- Mitt Romney – Gov. Romney remains in the best position to win the GOP nomination, however the fallout from Gov. Mike Huckabee’s clemency of a cop killer may hurt Romney as well. If the clemency problems force Huckabee out of the race, then Gov. Sarah Palin could consolidate social conservative support in the early states and pose a serious threat to Romney’s chances. On the other hand, Romney has held steady throughout the year, experiencing none of the problems that have plagued his potential rivals. That doesn’t mean that trouble isn’t rearing it’s head around the corner. Gov. Romney’s healthcare plan will likely loom large throughout the next year, with the New Hampshire Union Leader firing the first major shot across the bow in a recent article that also showed signs of support for another Romney rival, Gov. Tim Pawlenty. Although this is a major hurdle, Romney’s rivals also have major obstacles, from Gov. Palin’s resignation, Gov. Pawlenty’s cap-and-trade problems, to Gov. Huckabee’s clemencies. Whomever handles these problems the best will likely be the front-runner come 2012. For now, Gov. Romney is in the best position to do that.
- Tim Pawlenty – Minnesota’s governor has made some significant moves in his pursuit of the 2012 nomination. He has created a PAC, Freedom First, and announced several major hires from previous campaigns. He has also taken direct aim at both Barack Obama’s and Mitt Romney’s healthcare plan, likely to be a favorite line of attack as Pawlenty sets out to overtake 2012 frontrunner. He is quickly becoming an establishment alternative to Romney, and attracting early insider support. His efforts have earned him some early praise from key players in 2012, namely an early indication of support by the influential New Hampshire Union Leader. With Palin and Huckabee potentially leaving politics behind in pursuit of success on television and other areas, Pawlenty now appears to be Romney’s top rival. However, any indication that Palin and/or Huckabee may break their Fox News contract and return public life would instantly make the campaign more difficult for the Minnesota governor.
- John Thune – Senator Thune continues to quietly build for a 2012 run. While having no announced opponent yet for his 2010 reelection bid, Sen. Thune still has amassed an impressive war chest, retained a top-level campaign manager, started a PAC, and fundraised for candidates in Iowa. Slowly but surely the media is beginning to catch on, with new profiles about the junior senator from South Dakota appearing on CNN, The New York Times and The Washington Post. Thune’s social conservative credentials could also allow him to join the chorus of candidates likely to benefit from Huckabee’s problems. Thune brings both the social conservative credentials needed to win over the early states like Iowa, as well as significant establishment support that is needed for overall success in the primaries. With other conservative candidates seemly leaving politics for careers in media, Thune is rising quickly to potentially fill the void, with both his intangibles, his giant-killer reputation, and his conservative credentials leading the way.
- Sarah Palin – After taking hits early on, Palin has stormed back with her wildly successful book, Going Rogue, and has seen a marginal increase in her numbers among republicans and independents. But the success of her book is not the most important factor in her return to contention, but rather the damaging clemency revelations that could mortally wound Gov. Huckabee’s political career. Palin can now galvanize the social conservative movement behind her, making the former Alaska governor the overwhelming front-runner in the all important Iowa Caucuses. This potential, as well as a natural base of support in South Carolina, could help the governor build an unstoppable momentum towards the nomination. However, her decision to sign a multi-year contract with Fox News seems to indicate that Palin could very well leave political office behind, instead choosing to remain in the private sector writing books and becoming a TV star. Due to these tempting private sector opportunities, Palin as well as Mike Huckabee may forgo political office all together, deciding to stay active politically more as pundits and celebrity conservatives. These opportunities are why I feel Palin is now less likely to run, and therefore why she is being dropped in the rankings.
- Newt Gingrich – The former Speaker may have lost some face with the conservative base in endorsing Dede Scozzafava in the NY-23 election, but he may have gained support from the crucial GOP establishment. Despite the Speaker’s impressive resume and historic electoral successes, his bombastic past still leaves many in the establishment wary. But being a team player in NY-23 may get the establishment on board the Gingrich train, granting the former Speaker a chance to make history and complete a legendary comeback. Nixon accomplished it, and Newt may be next. With Palin and Huckabee potentially staying out of the 2012 field, Gingrich could potentially rally the base and become an alternative to the more moderate Romney and Pawlenty. He has recently mentioned himself as a potential 2012 contender and also plans to release a new Contract with America, which could be the policy foundation for his presidential bid.
- Mike Huckabee – The former Arkansas governor has run into serious trouble with the revelation that he granted clemency to notorious cop-killer Maurice Clemmons. The sheer amount of clemencies and pardons is jarring, with the governor having granted more clemencies and pardons then several surrounding states’ governors combined. The volume alone would lead you to believe that Clemmons will not be the last we hear of the people released or commuted by Governor Huckabee. While Huckabee’s die-hard supporters will likely stick by their man allowing his poll numbers to hold steady, this will certainly come back to haunt him, as rivals hammer the former governor with his poor judgment in these cases. A GOP establishment already wary of Huckabee now has the last reason they will ever need to abandon him completely, and will work to force him from the 2012 race. If Huckabee was reluctant to leave his TV show before this news broke, I imagine his Fox News deal will grow only more enticing as the primaries get closer. The promise of a lucrative private sector career on TV and radio may prove too much to surrender for another run for office, a temptation now shared by Huckabee’s new Fox News colleague, Sarah Palin.
- Haley Barbour – Governor Barbour is perhaps the greatest strategist in the party. He showed off that talent earlier this month, helping to lead two GOP candidates to victory in Virginia and NJ, a great start for the head of the RGA. With his sights set on major races all over the country in 2010, from California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Michigan, Florida, and Texas, Gov. Barbour could not only continue to help revive the party but could also collect enough chits along the way to make himself a strong contender in 2012. With Speaker Gingrich’s mishap in NY-23, it could be Gov. Barbour who emerges as the 1994′er to lead a new generation of Republicans back to power, and himself to the White House.
- Rick Perry – The long serving Texas Governor has bounced back from poor early polls to take a solid lead in the GOP primary against Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. A successful primary followed by likely reelection will help raise Gov. Perry’s profile further in the national party. He is already winning populist support for his anti-Washington screed, and won the endorsement of Gov. Palin. But it’s his state’s strong economy that just might push the Texas Governor into contention. As blue states like California and New Jersey head into spiraling fiscal crisis, Texas stands as a strong example of successful conservative economics in the face of a President pushing tax-and-spend liberalism. This factor, combined with a long, experienced career can put Perry in a very strong position. The uniting of the Tea Party base and his large, deep-pocketed Texas donors would give him a strong chance in the early states.
- Mike Pence - The conservative Indiana congressman is a rising star in the GOP, and now more then ever he seems to be gearing up for a potential 2012 presidential bid. Rep. Pence’s intentions have been tough to read due to the multiple opportunities for higher office currently within his reach. In 2012, both the governorship and Richard Luger’s senate seat could be open, and due to the unpopular Obama agenda even Sen. Evan Bayh could be vulnerable in a 2010 race. Despite these potential opportunities, it appears Pence has a bigger office in mind. The recent additions to his campaign team, notably Phil Gramm, Ed Meese, and Tony Perkins as advisors and Kellyanne Conway as a campaign strategist, seem to indicate Pence will aim for the 2012 presidential nomination. With his conservative credentials, his Tea Party connections, and his strong communication skills, Pence could be a real dark horse, especially if Palin or Huckabee pass on the race.
- Jeb Bush – The former Florida governor has been more active of late, stumping recently in Ohio for GOP candidate John Kasich, and fundraising for other candidates around the country. As Obama’s numbers get worse and the Bush brand slowly rebuilds, talk of Jeb returning to public life is growing. He still commands the vast Bush network, and is increasingly gathering chits by fundraising in key races around the country. The biggest potential chit, however, remains his potential endorsement of Marco Rubio in the Florida senate primary, an endorsement that could put Rubio over the top while also endearing the more moderate Bush brother to the conservative grassroots. Such a high profile, high reward endorsement could push Jeb right back into the 2012 spotlight.
Honorable Mention: Rudy Giuliani, Mitch Daniels, Eric Cantor, George Pataki, Dick Cheney, Bobby Jindal, Gary Johnson, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum
Follow Max Twain on Twitter.
January 16th, 2010 at 12:04 pm
Very good analysis and spot on. While there is a still a long ways off, I don’t see anyone at the moment being a real challenge to Romney. However, Nature and Politics don’t like a vacuum, so some one may step up, perhaps Pawlenty, but for right now.
Tier 1: Romney
Tier 2: Pawlenty, Thune
Tier 3: Gingrich.
Potential Tier 1: Jeb Bush, should he decide to actually run
Not running, Huckabee and Palin (as stated above). If either decide to run, they would move up to Tier 1.5 (as their negatives will keep them just below Tier 1 status).
The rest are not even worth talking about.
January 16th, 2010 at 12:13 pm
With Coleman looking at a comeback in Minn., I think we should add him to the list. I think he would be an instant frontrunner. Jewish, moderate but prolife, articulate.
January 16th, 2010 at 12:31 pm
I would quibble about Sarah Palin and her Fox job. She has yet to prove herself there. Sure, she wowed her faithful in her first couple of appearances, but does she have staying power? After the novelty of her being on TV wears off, will she be able to make a success of it? Just because Mike Huckabee has been successful at it, that by no means makes it certain she will.
Let’s see how this experiment is working six months from now in July.
January 16th, 2010 at 12:33 pm
3. Die-hard Romney fan here. However, we have got to remember how Republicans are nominated. Historically, the person who wins two out of the first three states wins the nomination, with special emphasis placed on South Carolina. Now tell me, how does Romney win Iowa or South Carolina. He could most certainly win NH, but the folks in South Carolina would rather vote for the devil than a Mormon. Especially a Mormon from Mass.
Remember, Rudy tried to skipped those first states (Romney situation is not quite as dire), so this makes me hesitate in my confidence that Romney automatically wins.
January 16th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
How does someone get on the front page saying ridiculous things like Huckabee dropping out would be bad for Romney? Like having a religion based relentless and disrespectful critic not show up could hurt.
January 16th, 2010 at 12:49 pm
Not sure why I put a 3. on my 4 comment. Sorry, Mark, I was addressing what you said.
January 16th, 2010 at 12:51 pm
Petraus would be tier one if he declared.
January 16th, 2010 at 12:56 pm
how the heck is pawlenty ahead of palin. the guy is a Captian Zero.
January 16th, 2010 at 12:59 pm
Health care will be one of the issues on which the Democrats are most vulnerable. The elephant in the room is Romneycare. Do you really think the Republicans are going to take this issue off the table by picking a candidate who is vulnerable himself? I cannot see the grassroots movement and Tea Party folks being content with Romney as their candidate. Think outside the box and look for a candidate that can harness the frustration of the grassroots and is a fairly fresh face. Who will be the national Scott Brown? I believe this nomination can be won by Thune or Daniels if they make a run.
January 16th, 2010 at 1:05 pm
9. Ironically, you asked ‘Who will be the national Scott Brown?’ who is many ways a mini-Romney, and who supports Romneycare. Yet, this comes question comes after you disparaged Romney.
However, I do understand your point that Romney has to effectively defend his health care policies if he wants to win.
January 16th, 2010 at 1:07 pm
#4. No need to worry about Romney losing IA or SC. NV votes the same day as SC, and Romney will take NV in a landslide greater than he did in 2008 – in which he got 51% of the vote. Also, Jim DeMint is a strong supporter of Romney and he could help Romney get more votes there.
January 16th, 2010 at 1:10 pm
11. I wished a shared your confidence. I used to live in SC and I went to Bob Jones University. The rural evangelicals (not from BJU) will not vote for Romney. DeMint supported Romney last time, and Romney came in fourth. And Nevada, quite frankly, doesn’t matter.
I think Romney has to win Michigan and Florida and NH in order to win. It is a lot riskier strategy.
January 16th, 2010 at 1:17 pm
11. Romney will win handily in NV, but will NOT win by the same margin. In 2008, NV was a caucus and Romney installed a quality team there early. Only Ron Paul later added a single staffer. Otherwise, no other campaign created anything other than ad hoc volunteer committees. The result was that Romney was able to control almost every district.
In 2012, it is expected that NV will go back to a primary. I fully expect Romney to win by a large margin, building on the organization from 2008, but it will be less than 50%. Other than Palin, there does not appear to be a natural western candidate in the race at this point. (If Palin runs, I believe she will give Romney a very good race in NV.)
January 16th, 2010 at 1:19 pm
It doesn’t seem all that democratic to me that certain states continue to get a disproportionate say in who becomes the nominee due to their protected status as first voter states–I’m amazed it continues to be tolerated.
8. I think i’s quite a subjective call at this point whether Sarah actually decides to run. This post isn’t specifically about who’d be the most likely candidate assuming all decide to run–Sarah would be higher up as you suggest. Whether or not they’re likely to run in the poster’s opinion plays a factor in the rankings.
January 16th, 2010 at 1:20 pm
Romney/Pawlenty/Thune are ahead of Palin/Huckabee because those 3 seem to be very committed to public office while the other two seem to have other interests in careers that will draw them away from public office.
This ranking does not mean Pawlenty or Thune are more popular with the GOP then Palin or Huckabee, but rather they are more likely to win because they may actually run while it seems that Palin and Huck seem to be leaning against a run.
January 16th, 2010 at 1:22 pm
Yet, McCain won SC last time. There are not enough rural evangelicals to stop a legitimate candidate. But, if these rural Evangelicals vote against Romney purely based on Religion, it would demise any victory by another candidate and put them in a bad light. The bigger risk will actually be to South Carolina legitimacy as a picker of Nominees.
January 16th, 2010 at 1:41 pm
14,16. I would be in favor of trading SC with Florida. That way, you got one rural, socially conservative state (Iowa), one Northern, more fiscally-oriented state (NH), and one hodgepodge of everything (Florida). That seems to be the most democratic way of doing it.
January 16th, 2010 at 1:44 pm
16. The average Southern Baptist Evangelical is not thinking about SC’s legitimacy as a picker of Nominees when he goes into the booth. Furthermore, McCain is not Mormon. Romney as a Mormon from Mass. would rank lower than McCain, who has actually fought against some social conservative causes. Sounds crazy? Yes. But this is how it is.
January 16th, 2010 at 1:58 pm
#4,
DeMINT will do anything and everything possible to win SC for Romney. Perhaps even enter the primary there as a favorite son? Anything is possible as long as it works
ROMNEY / DeMINT in 2012!
January 16th, 2010 at 2:11 pm
The reason that SC has been seen in the past as legitimizes is because it has seemed some what fair, but if it comes down to religious bigotry, there will be a backlash against SC, so that its vote will not to be seen as legit. But, I have more faith in my fellow republicans to think that voters will do whats best for the Country.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:22 pm
Max,
I think you read too much into private sector pursuits. One isn’t necessarily inconsistent with running for the presidency. Just look at the guy you supported last time around. Without getting into an analysis of his eventual campaign, that he was pretty active with his non-political activities didn’t seem to indicate to anyone that he wasn’t running for the presidency in 2008.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:24 pm
We’ve already got people playing the religion card in South Carolina. Do you have a scientific poll from South Carolina that supports your argument?
January 16th, 2010 at 2:29 pm
#20:
There is no evidence that religion had anything to do with the way South Carolina voted last time or will vote next time. If religion was the main factor in South Carolina, then Huckabee would have won the state easily.
Romney slit his own wrists in South Carolina last time. He essentially abandonded the state to shore up Nevada while McCain, Huckabee and Thompson all stumped there like crazy heading into the primary. It isn’t South Carolina’s fault that Romney decided to not campaign there. I would advise the Romney supporters to not play the religious victim card before there has actually been a poll out of South Carolina showing it to be a factor.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
22. Not I don’t. Most people aren’t going to say in a poll that they won’t vote for somebody because they are Mormon. My argument stems strictly from me having lived in South Carolina for six years and Tennessee for 18 years.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
21. Spot-on comment, Tommy.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
23. Romney bailed on SC because he knew he wasn’t going to come close to winning. He had been actively campaigning there since 2006, but right before the elections he went to Nevada to try to deflect attention from SC. Didn’t work.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:38 pm
23. I agree. Sounds like a few are being divisive here and playing the religious card much too often. Where are their facts?
January 16th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
26. Exactly right, Pablo.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
I don’t think Romney’s done a single thing to help himself other than not self-destruct (which Huckabee and Palin and Sanford and Jindal have all done in varying degrees).
Romney’s out of the limelight, but once he gets back in, a smart conservative will nail him on Romenycare and all the flip-flops, and he’ll drop to 3rd place in no time.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:44 pm
27. I have no facts, only anecdotal evidence. And I hope that you are right. But surely you would admit that a lot people vote for cultural reasons. Why did Huck go hunting two days before the Iowan election? Does hunting have anything to do with being President? No. But there are a lot of hunters in Iowa. Huck judged that two days before the elections, his time would be better served by going hunting as opposed to holding a town-hall meeting and talking about the issues. I am not blaming Huck, it was a good strategy. People tend to vote on how they relate culturally to candidates, not necessarily on substance that relates to being President.
Please tell me how I am wrong.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:46 pm
29. I have a strong feeling that Mitt knows this, too.
RomneyCare is his Achilles’ heel…
Romney’s fatal weakness.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:46 pm
#26:
Who’s to say that religious bigotry was a factor? Both McCain and Huckabee had momentum from their wins in New Hampshire and Iowa respectively. Thompson had campaigned there since Iowa. Romney had only won Michigan, which was expected and didn’t help him in the horse-race. Momentum and perception were much bigger factors than religion.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:47 pm
http://republicanrankings.blogspot.com/ New 2012 Rankings!
January 16th, 2010 at 2:47 pm
Flip, it’s truly sad so many people like yourself DO NOT understand our Constitution and the concept of Federalism. If you did, you wouldn’t find Romneycare such a heinous thing, or even comparable to this evil monstrosity called Obamacare. Read the 10th Amendment and choke on it. Regardless, the Mass. legislature would have voted on “Romneycare” with or without Romney’s help.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
I think you miss interpreted my point. However, lets be clear. While I agree Religion was not necessarily the deciding factor, it was a factor. A certain percentage of voters voted for Huckabee primarily because of he was a baptists minister, and a certain percentage didn’t vote for Romney because of Religion. One would have to be hiding under a Rock to think otherwise. However, I do agree there where many dynamics being played and certainly Romney did down play SC. Do I think that many voters will vote against Romney because of Religion? Yes! Are there many voters who voted against Huckabee because he played the Religious card? Yes! Did Romney’s 2008 strategy play a part in 2008 and especially SC? Yes! Did Religion play a part in who the eventual nominee was in 2008? Yes! But that’s life! Frankly if Romney and Huckabee could have found a way to team up instead of attack each other, then McCain would never would have won the nomination. Huckabee appears to have mis-calculated. He thought if he takes out Romney for McCain, McCain would pick him as his VP. But his actions actually dis-qualified him for McCain, because it would have alienated Romney’s people (its also why Romney was not selected, as not to upset Huckabee’s people.)
However, in the end, Religion played a part in the out come 2008, but doesn’t mean Romney can’t over come even in SC in 2012 or that Religion will be the deciding factor. 2012 will be more about finding someone who can fix the nations problems and who can defeat Obama. As of now, that shapes up to be Romney.
January 16th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
If what you are saying is true about SC and the rural south, Romney will definitely have to pick Jim DeMint as his running mate. Not that it would be bad thing! DeMint seems to be one of the few people in Congress to have a set of cajones on them!!
Romney/DeMint 2012!!!
January 16th, 2010 at 2:56 pm
#35:
Then there should be no argument that Romney won a state like Utah BECAUSE of his Mormon faith. If Huckabee were to run and for some reason win the Utah primary, wouldn’t that be an example of a state “overcoming religious difference” in voting for someone who is from a different faith then the majority of Utah voters?
January 16th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
#33,
Fl, PA, SC for Palin?
I suppose everyone should have something to HOPE FOR as long as one knows that some things don’t always work out the way you HOPE!!!!
January 16th, 2010 at 3:07 pm
Hunting is good, Pablo.
Even for varmints like Mitt says he likes to hunt…
(Btw, you don’t need a hunting license to hunt for non game animals; such as varmints. Could someone tell old Rom.)
But, you’re right, it’s about the issues. And I believe this will be an extremely close race to START 2012 among Mitt/Tim/Mike* OR Sarah*/Tim/Mitt but whomever takes 2 of 3 from IOWA-NH-SC is sitting pretty and should cruise on into the nomination,, imho.
Note: I think ONE of my top two will remain at FOX. (Probably Sarah)
January 16th, 2010 at 3:10 pm
29,
I’m from MA and JUST LOVE, RomneyCare. Especially the MANDATE that forces Massachusetts’ share of the 18 Million of nationwide DEADBEATS to purchase Health Insurance that they can afford
January 16th, 2010 at 3:11 pm
Yes, and had Mitt gone hunting, we would have known exactly what he would have looked like. John Kerry.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
41. lol THAT was funny.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:14 pm
41,
Your right! No one can GUT A SQUIRREL like MIKE
January 16th, 2010 at 3:16 pm
40. Yes!!!!!!!!
EXACTLY like Obama is trying to do with ObamaCare = RomneyCare.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:19 pm
41. Making fun of hunters probably won’t work if you’re trying to get elected outside of say… San Francisco or Berkeley.
Just a little friendly advice, Bosman.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:19 pm
44,
It Works for Me in M A S S A C H U S E T T S
We also have more competition among Ins Companies. NO PUBLIC OPTION
January 16th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
41,
Making fun of week end hunters probably won’t work if you’re trying to get elected outside of say… Little Rock or Nashville.
Just a little friendly advice, Sarah & Mike: Fox Superstars.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:24 pm
44,
Making fun of week end hunters probably won’t work if you’re trying to get elected outside of say… Little Rock or Nashville.
Just a little friendly advice, Sarah & Mike: Fox Superstars.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
45,
Making fun of week end hunters probably won’t work if you’re trying to get elected outside of say… Little Rock or Nashville.
Just a little friendly advice, Sarah & Mike: Fox Superstars.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
46. There’s no public option in the current ObamaCare that’s likely to go through, either.
But there are a plethora of mandates..
just like RomneyCare.
Look, my friend, we’ll just have to agree to disagree on whether or not mandates are Conservative. I say they’re definitely not. But I respect your right to think otherwise.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
50. I don’t want to hijack the post about mandates again. But… Mandates is just another way of saying requirements. We have requirements to own car insurance, we have requirements to pay taxes, we have a billion requirements. Health insurance seems to be a pet issue among some conservatives.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
I disagree that anyone not already committed to vote for Huckabee or Palin in a Southern state would not vote for Romney because he is a Mormon.
Are there folks that will hold that against him? Yes. But they do so because of their own set of religious priorities, which is going to have them backing Huckabee/Palin regardless.
A majority in every Southern state voted for John “Religious Right = Agents of Intolerance” McCain or Mitt “Mormon” Romney. On Super Tuesday that rose to nearly two thirds of each state. The South being dominated by Pat Robertson types, even in a Republican primary, is drastically overstated. I’d say Iowa, thanks to its caucus system, is more prone to that than any Southern state is.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:44 pm
Your logic is somewhat flawed. Did Romney win in Utah partially because of his Mormon faith, Yes. However, that was not the deciding factor? No! For instance, Harry Reid could not win Utah even though he is Mormon, and Evangelical running against Harry Reid in Utah would win (unless its Huckabee).
Huckabee shot himself in the foot when he played the Religion card in Iowa, and Mormon’s will be leery of him until he proves that he isn’t the religious bigot he appeared to be in 2008, which he does not seem to want to do.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:45 pm
Reply to 52: Well spoken and correct, IMHO.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
“Romney/Pawlenty/Thune are ahead of Palin/Huckabee because those 3 seem to be very committed to public office while the other two seem to have other interests in careers that will draw them away from public office.
This ranking does not mean Pawlenty or Thune are more popular with the GOP then Palin or Huckabee, but rather they are more likely to win because they may actually run while it seems that Palin and Huck seem to be leaning against a run.” Yes and no.
While, I would put Mr. Pawlenty at # 4 behind the big three. At least one can make a somewhat logical arguement that Mr. Pawlenty is # 2. Yes Mrs. Palin might not run (though I now lean towards the idea that she will run) and yes Mr. Huckabee might run into PAC troubles and the like. However, although I like Mr. Thune and have donated to him in the past, frankly, I find it entertaining that he is ranked ahead of Mrs. Palin and Mr. Huckabee. Few non-political junkies know who he is and I do not see how he can get a camp together at this point.
“Newt Gingrich – The former Speaker may have lost some face with the conservative base in endorsing Dede Scozzafava in the NY-23 election, but he may have gained support from the crucial GOP establishment.” With respect, I also find this entertaining. Mr. Gingrich was not exactly a winner before the Queen Dede afair, but if the establishment swells actually like this guy for backing Queen Dede, then we have even bigger problem. Head of even in sand, head is somewhere that we cannot say on TV. I for one will say this: If, M or M wins the primary, I’ll even put their lawn sign up for the general election (if my wife lets me.) however, if by some strange reason Mr. Gingrich win the primary, I do not think I waste any of my own tiny portion of political capital having his lawn sign on my lawn. The establishment may have lost their heads, but primary voters realize the general voters won’t touch this guy with a 10 foot poll.
January 16th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
#53:
Huckabee “played” the religion card in that he was able to rally evangelicals to him when the alternatives were all unappealing. Rudy was pro-choice, McCain’s history with evangelicals is well known, Thompson wasn’t in yet, and Romney appeared (fairly or not) to be a flip-flopper when it came to social issues that evangelicals hold dear. Huckabee, on social issues, could walk the walk and connect with evangelicals in a way that the others coudln’t. I still find it hard to believe the Romney theory of some massive anti-Mormon evangelical conspiracy in Iowa. The Hawkeye State has a large population of evangelicals and farmers. Why is it so hard to believe that they simply liked the Governor of Arkansas more than the Governor of Massachusetts?
January 16th, 2010 at 4:04 pm
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705358693/Corroon-gains-ground-from-Herbert.html
[November 2009 data]
Herbert (R) 48% [56%]
Corroon (D) 35% [32%]
January 16th, 2010 at 4:11 pm
Max,
Once again I completely disagree…but it is pointless to argue. You are wrong…completely wrong on these power rankings. Time to go home.
January 16th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
To put Pawlenty and Thune ahead of Palin is like saying the Detroit Lions are a better team that the Green Bay Packers and Minnesota Vikings. If you were a sports pundit and made such an observation you would be thrown out of the sports fraternity. To assert that Pawlenty and Thune without any credentials behind them should rate higher than Palin is downright ugly and offensive.
January 16th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
My rankings are the least biased and most accurate of any you’ll find on the web. Palin and Huckabee fans are usually too blinded by their passions to realize that both are leaning against a run. Considering Palin finished tied for 4th at last year’s CPAC poll, even before her multi-year Fox News contract, I think I’m being very generous.
Pawlenty and Thune are already better organized then Palin, and neither had to quit their jobs to build such organizations. Thune is a giant-killer, and Pawlenty has attracted big time buzz in the circles that matter most. Palin has done what? Had a great book tour and signed a TV deal, both indicators that she is less likely to reenter politics.
I know it’s tough for some people to follow these rankings, because most people can’t see but 5 minutes in front of their own faces, but by 2012 Palin’s 2009 book tour will mean jack. She is simply not making the kind of moves that indicate a presidential bid, and she has no more establishment support then she had a year ago. Check your history books again, grassroots candidates with no establishment backing who make a ton of gaffes don’t win GOP primaries. She has a lot of work to do to get the party on board with her and skipping CPAC (again) and signing TV deals doesn’t scream ’2012 run’ to anyone but her most loyal followers.
If she did the tough work behind the scenes, she would be right at the top of the list, but she’s not. Huckabee is doing slightly more work, but even he admitted he was less likely to run next time. Considering his clemency record, that’s almost a guarantee.
January 16th, 2010 at 5:25 pm
Actually my top 4 lineup with Intrade’s top 4, I just think Palin has dipped due to her contract signing.
January 16th, 2010 at 5:26 pm
Hey Max,
Your “Power Rankings” is a joke?Right?You can’t be serious,unless you’re in a dream world or “Twilight Zone”.
Gooooood Lord,
Tim Yawnplenty,Mitt Romney and John Thune are ahead of SARAH PALIN?!
Your thinking is based on premise that Huckabee and Sarah Palin will not run.
Well,if that’s what you(hope)think,than why put them on the list?!
You should’ve said:Here is my Power Rankings in case SARAHCUDA and Huckabee don’t run.
January 16th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
” most accurate of any you’ll find on the web ”
If you say so.
January 16th, 2010 at 5:31 pm
62. ” You should’ve said: Here is my Power Rankings in case SARAHCUDA and Huckabee don’t run. ”
Exactly.
Why play games just to put YOUR guy on top? Kinda obvious what you’re doin’ here.
January 16th, 2010 at 5:33 pm
#60:
I only have one quibble Max. I would swap Jeb for Mitch. It is no secret in Florida that Jeb likes Rubio and is not thrilled with Crist. Jeb may or may not endorse Rubio, but he’ll be quietly supporting him either way. I think that just shows that Jeb is still interested in Florida politics and in having some influence within the Florida Republican Party. I just think that Jeb knows that 2012 is far too soon n after his brother’s terms to run.
January 16th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Here’s mine if everyone shows up in Iowa for the showdown:
1. Huck …top rated weekend show more popular than ever (see PPP poll and others *where he remains on top month after month* due out shortly): not everyone got the memo that clemency is always bad
2. Palin …very closely behind Huck or could very well beat Mike
3. 4. Romney/Pawlenty …splitting votes (much like my top two)
5. Don’t matter …they’re wasting their time and $$$ if the four above run.
January 16th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
NEWS FLASH!!!!!!
Martha Coakley Call Kurt Schilling A Yankee’s Fan:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmNpcMHwOa8&feature=player_embedded
Schillings Response:
“But never, and I mean never, could anyone ever make the mistake of calling me a Yankee fan. Well, check that, if you didn’t know what the hell is going on in your own state maybe you could….”
http://38pitches.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/curt-schilling/general/2010/01/16/ive-been-called-a-lot-of-things/
She just BLEW any chance of a come from behind win
Prediction for TUESDAY:
BROWN 52
COAKLEY 45
KENNEDY 2
January 16th, 2010 at 5:46 pm
Mitch dropped off because he seems dead set against a run, and Jeb slightly more open to it.
Palin and Huckabee haven’t closed a door to a run which is why they are still on the list. But both have their attention elsewhere, while Romney is already running almost full-time.
Notice the Palin folks were not upset last month when she was #2, but they just can’t accept that there is a good chance she doesn’t get in. Charging a huge fee to attend a Tea Party convention and struggling to answer questions about the Founding Fathers also don’t help her. But if she had not signed a multi-year deal, a deal she will have to break to become a full-time candidate, then she would have held steady in the #2 spot.
Huckabee was moved down for two reasons, 1) his own admission that he may not run to stay in TV, and 2) the clemency problem will follow him to 2012. Even if Huckabee was all in, he still wouldn’t be near the top spots due to his poor fundraising and lackluster organization.
As for those who claim I support Romney, the claim is laughable. I didn’t support Romney at any point in 2008, but only a fool would ignore the frontrunner status he has worked for. Palin, like Martha Coakley, cannot just coast. She will have to out-work Mitt to win, and so far Mitt is miles and miles ahead. There is a reason that Mitt was welcome at rallies and fundraisers for McDonnell and Christie and Brown and Palin was not. She has a long way to go.
January 16th, 2010 at 5:49 pm
68,
Well said, and TRUE
January 16th, 2010 at 5:49 pm
There was a poll that had Obama besting George W. Bush 50-44. Not exactly a landslide. Considering that Jeb is far more articulate, equal or better at fundraising and orgainzing, and with a stronger lock on Florida, then you have to think that Jeb could compete, which is why I think you see Jeb in a swing state like Ohio working for Kasich. You don’t bring someone with the name of Bush to Ohio unless your internal polling says its ok to do so.
January 16th, 2010 at 6:04 pm
Pawlenty is way too high.
There is only one person (serious contender) I would bet my life won’t win and it’s T/Paw.
January 16th, 2010 at 6:05 pm
If Huck doesn’t run I guarantee a southern gov (Perry or Barbour) will run and will do well.
January 16th, 2010 at 6:09 pm
Any word yet why Mitt is dissing the SRLC?
January 16th, 2010 at 6:21 pm
I and none of millions of SARAH PALIN’s admirers are not upset at all of any of your
rankings.They don’t mean a thing,because they don’t make sense.
Max,I wonder what you said when SARAH PALIN made brilliant political move,Willy Brown
called her genius at the time(the best political instinct he’s ever seen),last July by resgining her
Alaska Governorship.
Did you applaud her move like I did,Willy Brown and many others?
Or did you agree with libs lunatics and RINOs that she’s politically dead,done,finished
forever and ever,until the end of time etc,etc….?
Just asking,just curious.
January 16th, 2010 at 6:32 pm
Max,
What’s so out of the ordinary about breaking a deal with Fox? Jon Kasich did it to run for governor of Ohio.
January 16th, 2010 at 6:34 pm
69. Max, you will never be able to explain to Palin fans the necessity of winning part of the establishment. They really believe that Palin can just cost in on her celebrity status. They also firmly believe that Palin is the “people’s choice” and any candidate that is liked by the establishment will never win. We will see.
January 16th, 2010 at 6:44 pm
Max,
Also, isn’t the “behind the scenes” stuff irrelevant for the wider Republican electorate as very few people outside Washington, DC are seeing it (hence, the phrase “behind the scenes”).
#75 If this poll from Rasmussen is right (and I don’t think it is, so take 10-15% off but the point I’m about to make remains), then it’s pretty clear that it’s not just “Palin fans” that think the establishment is out of touch…but rathern an overwhelming majority of Republicans nationwide.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2010/75_of_gop_voters_still_think_their_legislators_out_of_touch
January 16th, 2010 at 6:57 pm
Pablo,
You mean establishment that gave us Bush 41,mr “read my lipps,no new taxes”,Bob Dole,he was great,
wasn’t he.As a result of these two clowns we had Bill and Hillary to put up with for 8 years.
Then in 2000,establishment gave us mr RINO #43.
Two wars,destroyed economy,he outspent all democrat Presidents combined…..
In 2008 establishment gave us a real RINO,Johnny McCain.If it wasn’t for SARAH PALIN
Barak Obama would win with landslide.Even steve shmidt admits it.
OK,Pablo,amigo.
Now you want corupt,worthless establishment to give us another RINO.
Wich RINO loser is your first choice?
Just curious.
January 16th, 2010 at 7:01 pm
76. First of all, I admit I don’t understand why there is so much anger directed at the establishment. Republicans are doing everything they can to stop the Democrats and Obama. In fact, they are doing exactly what “the people” want them to do. I would love for you Palin fans to be a little bit more specific than this outsider, anti-establishment stupidity. What in God’s name do you want them to do?
Second, that is all beside the point. You cannot run a campaign without an infrastructure. It’s takes money, and people on the ground, and key endorsements. That is the way politics works. To quote Max, “grassroots candidates with no establishment backing who make a ton of gaffes don’t win GOP primaries.”
January 16th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
ok, Tex. How is Bush Sr. a rino? How is McCain a rino? In what way are they corrupt? McCain has been a consistent critic of the Obama administration. Please be specific.
January 16th, 2010 at 7:13 pm
I think that the term “rino” is not helpful to our party at all. Sorry.
January 16th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
#79 I think you were asking me that question?
If you were, I’d just respond that it’s not just “Palin fans” considering that the Rasmussen poll found 75% of all Republicans to hold the attitude described by several posters here (though I’m not sure what you mean by “Palin fans” because you could make an argument based on the polling that around 79% of the party is a “Palin fan” or you could just be referring to those who are telling pollsters that they would vote for her in a primary).
January 16th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
#78:
That is why you Palinistas and your candidate will never win the nomination. Trashing those of us who have even mild reservations about Palin and calling us “RINO’s” is no way to unify the party or take on the Democrats. Trashing our previous nominees, including two of them who became distinguished Presidents is not only historically ignorant, but stupid as well.
January 16th, 2010 at 7:24 pm
82. Yes, sorry, I was responding to your statement. And, yes, I agree that their is a great deal of anti-establishment sentiment out there. I also agree that there is anti-establishment sentiment among non-Palin fans also. You are exactly right. I apologize for not being clear.
I had two points. 1. I think that the anti-establishment sentiment is unfounded. 2. Whether people like it or not, a candidate still needs the establishment in order to win, even when there is a great deal of anti-establishment fervor.
I apologize for accusing only Palin fans of being anti-establishment, but it seems to me that Beck and Palin are the biggest proponents of it.
January 16th, 2010 at 7:30 pm
75% of Republicans think that the establishment has issues? Sure, I’m one of those.
But how many think the prescription to the illness is Sarah Palin, or more broadly, an insurgent conservative movement? Probably not nearly as many. She’s got room to grow, but as it stands now, Republicans are not all attending Tea Parties wanting us to burn our more moderate members. That’s a small minority, trumpeting themselves as a majority.
January 16th, 2010 at 7:34 pm
As I’ve said Palin and the Tea Party movement serve one and only one valuable purpose
To kick the establishment’s behind and remind them to shape up and act like responsible leaders. Thanks to that pressure the Republican Party has a strong impetus to reform itself, steer clear of corruption and politics for power’s sake alone, moderates and conservatives, and move forward.
When we have McDonnells, Christie’s, Rubio’s, and Brown’s, all solid leadership material, we will do just fine. And that’s what’s happened in race after race this year.
January 16th, 2010 at 7:35 pm
#85 Actually, Rasmussen, if you believe the poll, provides data as to why the 75% feels that way:
I think it’s fair to infer from these two data points that 73% (55/75) of the 75% that believe the establishment is out of touch feel that way because they feel that the party’s establishment is too liberal.
January 16th, 2010 at 7:42 pm
Pablo,
Bush Sr worked very hard to distance himself from Ronald Reagan and damage great man’s legacy.
He did it economicaly,attacked Iraq to save little emir,pervert with 69 “wives” in Kuwait.
Yes,he and his son W love to kiss those Arab perverts.
John McCain?God,where do I start?
Pablo,all you need to know is that John McCain wanted Joe Liberman as his choice for VP.
Joe Liberman???!!!
The man is very,very liberal Democrat.
But,there is a catch.They are both neocons.They believe that USA should attack and bomb every small,
defensless country that resist neocons “Diktat”,bomb,bomb,bomb,always in the name of spreading democracy,
OF COURSE.
John McCain is a neocon,far from conservative,far from Reagan conservatism.
Sorry to burst your buble Pablo,I hope we are still AMIGOS.
January 16th, 2010 at 8:10 pm
I hope Mittens appreciates all these love letters that Max Twain keeps sending him.
January 16th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
I think Tex Milan has crossed a number of lines.
January 16th, 2010 at 8:17 pm
Flip – I know you’re a grown woman. It’s sad to see you use such childish behavior.
January 16th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
Hey Nate,
What lines?!
Tell me what is not tru that I said.
Just because you don’t like what I say,it doesn’t mean that I’m wrong.
Unless you “show me the way”.
Thank God you are not lib.They just call us names,never back up their words.
So I’m sure you will tell me about those “lines”.
January 16th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
I think Tex Milan is someone’s alter-ego phony character having some cheap entertainment at our expense.
January 16th, 2010 at 8:41 pm
hamaca,
You attack me just like libs do.Only name calling and insults.
I hope you are not lib,so you will back up your words.It’s only fair,right?!
January 16th, 2010 at 8:42 pm
Palin is our Al Gore. Think about it. They both desperately want to stay releveant by responding to their critics or taking on polarizing issues (most politicains don’t have that luxury since they have to worry about governance and reelection). Palin and Gore can just pander to those that already agree with making them uber popular with the political activists. They both enjoy passionate and loyal followings whom they string along with subtle hints at presidential runs, but in the end, settle for the fame and fortune that is just too good to resist.
January 16th, 2010 at 9:11 pm
Lovenguth speaks for Lovenguth – January 16, 2010
I immersed myself into the Tea Party and found money hungry Republicans
The Tea Party movement is an excellent idea, concept, a call for Americans to return to the Constitution which every elected official swears to defend and uphold. Information has begun to surface which presents the real possibility that the Tea Party is just a concept being used by professional bloggers, to distract.
A below the surface search of the whois website registrations on networksolutions.com indicates many third party persons hiding behind website addresses which are traceable to Republican strongholds. It appears the Tea Party movement does speak out and bring to attention much that is negative with the current two party political systems in America.
The fact that there is much infighting as to who began this movement and who the leader is is now surfacing. What appears to be an attempt by certain bloggers to create an image of unity with political party type conventions, without any real efforts or support for a Tea Party candidate is showing itself.
An illusion can only sustain itself for so long. It is a great concept however, yet in actuality, it is an attempt by the Republican Party to get American citizens to forget who has dismantled the American way of life in the last administration. They appear to be focusing on calling for the ouster of Republicans and Democrats no longer of political use and calling for the replacements to be more corporation financed Republicans; all in the name of the Tea Party.
It seems to be working with the resigning of certain Republicans and Democrats who clearly were part of the last administrations selling off of America. This new movement uses words and images of old America yet they seek to get elected corporation financed Republicans. A true movement would support a candidate from the Tea Party but this isn’t the case. Perhaps one day when a number of states actually get the Tea political Party certified as a viable party who will actually endorse candidates who are not corporate financed, candidates who want to return to the system of check and balances, candidates who are for the citizens, then and only then will they be real.
For now, they are nothing more than a Republican blogging distraction.
If people would only get off the blogs and do some in-depth research they would see for themselves what is not there. There is no leadership, there is no real support, there is no unity, and there is no consensus on how to proceed. What there is however is a call to raise money to get Republicans elected in 2010. Same oh same oh with those folks.
I call out to American Veterans to file to become candidates in your state Elections this year. You do not need anyone or any Party permissions. That too is a falsehood. Get involved people. Get involved.
Jorge Lovenguth
January 16th, 2010 at 10:06 pm
Taylor,
To compare Al Gore,that lying,conniving,”global warming” crook,that sissy(Maureen Dowd said:”Al Gore is so
feminized,he’s lactating”),with ferocious and relentless moose,wolfs and Democrat AND REPUBLICAN(in Alaska)
crooks hunter,SARAHCUDA,is so stupid and idiotic,I will just leave it there.
Taylor,didn’t mean to offend you,but your comment is insult to all us Republicans,even
those that don’t like or even hate SARAH PALIN.
Any of our guys is far,far above that crook Al Gore.
January 16th, 2010 at 10:19 pm
Ha ha ha Palin like gore sooooo funny and soooo true
January 16th, 2010 at 10:55 pm
Sarah’s the antigore.
January 16th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
“Palin is our Al Gore.” Haha, yeah, one of them is for Energy Independence and the other believes in global warming. Nice try though.
January 16th, 2010 at 11:16 pm
Sarah & Mike:Fox Superstars,
Sarah’s the antigore.
Thanks,I couldn’t said it better.
January 16th, 2010 at 11:41 pm
I appreciate the rankings and the thought and analysis behind them. Whether or not they turn out to be accurate is beside the point–it’s not a popularity contest. A lot can happen in the next year or two and the discussions that follow are usually interesting to follow. I hope you keep them coming.
January 16th, 2010 at 11:57 pm
Huckabee was moved down for two reasons, 1) his own admission that he may not run to stay in TV, and 2) the clemency problem will follow him to 2012. Even if Huckabee was all in, he still wouldn’t be near the top spots due to his poor fundraising and lackluster organization. -Max Twain
Very Stupid of you Mr. Twain… (1) He was asked what was his most probable reason why he wouldn’t run, he gave a very objective answer. If he was asked why he would run, then he can also give a very objective answer. (2) Allegations of poor fundraising is outdated which means you are very ignorant in making this list. This emotions-based which is of course favorable to someone who gives you your bread and butter. Just because Romney has millions makes him a good fundraiser? You are nuts. Only few hundred voter give to him, while thousands give to MH. This point leads to your second allegation of “lackluster organization.” Team Huck is organized in almost all states in the USA FYI. We are busy campaigning for our candidates. We are principle-based group and not money-based(classic Romney-ism)
Well, let’s just see how stupid you and your predictions will become after midterm elections. I haven’t heard Romney supporting anybody so far, have you? Oh, it could probably mean his in full time campaigning for himself which makes him look like an predator among grass roots republicans.
Huckabee 2012, all the way!
[Editor's Note: Chameleon Rising aka All for Huck! aka Poor American Voter aka Another Poor American Voter aka aljneym, please pick one name, and don't ever again claim a staff writer's e-mail address as your own.]
January 17th, 2010 at 12:17 am
103 – It is Romney I have seen out campaigning for Republicans and using his pac money to help. Huckabee has been to busy promoting himself and his talk show to have time to be a team player.
January 17th, 2010 at 12:26 am
#4
Pablo,
Mitt wins NH and Michigan, hands down. Iowa will be forgotten about, especially after Romney takes the next 2 states, Nevada and Wyoming. I am assuming you are forgetting that winning Michigan would give him 2 wins out of the first 3 states?
If Romney loses SC, he will still win Florida. Be barely lost Florida to McCain and was ahead in the polls until the McCain lie about timetables. That gives him enough momentum to jog over to California and take that State. This gives him enough momentum to win big on Super Tuesday.
January 17th, 2010 at 1:04 am
Chameleon,
Well, let’s go to the FEC filings, okay?
We know Mitt’s donations through November of last year because he files a report every month. Mike only files his every six months. So let’s look at their mid-year report so we can compare apples to apples, shall we?
Mitt’s, located here shows an unitemized total of $1,581,019.74. That is line #11.a.ii on page #3. “Unitemized” donations are donations for $200.00 and under. If you donate $200.00 or less, the PAC doesn’t have to report you, hence the term “unitemized”.
Well, if you assume that all unitemized donors contributed the maximum $200.00 (They don’t, but it is the easiest number to work with), that means more than 7900 voters donated $200.00 or less to Mitt in the first half of this year. Of course, that is not counting the greater than $200.00 people, but it is a number easily obtained. “Only a few hundred”, didn’t you say?
Here is Mike’s FEC 2009 mid-year filing. Looking on page three, line #11.a.ii, we find that Mike got a grand total of $214,888.99 from people donating #200.00 or less. Dividing his number by $200, we get fewer than 1100 contributors. “[T]housands give to MH”, I believe you said?
So Mitt Romney had more than seven times the number of little guys donating to him than Mike did in the first half of last year.
You are really going to have to do better if you plan on holding your own on this board.
January 17th, 2010 at 1:20 am
Chameleon Rising,
Huckabee being on the list should be more then enough for you and his followers considering the disaster that is his clemency record, and economic record, and ethics record. Huckabee is a social conservative coming into a cycle where economic conservatism will be key. Huck’s awful fundraising was cute last time because he was the quotable, funny unknown candidate. Now, there will be expectations, expectations that Huck will easily fail to meet. He admits to being an awful fundraiser, and like it or not, the person who wins the nomination will have considerable grassroots support AND considerable establishment support, not one or the other. The establishment hates Huckabee, fiscal cons hate Huckabee, every big fundraiser and bundler in the party hates Huckabee. You fail to realize his spot on the list is my tribute to you and your fellow Huck’s Army folk who keep him alive in the field, because based on all the other means of measuring potential candidates, Huck would be at the bottom.
As for the Palin-ites, relax. Palin is third over on Intrade, and I feel her Fox deal knocks her down a peg, but by no means is she out. I just haven’t gotten the feeling that Palin is all in, the way Mitt and T-Paw clearly are. As for Thune, she cannot take him lightly and try to coast around him, he is a giant-killer who has fought far tougher political minds then Sarahcuda. We are a long ways off and if her TV career begins to look like a platform for a run rather then a new career then she will likely quickly climb back to the top of the list. Perhaps she can use this chance to learn how to answer questions without sounding clueless. She’s a smart lady, and hopefully she can finally show it. But as of this second, it is more likely that Romney, Pawlenty, and Thune run then it is Palin, although that could change if she starts organizing and fast. Charging big fees to come to conventions when the economy is in the tank is really not the best way to go, in my opinion.
As for Romney, he is as of now the front-runner, but he is the weakest front-runner we’ve had in many cycles, perhaps even as weak as Giuliani. Healthcare will be difficult for him to campaign on, but if Scott Brown can defend it, then perhaps Mitt can as well. Romney will also struggle in Iowa and South Carolina regardless of his numbers in the big delegate rich states. His Mormonism remains a tough sell for many social cons, as does his old Massachusetts record. But he is still in good shape, but there is a big opening for someone to take him down. Palin is certainly in position to overtake him, but she doesn’t have a good team around her yet and it’s getting later and later with top talent joining up with other candidates. Pawlenty is organized and targeting Mitt, doing the job Palin should be doing. Huck has a TV show on the weekend, so that’s nice too. Nominations don’t fall in peoples’ laps just because they pass litmus tests, they need to be worked for, aggressively. Palin and co. have a ways to go to match the work ethic of a Romney or a Pawlenty. If they do, they will likely top this list and maybe even win it all, we’ll have to wait and see.
January 17th, 2010 at 2:13 am
” Palin and co. have a ways to go to match the work ethic of a Romney or a Pawlenty. ”
LOL
January 17th, 2010 at 2:21 am
Btw, is Mitt in Massachusetts “working” for the Party this weekend?
Or busy watching football on his couch tomorrow and leaving Brown on his own?
Some work ethic.
If this was an Alaska or an Arkansas Senate race I assure you Palin or Huck would be there SIDE By SIDE with our candidate.
Where’s exGovernor Romney of MA?
January 17th, 2010 at 2:29 am
“If you did, you wouldn’t find Romneycare such a heinous thing, or even comparable to this evil monstrosity called Obamacare”
No, many conservatives are against bigger state government, as well. If you don’t understand that, you don’t understand the difference between some libertarians, constitutionalists, and conservatives. I don’t want the federal or state government ordering me to get insurance or controlling what insurance companies must cover.
January 17th, 2010 at 2:32 am
Sarah & Mike,
Don’t laugh too hard. All last cycle, I kept saying it was going to come down to McCain or Romney, even while Rudy was ahead by double digits. Why? Because John and Mitt were out there busting a gut trying to pull it altogether. Rudy just coasted — sorta like Coakley tried to do.
Then came the Fred Thompson surge. Here again, McCain and Romney were working their tails off, while Fred seemed to not be that interested. He seemed to be saying, “Yeah, I’ll campaign if I don’t have to work too hard.”
The final score? Rudy and Fred both failed badly, even though they had massive support early on. The nomination went to McCain.
I have seen it in election after election after election. The winner, especially in open elections, is nearly always one of the people who worked the hardest.
I have no idea how hard of a worker Pawlenty is. But you dismiss Romney’s work ethic at your peril.
January 17th, 2010 at 2:36 am
“18 Million of nationwide DEADBEATS to purchase Health Insurance that they can afford”
First of all, it is ridiculous to suggest that everyone who refuses to buy insurance is a “deadbeat”. I had a a $21.000.00 medical bill without insurance. I am paying back every dime.
January 17th, 2010 at 2:37 am
105. I think that is a reasonable path to victory. Let’s hope it works.
109. You have to admit that Romney has an incredible work ethic. Look at how many events that Romney held compared to the other during the primaries. Fred came in last in that category.
And TexMilan: You had so many ridiculous comments, I do not have space to respond to all. My favorite little gems were: 1. Papa Bush is a neo-conservative (no, he wasn’t. he was a realist). 2. Reagan was a true conservative that never attacked small countries (Ask the good folks from Grenada and Nicaragua). 3. McCain is very, very liberal because he wanted Lieberman to run with him (voted with the Republicans 90 percent of the time and has been a consistent critic of Obama). There is more, but I have to go to bed. Just try to get your information from somebody other than Glenn Beck next time.
January 17th, 2010 at 2:45 am
“Where’s exGovernor Romney of MA?”
That is a very good question. I’ve been wondering the same thing. Neither Brown not Romney nor any of their people are talking. It simply is not like Mitt to sit on his hands while things are so fluid in Massachusetts. Nor is it like him to skip an important event like the Southern Republican Leadership Conference.
I am starting to be concerned. I hope the health of Ann, his wife hasn’t taken a turn for the worse. She has MS, you know. It has been in remission, but it could flair up at any time.
January 17th, 2010 at 2:56 am
51: “But… Mandates is just another way of saying requirements. We have requirements to own car insurance…Health insurance seems to be a pet issue among some conservatives.”
The car insurance comparison is bogus from the start. You are not required to cover your own car by any state. You are required to cover somebody else’s car in case you damage it or other property or injure or kill somebody. By the way, we are expecting insurance companies to cover those who have pre-existing conditions. That makes as much sense as having car insurance companies cover cars that already wrecked or life insurance co’s to cover those already dead.
It’s a “pet issue” because it is a means by which government’s can control nearly every area of our lives. As I have pointed out earlier, many of the mandates in Mass are on insurance companies. They can’t offer true catastrophic insurance and they must cover medicines, drug abuse, and mental health.
January 17th, 2010 at 3:03 am
115. It is the same concept. If you go out and wreck somebody else’s car, you should pay for it. If you get sick or injured, you should pay for it. Without mandates, people who don’t have insurance skip out on their bills. That is why they have mandates. To force people to pay for their own health problems. This is conservative. I, nor the hospital, should have to pay for somebody else’s health problems. And no, having mandates does not mean that the government will control every aspect of our lives. That is a huge stretch. There is no government-run health insurance in Mass. Period.
January 17th, 2010 at 3:07 am
“My rankings are the least biased and most accurate of any you’ll find on the web. Palin and Huckabee fans are usually too blinded by their passions to realize that both are leaning against a run.”
But to Romney’s credit none of his supporters have any passion, whatsover.
“fiscal cons hate Huckabee”
I don’t hate Huckabee.
January 17th, 2010 at 3:28 am
“It is the same concept. If you go out and wreck somebody else’s car, you should pay for it. If you get sick or injured, you should pay for it. Without mandates, people who don’t have insurance skip out on their bills.”
It’s only the same, if you don’t see the difference yourself and another person. A roofer has to be bonded because he might do damage to your roof and skip town. But he is not required to cover his own equipment.
Some people who don’t have insurance skip out on their bills. So do some people who use utilities, who owe taxes, etc. But many pay their own bills. And there are other means to get the money from those who can afford insurance, don’t get it, and then charge up medical bills. They are called courts.
“To force people to pay for their own health problems. This is conservative.”
Forcing them to pay for problems they may or may not have, is not.
“There is no government-run health insurance in Mass. Period.”
You should have ended that sentence with a question mark, not a period. Romneycare forbids me from buying cheap Catastrophic Health Insurance, and requires me to buy coverage from companies that cover mental health, as two small examples. There are many more.
January 17th, 2010 at 5:07 am
@ Taylor Says: “Palin is our Al Gore. Think about it. They both desperately want to stay releveant by responding to their critics or taking on polarizing issues ”
What a load of utter rubbish!
You need to go take your meds Taylor.
Sarah Plain and Algore are as different as day and night. They are not even on the same planet.
Sarah Palin spent 4 months writing her book, during which she never even made one appearance in the media . It’s the media, and the loony left that are obsessed with Sarah Palin and everything she does, not the other way round.
Sarah Palin is relevant because she remains the politician that more Repulicans identify with as respresenting their core values than anyone else.
The PPP poll had 73% of Republicans viewing Sarah Palin favorably as compared to only 57% for Huckabee and 51% for Romney.
Back on point, this so-called “power rankings” is worthless. The people have spoken(in the polls), and Sarah Palin stands at the top of any power rankings for the Republican nomination for 2012..if she wants it.
Sarah Palain working at Fox is not an issue to whether she runs in 2012 or not. As a matter of fact, Ronald Reagan did the same thing after he lost to Gerald Ford in 1976. He spent 4 years working in radio, then run run again in 1980, and totally clobbered Jimmy Carter.
January 17th, 2010 at 5:30 am
ROMNEY SUPPORTS: I just jumped to the end of this thread without reading more than the first 20 or so posts, but I want to remind Romney supporters that Mitt was actually doing pretty good in South Carolina until he lost Iowa and New Hampshire……then things started getting rough again there with McCain and Huckabee picking up speed and Thompson making his last stand.
Don’t write off South Carolina for Mitt….if Mitt is looking good by the time he gets to SC, he has a good shot there.
January 17th, 2010 at 6:57 am
#120…ROMNEY SUPPORTERS:….opps
January 17th, 2010 at 6:58 am
#117….Romney supporters have passion…
But there’s a big difference between the passion of people swooning for a celebrity and people who are firmly behind someone but are also busy taking action in other parts of their lives and don’t have time to salivate over their candidate 24/7.
January 17th, 2010 at 7:25 am
“As for the Palin-ites, relax. Palin is third over on Intrade, and I feel her Fox deal knocks her down a peg, but by no means is she out. I just haven’t gotten the feeling that Palin is all in, the way Mitt and T-Paw clearly are. As for Thune, she cannot take him lightly and try to coast around him, he is a giant-killer who has fought far tougher political minds then Sarahcuda.” Again, half right. I cannot disagree that my candidate is not as committed to running as the others. However, I think there is a good chance that she will run and she can put together a good camp. I am aware that Mr. Thune is no clown, but frankly, as a Palinite, I am more afraid of Mr. Johnson and Mr. Daniels being able to take advantage of a senario where Mrs. Palin is weak, rather than Mr. Thune. I of course can be surprise later on, but as of now, I am not convince that Mr. Thune is quite even in the 2nd tier. I will grant you that he has probably promoted himself from 4th tier to 3rd tier.
January 17th, 2010 at 8:23 am
By the way, good early morning to you, Jerald. I know that you addressed the Romneyites instead of the Rom-nots so forgive me for budding in with regards to: “Don’t write off South Carolina for Mitt.” I think that you are partly right. I remember one SC poll last time when Mr. Romney was tied in first place and there might have been another poll where he was winning all by himself. However, such polling took place even before Iowa and before Mr. McCain (the winner of SC) caught on fire. In short the political landscape was different and Mr. Romney was on a high.
I admit that depending on how the cookie crumbles and who is all running, Mr. Romney could in deed win SC. However, by the same token, it is also possible for Mr. Romney to lose or almost lose some of his states under certain scenarios. Some of the states that he did end up winning or doing quite well in 2008 showed a different polling picture at certain points in the game. In short, it will be good for Mr. Romney to keep SC in single digits and it would be bad for him to allow others to come within single digits ina few other states.
January 17th, 2010 at 10:24 am
And I think it is far too early to be assigning wins to anybody. Up to a fortnight ago, anybody who thought a Republican had a ghost of a chance to win the Senate seat that Teddy Kennedy held forever would have been justifiably laughed to scorn. The numbers even a week ago didn’t look all that good. Now Brown is favored to win in nearly every poll.
We still have two years before the first ballots are cast in the 2012 primary season. So I wouldn’t put too much passion into any of these predictions if I were you.
January 17th, 2010 at 10:39 am
#112,
Good for you! Let me revise those numbers, 17,999,999 deadbeats!
January 17th, 2010 at 10:53 am
#124……Good morning to you too Ohio Joe.
I think Romney is going to have to fight hard for every state up until the primary tide turns for or against him.
He had a slim chance in South Carolina last time until he lost Iowa and New Hampshire, which were important springboards for Huckabee and McCain. Even then, Mitt stayed right in there until Super Tuesday.
I don’t see any of the candidates having it made out of the gate.
Personally, I wish the rest of the country after the early states got more respect and we didn’t “end the race” after the first handful of states vote. I also don’t like the “winner take all” big states, but that is the way it is.
January 17th, 2010 at 11:39 am
118. You still do not understand why mandates are important. When a person skips out on his bill, the rest of us pay for it. That is not fair. I don’t want to see medical care costs rise because some people refuse to pay for health insurance.
And while the gov’t can repossess a house, or a car, the government cannot repossess someone’s heart after they have surgery. There is a difference my friend.
January 17th, 2010 at 8:58 pm
I don’t think Huckabee or Palin will run in 2012, but assuming they do, I think they should be ranked higher.
Mitt’s #1 for sure, just because he WILL win New Hampshire. The question is who will win (or come in 2nd in) Iowa. I think Huckabee and Palin would have to be the top contenders there with Thune as the wildcard. I would also bump Bush for Jindal.
January 18th, 2010 at 1:41 am
126: “Good for you! Let me revise those numbers, 17,999,999 deadbeats!”
Thanks for the compliment and the thoughtless comment.
128: “You still do not understand why mandates are important.”
It is not a matter of understanding, it is a matter of agreeing. When a person skips out on a bill, sue him.
How is it conservative to order someone at the barrel of a gun to have something
they may not ever need?
January 18th, 2010 at 6:01 am
“It is not a matter of understanding, it is a matter of agreeing. When a person skips out on a bill, sue him.” Great line!
January 18th, 2010 at 9:41 am
130. 17,999,999 potential new lawsuits. Whom does that benefit? Maybe time to get a law degree. “…barrel of a gun…”? Thoughtless comment there. I didn’t hear about that being in RomneyCare or ObamaCare for that matter. Wasn’t it just a fine? Not much of a mandate, not with a lot of teeth anyway.
January 18th, 2010 at 4:13 pm
Palin has yet to prove her analytical abilities and I doubt she will. The ratings will come down to plane level — already Hannity get 1 million less this time than he did a few weeks ago during Palin’s book tour. If there is an opening for her in 2012, I am sure she will be in.
Huckabee is a media success and, depending on his choices in 2012, can write his own ticket wherever he chooses to go. He has proven his mettle as a first-rate interviewer and media personality. It is his choice to make. However, as a Huckabee devout follower, I think I know him a little bit more than his detractors. He is, in many ways, a perfect blend of true humility and abject egotism. If Obama is beatable in 2012, do not doubt for a minute that he will jump in. There is no way his ego will allow him to sit back while Palin and Romney play the 2012 field. Insiders in Iowa already have advised that Huckabee is even more popular in Iowa today than he was in 2008 when he won — and he would win the Iowa caucus if held today (that’s privileged, so don’t ask for a link — believe it or not — I don’t really care).
So take it for what it is worth. If Obama is destined for two terms, Huckabee will not run in 2012. Otherwise, you had better be prepared for him and Huckaboom II because most of you are taking his support base — and his presidential ambitions — way too complacently. And do not bank on Maurice Clemmons to take Huckabee down — he will turn that against any fool who tries to raise it in the primaries — especially if one of them has MassCare with which to contend and the other quit her term as governor after 2.5 years. Need I remind everyone of the last PPP poll which placed Huckabee in a virtual tie with Obama a week after Huckabee made his case on the Clemmons controversy.