Chris Cillizza, of the Washington Post, apparently thinks so; in an article today, he tamped down speculation, fueled most recently by Sen. Jim DeMint, that the eventual 2012 Republican nominee could enter the race late:
Let’s start with governors, the ranks of which DeMint suggested might produce a new crop of national candidates.
Of the 25 Republican governors, 20 of them were elected or appointed in 2009 and 2010. That relative newness makes it difficult — rhetorically and organizationally — for any of the 20 to quickly pivot to a presidential race.
The obvious exception to that rule is New Jersey’s Chris Christie who, in less than two years on the job, has emerged as a straight-talking superstar for Republicans nationally.
…It still seems an unlikely prospect, however. One plugged-in Republican operative suggested that there is a “10 percent” chance that Christie runs.
Beyond Christie, the only other potential candidate who could immediately step into the race with a real following is Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker who endeared himself to Republicans nationwide with his stand-off against organized labor earlier this year. But having just weathered that traumatic political moment, it’s hard to imagine Walker moving into the presidential field.
Other newly-elected governors with bright futures at the national level — South Carolina’s Nikki Haley, Nevada’s Brian Sandoval, New Mexico’s Susana Martinez, Pennsylvania’s Tom Corbett — seem content to let their stars rise more slowly.
So, if you assume that none of the newest governors will run, you are left with five people: Govs. Rick Perry (Texas), Mitch Daniels (Ind.), Bobby Jindal (La.), Dave Heineman (Neb.) and Butch Otter (Idaho) — all of whom were elected in 2007 or earlier.
Neither Heineman nor Otter have any sort of national profile. Jindal is actively running for a second term this November, making it impossible for him to simultaneously put the pieces of a presidential bid together. Perry is intriguing but might struggle with being viewed as the second coming of George W. Bush. Plus, Perry’s 2010 campaign manager Rob Johnson and longtime political consigliere Dave Carney have signed on with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s presidential campaign, moves that suggest the Texas governor isn’t likely to be a surprise late entrant into the race.
Cillizza proceeds to discuss the notion of Daniels running, an exercise tossed about often on this site and, thus, one I won’t re-hash. The author then mentions the list, which pretty much begins and ends with Rand/Ron Paul and Michele Bachman, of possibilities from the Senate and House. He concludes with the following:
Viewed broadly then, the 2012 field appears unlikely to be considerably affected by a last-minute candidacy. Christie is the true wildcard and would almost certainly re-shape the race if he ran. But, it’s hard to find anyone in Republican circles who put the odds on such a bid at anything short of long.
A Daniels candidacy would make the race interesting but wouldn’t exactly be the sort of “new cast” member to which DeMint was referring.
In Cillizza’s mind, the layout of the 2012 race has begun to come into view, and those who drag their feet risk losing out on precious staff talent, fundraising dollars, and media exposure.
His analysis certainly challenges a significant deal of conventional wisdom, which states that the apparent lack of a clear frontrunner leaves the race wide open. If Mr. Cillizza has, indeed, read the tea leaves correctly, it seems to bode well for candidates like Romney, Pawlenty, and Bachmann; the former two have taken some of the most significant steps toward building campaign organizations, Pawlenty has a real opportunity to attract the anyone-but-Romney vote, and Bachmann will presumably take much of the Tea Party/anti-establishment vote.
March 29th, 2011 at 9:40 pm
Anthony,
A good read on the situation, I think. It’s amazing that so many of our governors are so “young” politically.
But we will have an AMAZINGLY deep bench in 2016, and the Democrats’ bench was decimated last year. Even if they have a good ’12 crop, those pols will be too green in 2016.
So IF we lose the monumental race of ’12, we should have a large crop of talent for 2016, and a crop seasoned in the tumult of the fiscal meltdown. The Democrats, on the other hand, will face the slim pickings that we do this year.
March 29th, 2011 at 9:42 pm
The problem with this scenario is that it isn’t realistic. A serious Presidential run requires too much in the way of money, organization, and preparation for a relative newcomer or unknown to jump in late and get anywhere at all.
The one, relatively at least, latecomer who could manage it would be Huntsman, who is honor-bound to remain Ambassador to China for a few more weeks….but his team is hiring people and laying the groundwork for a run. Also, in his case, funding won’t be any kind of problem.
March 29th, 2011 at 9:56 pm
@matt
You’re right, the dems don’t have as good of a field as the GOP would for 2016, but they still have people would be very formidable if they ran such Hillary, Cuomo, and O’Malley.
March 29th, 2011 at 9:59 pm
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/52181.html
TPAW is starting to bring in the money.
National Journal comes out today and says TPAW is surging among insiders.
Not only is it too last for these newcomers to go against a Romney or a potential Huck, it’s probably too late for them to go against a Barbor or…do I say it?….TPAW.
Pawlenty/Rubio 2012
March 29th, 2011 at 10:10 pm
Herman Cain is more likely to be the Tea Party candidate than Bachmann, as Cain comes with fewer gaffes. But still, the Tea Party types are competing for about 25 percent of the GOP vote, the portion of the GOP electorate that claims to prefer ideology over electability according to a recent poll, if I am remembering correctly. That’s a low ceiling and as soon as the race is down to 2 or 3 candidates, the Tea Party candidate will not go any farther. The only caveat is that, as Metro often points out, someone like Chris Christie could run as an ELECTABLE Tea Party candidate. That would truly be a game changer. But for now, all of the TP candidates are also unelectable, and thus will not win the nomination.
March 29th, 2011 at 10:22 pm
The talk of a knight in white armor is DeMinted. Agree on Romney, Pawlenty, Bachmann in front. Add Palin or especially Huckabee if one surprises with a run. Daniels or Barbour not likely but not impossible.
March 30th, 2011 at 5:21 am
Primary won’t surprise us because Romney is going to win – lol. I still this primary is reduced to the big 4, that in itself is a surprise and challenge.
March 30th, 2011 at 5:39 am
The only real question and the only one that will make an impact is if Huckabee decides to run. I think the odd’s are less than 30%, but if he decides to run, it will be Romney vs Huckabee, with Romney having an edge better than slight, but less than overwhelming.
Without Huckabee in the Race, the Path for Romney seems reasonable clear.
The other Big question is if Huckabee doesn’t run,what does he do. Does he quietly sit on the side lines. Does he make a play for the VP slot (which he has the power to do), or does he become the anti-Romney guy which likely wipe out any potential political future (IMHO).
I have said since 2008, and I still believe this is the case. The best ticket we can put up in 2012 is Romney/Huckabee. I know these guys have had their problems in the past, but politics make for strange situations. Its all about winning the Presidency and beyond.
March 30th, 2011 at 7:41 am
I think Cillizza nails it here. The field of potential candidates is fairly knowable, really. Only so many folks who can credibly claim to have the kind of background that qualifies one for the office, and brother, isn’t that getting stretched by quite a few in the field as it is? Cillizza does skip the generals/admirals, of which only Petraus would hold any name recognition, (and he’s buried in Afghanistan), or Secty Gates, and he’s buried in the Obama administration. So skipping them is not really an oversight
Demint might want to prognosticate more judiciously if he’s wanting to be considered a guru. And it’s harder to be a kingmaker if you’re trashing the entire field first. Tarnishes his eventual endorsement somewhat.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:13 am
I could see a late entry. Let’s go with romney, tpaw, etc announce in april…than a lukewarm reaction to them happens throughout the summer. At that point, palin and huck would be up with their decisions, i think either could probably wait till early September and announce right before the Reagan debate. Others who could jump in late, rudy, pataki, huntsman, maybe bill frist, jeb bush, heck john engler. The key is the first round of announcers fade from april to august.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:28 am
Allen West in 2012!! Yeah, he’s not too well known nationally yet. But I stress “YET”. Allen West / Paul Ryan 2012!!
March 30th, 2011 at 9:48 am
Allen West has everything needed to be an outstanding President…excellent leadership skills, integrity, intelligence, honor, undying love for this nation, knowledge and dedication to the Constitution, a willingness to uphold all of our nation’s Conservative values, and a backbone…he won’t get wishy-washy and change his tune depending on who he’s talking to.
Yeah, he’s from the House and everyone will say, “Nobody from the House can ever be elected President!!”. Well, let’s not limit our options and neglect the best candidate out there because of some unwritten rule. He did spend 22+ years serving our country in leadership roles. He has what it takes.
http://westforwestwing2012.com/about/
March 30th, 2011 at 12:01 pm
Honestly, Sammy, Allen West for President is a joke. We don’t need an affirmative action candidate. The country will see thru this shtick.
March 30th, 2011 at 1:26 pm
So, Lew…you only see him as an “affirmative action” candidate?? He could turn out to be the BEST thing the Republicans have, and you wouldn’t vote for him because of a supposed “shtick”??
March 30th, 2011 at 1:28 pm
Have you seen him, listened to him, researched him?? Or does he immediately get pushed aside because he’s an “affirmative action” candidate?? Just wondering…
March 30th, 2011 at 2:24 pm
This piece is prescient. Everyone is just about broke, and beaten down. Everyone, that is, except one person who has been preparing to take on the responsibility non-stop for at least the last two years, and one person who just so happens to have the killer exact needed skill-set for this country.
No, I’m not talking about Huckabee.
March 30th, 2011 at 2:25 pm
Yep Lew, why don’t you like Allen West? My brother from Florida said the same thing. I wonder what you base that on. Because I thought he’d be a good VP. Military guy, straight shooter, decent communicator.
April 2nd, 2011 at 2:19 pm
[...] my last post, I broached the possibility that, contrary to a bit of conventional wisdom, the eventual 2012 [...]