who has taken the pretty extreme stance that "The biggest short-term threat is clearly radical Islamists and the fact that they methodically get up every (day) trying to find ways to kill us" (5), Pawlenty has stated that "The number one issue facing the United States of America is making sure that America is secure and that we're respected around the world" (4). His level-headed viewpoints will appeal to voters the most.
I think we can all agree that it would be a bad move to nominate Sarah Palin. I mean, come on now, she has a reality show (3). She has tried to be coy about running, but her recent stops in Iowa for her book tour have made it pretty obvious what she's up to (2). Also, with all the publicity surrounding her, she's hardly a dark horse (3). But anyway, everyone knows that she's not serious presidential material, so we don't need to discuss it any further. One more thing. I know that everyone seems to think Mitt Romney is a huge front runner, but I think his religion (Mormon) is a serious obstacle. There are a lot of evangelical, social conservatives out there that would have a serious problem with it (3).
1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/21/AR2010112103779.html?hpid=topnews
2. http://video.foxnews.com/v/4436985/sarah-palin-contender-or-pretender
3. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2012-republican-presidential-candidates-abc-news-guidebook/story?id=12164311
4. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/08/tim-pawlenty-skipped-mccain-set-billing/
5. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/10/gingrich-experience-lead-baggage-unload-white-house-quest/
This comment has been removed by the author.
1. This is number one
To gain a large advantage going into the 2012 elections the republicans who were recently elected should be doing all that they can to try and fix the budget issues that are currently plaguing the economy. This will go a long way in helping the republican public image. The GOP says that they are going to be “slicing and dicing appropriations …proposals include statutory spending caps, weekly votes on spending cuts and other reforms to ensure spending bills aren’t sneakily passed under special rules”.[1] This scrutiny should help reduce a few budget issues. Another thing important for any Republican presidential candidate is to continue to put up a united party front. Also they must have a very clear agenda that serves as a dramatic change away from that of President Obama.[2]
2.Followed by the second point
I think that the Republicans should put forward former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin. She already seems to be taking steps to set up a campaign for the 2012 election by she has also begun to make the case for her record of achievement in Alaska at the local and state level.[2] She also already has the advantage of having national attention and recognition, which can be one of the most difficult steps when running for a public office. Especially when the candidate is running against a incumbent. Furthermore, she brings in a fresh perspective that seems to be popular with the republican voters as demonstrated by the midterm results. Plus, she has already faced many public criticisms that have been made about her, since 2008 when she presidential candidate McCain’s running mate. [3]
3. Some parting words
If I were President Obama I would want to run against Jon A. Greenspon ,a newly announced possible republican presidential candidate. He is a business man from Montana with no previous political experience. [4] One of his main running points is that he is an average American who knows what the people want. Furthermore, he is unknown and will struggle to get positive media attention.
[1]http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/45845.html#ixzz170RqBxds
[2]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/12/02/gop_presidential_race_may_become_competence_primary_108119.html
[3] http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sarah-palin-thinking-running-president-tells-barbara-walters/story?id=12170631
[4] http://www.naymz.com/jon_greenspon_2088579
There are many things that the Republican Party and its candidates can do to gear up for the next election in 2012. First, they can continue to support what the people support, in congress. This will give the people a positive view of the Republican Party, and get them to think, “Hey, we need a change in the White House.” Governor Pawlenty put it very well when he said, "The demographics of the country are changing, technology is changing, the economy is changing, the culture is changing, and we have to learn to do a better job of applying our conservative principles."(1) The Republican Party’s candidates also simply have to publicize themselves, and make themselves known to the public. (This shouldn’t be a problem for Sarah Palin. She seems to already have that down.)
I think, that the best candidate for the Republicans to put forward would be Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty. I might be slightly biased because of the fact that he comes from Minnesota, but even despite that I believe he would make a very good candidate. As political analyst David Schultz said, "Tim Pawlenty is trying to sort of define himself as the face of the future of the Republican Party. He clearly has presidential ambitions.”(1) Pawlenty has been said to be a very likeable guy, so I think he would connect well with voters(2). Also, his views could help him get elected. According to one discussion group, the American public is tired of liberal spending, and is ready for a more conservative approach(3).
Sarah Palin is definitely the Republican candidate that the Democrats are hoping for. She has pretty much become a national joke, and no one takes her seriously. She has her own reality TV show about her living in Alaska for goodness sake(4). What an interesting way to campaign. There is no way, with her history, that she would end up winning the presidency, which is why the Democrats would love it if she was the Republican nominee.
Sources:
(1)http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=529774
(2)http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/07/026731.php
(3)http://mnprager.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/good-man-governor-tim-pawlentys-views-published-in-new-hampshire/
(4)http://media.www.lcctorch.com/media/storage/paper1259/news/2010/12/02/Opinion/Reality.Tv.Or.Campaign.Ad-3963586.shtml
Late night:
1.Republicans will have an easy time pointing out the faults of President Obama. He entered office in the middle of a recession and major health care debate, so yes; the change he wanted hasn’t come yet. Republicans will be able to play that to their advantage, asking, “where is the change?” along with being able to criticize his healthcare plan. Obama recently expressed his distaste for Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’, therefore leaving another topic for Republicans to express “disaster” for when speaking of our nation’s leader (5).
2. The Republicans should put forward Mitch Daniels (Gov.) if they want to upset the term of President Obama. Daniels is an extremely popular governor in Indiana. In 2005 he transformed the $600 million deficit into an annual surplus of $370 million within a year (1). Daniels recently has been appearing in the Wall Street Journal; could it be a possible indicator of his interest to begin gaining more media attention? I think another candidate (less likely than Daniels) who the Republican Party could nominate would be Mitt Romney. Romney’s weakness for the party would be his religious beliefs, for being Mormon can definitely be frowned upon by the average Conservative Evangelicalisms (2)
3. Sarah Palin has proven time after time how absolutely clueless and unprofessional she is. How could she run for president when she was unable to name a Supreme Court decision she disagreed with other than Roe vs. Wade in an interview with Katie Co uric (3). Granted, Palin certainly has run of the media; Sarah supposedly forced her daughter to perform on Dancing with the Stars, a reality TV show, as payback for her ill-timed pregnancy during Palin’s run for Vice Presidency (4). That is a disgusting misuse of the press and her own daughter. Palin gives people on each side an excuse to vent about personality traits we despise, but it has nothing to do with our government or the chance of her ever reaching Washington in the form of a presidential nominee.
(1) http://www.in.gov/gov/2635.htm
(2) http://www.ontheissues.org/mitt_romney.htm
(3)http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/24/eveningnews/main4476173.shtml
(4) http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/entertainment&id=7820577
(5)http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/1010/Log_Cabin_Obama_agrees_dont_ask_unconstitutional.html
1. What should the Republicans do (and what should someone wanting to run for president do) to gear up for the 2012 presidential election?
With so many possible republican nominees, republicans have to do several things to prepare themselves for the 2012 election.
First, anyone seeking the presidency needs to do some major name-dropping. Before the 2008 election, people would say “Sarah Palin who?” Now the governor from Alaska (who served 63% of her only term) is a frontrunner in the Republican Party and the face of the Tea Party movement. How did this happen? Name-dropping. The fact that a long timeserving Senator like John McCain would embrace her as a running mate gave her instant credibility. And the idea of being a “maverick” appealed to voters frustrated with partisan politics. Obviously, becoming a household name is much more effective and considerably less work than serving a full term as governor or other “experience”
Next, candidate hopefuls need to come up with a strong opposition to Obama’s policies. They need to offer an alternative to Americans that are upset with how Obama has run his administration. Not only will this stir up Republican support, but it can also help the right by winning over moderate democrats who are beginning to doubt Obama.
Lastly, Republicans need to get going NOW. Even though they do not need to announce that they are formally running yet and run out of momentum early, potential candidates need to raise money and make friends and connections to help them later down the election road.
2. Who should the Republicans put forward and why?
When answering this question one should ask, “what needs changing?” and “who can pull it off?” In my opinion, most Americans would say that the economy and the deficit are the major issues. Who could pull of a change? Well, that would have to be Mitt Romney. The Republican Governor from Massachusetts has a great track record with deficits. He entered office with a 3 billion dollar deficit, but through spending cuts and removing corporate tax loopholes he had a $700 million surplus and was still able to cut taxes. That’s the kind of management America needs and is looking for. The difficult thing with Romney however is his religion. If you don’t know about Mitt Romney and had just read this paragraph, you’d think he sounds great. However, many people automatically rule him out as a viable candidate once they hear that he is Mormon. He would be a great candidate; the republicans would just have to see if other Conservatives could be tolerant.
3. Which Republican candidate do you think Obama would have the easiest time beating and why?
Sarah Palin. No question. Once she was up on the ticket, she was a target from the Obama campaign during the 2008 election. Her extreme lack of experience overshadowed and nullified any arguments that McCain’s side had about their opponent on the same issue. However, McCain was running then, not her. Now that she is running however, she will be torn apart by her opponents. After the mass media coverage of the attacks by democrats and even other republicans, many bandwagon Paliners will “Refudiate” her and jump right off.
1. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Refudiate
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin
3. http://hubpages.com/hub/2012-Republican-Candidates
4. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/21/AR2010112103779.html?hpid=topnews
5. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2012-republican-presidential-candidates-abc-news-guidebook/story?id=12164311
6. http://2012.presidential-candidates.org/
1. The Republicans need to take advantage of the seats they gained in the midterm elections and stir up public support for the Republican Party. The Republicans can take this time to use the seats they gained in the House to push for legislation that will lower corporate taxes, reductions in Social Security, as well as cost-conscious changes to Medicaid and Medicare (3). By limiting government spending, the Republicans can try to gain some public support from people who disagree with many of the liberal decisions that the Obama administration has passed. Republicans who plan on running for president in 2012 need to make allies with members in Congress to gain more party favor before the 2012 presidential election. Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney have given a lot of money through PACs to help Republicans get elected into Congress and this helped strengthen their party ties and support (3). It is also important for potential Republican presidential candidates to show that they are reasonably similar to their party’s platform and are not too far to the right as to scare off moderate voters.
2. The Republicans should nominate Tim Pawlenty for their presidential candidate because he is known for crossing party lines and compromising with Democrats in Minnesota to enact changes, instead of staying strictly with his party (5). Some Republicans believed that Tim Pawlenty was not conservative enough in some of his policies, but he was still able to compromise with the Democrats and remained fairly conservative without separating himself from moderate and democratic voters. Tim Pawlenty would be a strong candidate because he appeals to some voters on both sides of the political spectrum, while still maintaining his conservative principles, without being too far right and scaring off more moderate voters.
3. President Obama would benefit if the Republicans put Sarah Palin as their presidential nominee in 2012. Many Palin supporters connect with her because they can relate to her on a more personal level instead of looking at her policies (4) and this reality star mentality that Palin has surrounded herself with has made her look less like a serious politician, and more like a person trying out for a reality show. The media has scrutinized and mocked Palin for the past couple years and some Republican voters admit that they didn’t vote for McCain in 2008 because they feared that Palin would become president due to McCain’s health and age (4).
1) http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/131593-sarah-palin-for-president?page=1#comments
2) http://www.nationaljournal.com/member/politics/palin-romney-show-republican-candidates-the-money-20101202
3) http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/02/the-left-and-the-coming-fiscal-crisis-get-in-the-game-before-it/
4)http://www.thebradentontimes.com/news/2010/11/10/national_government/possible_2012_republican_presidential_candidates/
5)http://www.thebradentontimes.com/news/2010/11/17/weekly_features/possible_2012_republican_presidential_candidates_part_2/
A Brief Note: Ms. Aby, in question 3, you refer to President Obama as “Obama” and not “President Obama” like you recommended to us earlier in the year! Tisk tisk, minus one point!
1. What should the Republicans do (and what should someone wanting to run for president do) to gear up for the 2012 presidential election?
The Republicans should definitely emphasize how they will deal with the biggest problems in the U.S. today, namely issues dealing with the economy. Arguably their biggest asset at this point is serving as an ideological contrast to the current administration. Many Americans have become fed-up with the administration, as made evident by the latest presidential approval ratings which put President Obama's approval at just 39% [1]. Politicians looking to make a bid in 2012 should make an effort to set themselves apart from the rest through equal amounts of refreshing idealogy and strong imagery that Americans can lean on, similar to that of former President Ronald Reagan in the 1980's.
2. Who should the Republicans put forward and why?
The Republican's should nominate a candidate that has proven themselves and has solutions to solve the problems that plague the average American today. Fundraising prowess is a must and will help spread the Republican message to the public. That being said, I believe either Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty would make fine Republican Presidential candidates in 2012. Both have proven their successes in different ways. Pawlenty was a Vice Presidential consideration of McCain's in 2008. Since then, he has made several moves to position himself for the nomination like deciding not to enter the gubernatorial race in Minnesota and raising millions of dollars through his Freedom First organization [3]. Romney already saw success in 2008 as he was one of the leading candidates for the Republican Presidential nomination[3]. Since then he has been touring the country endorsing other politicians and silently gaining a lot of support [5]. Both men have also exhibited great fiscal decision making, being able to cut deficits without raising taxes [3].
3. Which Republican candidate do you think Obama would have the easiest time beating and why?
Although this may be the most obvious answer, Sarah Palin would be the easiest Republican candidate for President Obama to defeat in 2012. Palin has proven herself to be more of a celebrity than politician in recent months. In July, she announced her resignation from her position as Governor of Alaska with 18 months left in her term [4]. Her first experience under the national spotlight was as an average hockey mom turned politician with little political experience, ultimately became a key reason behind John McCain's failed presidential bid in 2008. Her popularity with Republican voters and fund raising ability are the sole reasons she should ever be considered by the Republican party as a potential presidential candidate. Still though, polls have shown that 71% of Americans believe that Palin would be unqualified to be president [2].
[1] http://www.examiner.com/libertarian-in-national/latest-poll-obama-s-approval-rating-dips-below-40
[2] http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/80729-poll-71-say-palins-unqualified-to-be-president
[3] http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69J52G20101020
[4] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp
dyn/content/article/2009/07/03/AR2009070301738.html
[5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB81WPy3Xe8
1. In order to prepare for the 2012 presidential election, the Republicans need to be as hard-line as possible. Voters see Democrats as in control of government policy, and will continue to hold them responsible for government performance through the 2012 election. John Feehery, a Republican strategist, summed up current politics pretty well: "The problems facing the country are Obama's problems, not Bush's problems" (14). With the approval ratings for Congress (3) and President Obama (4) so dismal, Republicans need to make sure that they remain the party of opposition in order to present a clear difference to voters fed up with the government.
Obviously, both parties will hop on a 302 mph bullet train (1) towards the center once late game campaigning starts in 2012 (2), but the actions of Republicans now will determine which party has the most pieces on the board when the game starts in 2012. Republicans have populist support in the form of the Tea Party because of the recent election and the party’s uncompromising attitude during the first two years of Democratic control. Although capitulating now would allow them to take some credit for positive policy in D.C., helping to win the support of moderates, the enthusiasm of the Republican base in the 2012 election will be a much more important contributor to their success in that election (13).
In the most immediate term, Republicans need to pin the expiration of the Bush tax cuts to Democrats and cast them as raising taxes, while still appearing to be fiscally responsible. By abstractly relating government spending to hurting the economy and still promising tax cuts, Republicans can quickly establish a voting record on which to shout about come 2012.
2. In my opinion, the Republicans’ success in the 2012 election will depend mostly on the public’s perception of the state of the economy at that time, bar some epic disaster/scandal. If the Republicans stand a viable chance of winning (i.e. the economy continues to flounder), they should nominate a sensible moderate with few apparent ties to Washington. However, if the economy improves by 2012 and Obama will be reelected, they probably don’t want to sacrifice such a good candidate, and should run someone to give them the best chance in 2014 and 16.
According to numbers alone, Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney actually would beat President Obama in a head-to-head election held now (5), the only Republican to do so. I’m going to go ahead and say the Republicans should nominate him. I’d rather not dwell on things that could go well for Republicans in 2012. However, I don’t think Romney stands a chance of being nominated: He has a history of casting himself as very moderate, and also a history of involvement in government, including a failed bid for the GOP nomination in 2008 (15).
As eloquently stated by The Huffington Post (it’s liberal), “If the last quarter century of Republican Politics have demonstrated anything it is that the party's capacity to move rightward and still win elections should never be underestimated” (13). Evidently, people are mad. The Republicans need somebody with populist appeal who can pander to the Republican base, who has the connections in Washington to be a viable candidate for nomination, but has no ties to “Washington politicians,” and who can instantly flip to the moderate in order to be viable in the general election. Ha! I’ve proven they have no chance! Now I can rest easy ignoring the 9.8% unemployment statistic.
3. Before researching for this question, I was going to say Sarah Palin. Now that I didn't, you all have to respond to me. Her gaffs during the 2008 election, the historical failure of once-failed candidates, and her none-too-moderate political views seemed to make her a laughable candidate (13). Then, however, I found a poll by Quinnipac University, which states that given a choice between Palin and Obama, 40% of voters would pick Palin and 48% Obama (5). While still a landslide, this is much greater support than I really expected for “Mama Grizzly,” and when one makes brash statements of fact with one’s 18 years of political experience to predict events 2 years into the future, one considers skin-crawling consequences alongside slim chances, and appropriately changes one’s blog post to not jinx anything. Her wildly popular books, TV appearances, and speeches coupled with a five million viewer television show (6) and Bristol Palin’s bizarre success on Dancing With the Stars (7) suggest that her support, if only among the base, is strong.
Of course, I’m not suggesting that Palin would be the best candidate for the GOP to run in 2012. For Palin to lose to Obama by an 8% margin even in the current political climate, along with the precedent for campaign failures created in 2008 (8), shows that Sarah Palin has no chance in the 2012 election. However, she has potential to be an excellent tool for stirring up the Republican base (13).
Ok. Back on track. I think that Obama’s favorite candidate for the 2012 election would be John Boehner, soon to be Speaker of the House (9). I concede, he looks presidential (10). He can string a sentence together. He has prominence within the Republican Party, and he’s just received the support of the Republican caucus being selected for Speaker. He’s a fair candidate, which I think is implied by this question, or I would have said a brick. However, the best I can find about Boehner as a 2012 candidate on the internet is a few Facebook pages and forum discussions. I think Boehner would make a beast candidate for Obama because he represents current Congressional leadership for the Republicans. In 2012, the Senators elected in the Democratic landslide of 2006 will be the key Democratic asset at stake (11). I honestly don’t think Obama will have a gigantic problem winning the presidency, bar epic disaster/scandal/sucky economy. If worse comes to worst, he can start a war and say we have to “stay the course” (12). Boehner would serve as a relatively conservative face that Democrats could use to make the poster boy of the Republican Party and proceed to destroy, helping their Senate chances. Of course, this is ridiculous. That’s the point.
(1)http://landing.newsinc.com/shared/video.html?freewheel=69016&sitesection=ndnsubss&VID=23215095
(2)http://rdc1.net/forthcoming/medianvt.pdf
(3)http://www.gallup.com/poll/144419/Congressional-Approval-Elections.aspx
(4)http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/gallup-daily-obama-job-approval.aspx
(5)http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1538
(6) http://www.mediaite.com/tv/the-grizzly-roars-sarah-palins-alaska-debut-beats-conan/
(7)http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20443659,00.html
(8)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbQwAFobQxQ
(9)http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11/17/john-boehner-elected-next-speaker-of-the-house/
(10)http://www.blogcdn.com/www.politicsdaily.com/media/2010/11/john-boehner-speaker-427mh1117.jpg
(11)http://www.rollcall.com/issues/56_49/-200722-1.html
(12)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEfxRfl03b4
(13)http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lincoln-mitchell/the-republican-party-and_b_791902.html
(14)http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/gop/strategist_gop.html
(15)http://thephoenix.com/boston/news/96976-new-and-improved-romney/
This comment has been removed by the author.
(1) There are many things the Republicans need to do in order to get ready for the 2012 elections. One thing the Republicans need to do is to stay focused on the issues at hand and not the their party morals. Bruce Ash, the National Republican committeeman for Arizona, warns that care must be taken by the GOP so the issues “don’t slip away from us.”(1) This means that in order for the Republicans to keep their party on the rise, they will have to keep the most pressing problems of the country at the top of their to-do list. This would prove very beneficial to the Republicans in the 2012 presidential elections because it would show the United States that the Republicans care about what the people need and want. Another thing that the Republicans need to do is reach out to the Democrats and keep trying to make compromises in the legislature. Bruce Ash again gives a very compelling argument as to why this needs to be done. He says that governing requires reaching across the aisle without losing the Republican Party’s values.(1) This means that in order for the Republicans to keep their winning record for the 2012 presidential elections they will have to be willing to compromise with the Democrats to get things done. Anyone who wants to run for the Republican nomination should, in my opinion, be willing to do these things.
(2) I would say to nominate Mike Pence. He is a very conservative player and seems very strong as a candidate. One of his friends talks about him and his talents as a political figure saying that Pence is a solid conservative on the range of issues conservatives care about and is the only candidate who can "seamlessly meld" the sometimes adversarial Tea Party and establishment wings of the GOP "without too much friction."(2) This is very beneficial as the Tea Party thinks that the conservatives of today are too moderate and it would be good to have someone who can make discussions happen without too much burn on either side.
(3)I would say to stay away from Sarah Palin. She is nothing but trouble. On Glen Beck's radio show she said that we have to stand with our North Korean allies.(3) We are not allies with North Korea and that is not likely to change until Kim Jong Il is dead. She also gave the reason that her state's proximity to Russia gave her foreign policy experience.(3) Although she does seem to be getting support for being in the Tea Party, she is still a ticking time-bomb in the political world.
1)http://www.svherald.com/content/news/2010/11/20/republicans-assess-what-s-changed-what-hasn-t-and-what-lies-ahead
2)http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-turn/2010/12/why_mike_pence_will_run_in_201.html
3)http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/11/24/2010-11-24_sarah_palin_on_glenn_becks_radio_show_we_gotta_stand_with_our_north_korean_allie.html
It’s obvious that it would be easiest for President Obama to beat Sarah Palin in the 2012 Presidential election. I don’t see how anyone can take her seriously as a politician. She has her own reality show, that can’t be good for a political career. I don’t see Palin being nominated by the Republican Party in 2012 because they can’t be stupid enough to believe that she has a chance at all, she couldn‘t even complete her term as governor. Republicans need to prove that they can make changes that can help the country, through there control in the House. Someone interested in running for president in 2012, needs to get their name out their so the public knows who they are. Maybe it’s just because I’m a Minnesotan, but I think Tim Pawlenty has a real shot at getting nominated. He’s conservative, but was able to get elected in a state that tends to vote liberal. This shows that he’s a moderate conservative that’s able to compromise. Also he balanced a 4.3 billion dollar deficit without raising taxes which is important in this economy.(2) I feel that Tim Pawlenty is a good option for the Republican nominee.
(1)http://www.newsweek.com/2010/01/01/the-anti-obama.html
(2) http://2012.presidential-candidates.org/biography
In Response to Caitlin:
Unfortunately, I do not agree with your choice for who should run for president. I don’t exactly think that Sarah Palin would be the best choice, or even a good choice. You said she has nationwide recognition and attention, but unfortunately it is not positive. Sarah Palin has successfully given herself the image of a person who is not very intelligent. People want to vote for a candidate who they feel is more intelligent than they are but I don’t think people feel this way about her. If anything, her attention is the big thing that will make it impossible for her to ever win. Although she might be fit to govern Alaska, I highly doubt she would be suitable for the country as a whole [1]. Although she has a fresh perspective, I don’t believe many republicans would actually go for it. I do agree that Jon A. Greenspon would not be a formidable candidate. Unfortunately, I find him a better candidate then Sarah Palin because with her vast amount of negative publicity, I would argue that it would be better to be unknown.
[1] http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/12/02
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home