A consistent theme among those who think Mitch Daniels won’t run (and among those who hope he won’t run, for one reason or another) has been that he has waited too long, and has done nothing to build a campaign organization.
I will admit that I have been concerned occasionally, although I suspected all along that the team Haley Barbour was building might be community property, so to speak.
So I was pleased to read this item by Erin McPike when MWS sent it to me. It argues that, even apart from any infusions from Barbour’s campaign, Daniels has at least the framework of a strong organization already in place.
With more than three decades in politics behind him, the governor has done more than develop a Rolodex he could deploy for fundraising, as most point out. The campaign operative in him also has built an organization ready to go whenever he tells them to — and the media doesn’t seem to know it yet. For the past year, he’s been playing its members like piano keys as he orchestrates his national rollout.
Anthony Dolan, the chief speechwriter for the entire Reagan presidency, knows Daniels well from the time they worked together and explained, “Mitch has always been a marvel with the news dynamic.” He added, “A year ago people were saying ‘Mitch who’ and then comes a rollout with more elaborate choreography than a Busby Berkley musical — we haven’t seen the synchronized swimming yet, but I’m sure it’s coming.”
Most of the article deals with the campaign infrastructure Daniels has in Indianapolis, but apparently there have been conversations with folks in primary states as well:
Then come the early nominating states, where Daniels has been talking to some key figures, albeit in an under-the-radar kind of way. He’s kept in touch with former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu, whom he’s known for decades, and he recently spoke with Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad about education policy.
(Note: I question McPike’s inclusion of Branstad in this — I recall a recent article in which Branstad said they discussed nothing but education, and he sounded dubious about Daniels running). But she goes on:
One of the most prominent names in Iowa GOP politics, attorney Doug Gross, has been meeting methodically with all of the 2012 Republican contenders and hasn’t picked one to support yet. He was with Mitt Romney four years ago but is unlikely to return. He’s long thought highly of Daniels and has told him to make sure he calls him as soon as he figures out his plans.
And in New Hampshire, strategist Mike Dennehy is awaiting Daniels’ decision, too. Dennehy worked for both of Arizona Sen. John McCain’s campaigns and had signed on with Haley Barbour in March. But he had talked with other operations before choosing the now-defunct Barbour team and told RealClearPolitics this week after Barbour’s exit that he hopes Daniels runs.
Also in the Granite State, Sununu’s sons Michael and James, and Jamie Burnett, are partners in the Concord-based Profile Strategy Group. Burnett was Mitt Romney’s New Hampshire political director in 2008, but the trio is not working for a presidential candidate now and is open to advising a campaign this cycle. Michael Sununu has had long ties to some of Daniels’ advisers, and they indicated they could support Daniels.
When these operatives are combined with the Barbour team, they add up to an organization that would have the capability to get rolling pretty quickly — particularly under the direction of a couple pros like Daniels and Barbour. McPike concludes:
So the next time Daniels says he hasn’t been doing the things he needs to do in order to launch a White House bid, it’s probably best not to believe him. He could still wind up not running, but he has set himself up to do so if he gives his advisers the nod.
We’ll know in a few days, it appears.
April 29th, 2011 at 1:30 pm
I dunno. Do he?
April 29th, 2011 at 1:35 pm
He do.
April 29th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
OK, OK: Do Bob have proof-reading problems? Yes, he do.
April 29th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Daniels can do it on his own without Barbour who sounds like he plans to take it easy in politics now.
He deserves it since he’s had a nice long career. It really time for Haley to retire and take his actual dogs out hunting more.
April 29th, 2011 at 1:39 pm
Oops… *It’s
April 29th, 2011 at 1:47 pm
If Daniels doesn’t sign that bill banning PP, he’s done. Simple as that. And I’m a Daniels supporter.
April 29th, 2011 at 1:50 pm
Anyone who thinks organization will be a problem for Daniels doesn’t understand the GOP establishment. Daniels will be just fine in the area of organization if he decides to run.
The real impediment to Daniels, if there is one, will be the grassroots.
April 29th, 2011 at 1:52 pm
I wont be able to sleep until I hear Mitch say NO!!
April 29th, 2011 at 1:52 pm
It’s really too late for anyone who is not in it who’s name doesn’t end in Huckabee. The field is set and the candidates are strong. Despite what talking heads say.
*********************************************
The conventional wisdom is that the emerging Republican field for 2012 is a very weak one. However, like so much else in the topsy-turvy age of Obama, the conventional wisdom on this one is completely upside down. The idea of a weak GOP field is almost as ridiculous as a debate about a fifty-year-old birth certificate just as the economic recovery comes grinding to a halt. Almost
**************************************************
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-gop-looks-strong_558450.html
April 29th, 2011 at 1:52 pm
#6,
As someone who wrote a glowing article about Daniels way back in 2009 on this site, I agree with you that if he vetoes an abortion ban immediately before jumping into the race for the Republican presidential nomination, he will garner the 2 percent of the vote that sort of strategy deserves.
April 29th, 2011 at 1:53 pm
Not in Iowa.
He must not be serious.
NO one on the ground in Iowa? He’s toast (or so they say about ‘you know who’)
I have a question about the Fox SC debate…does anyone know who is going to be there?
So far just T-Paw and Buddy Roemer?
April 29th, 2011 at 1:53 pm
Dave Gaultier Says:
April 29th, 2011 at 1:50 pm
Anyone who thinks organization will be a problem for Daniels doesn’t understand the GOP establishment. Daniels will be just fine in the area of organization if he decides to run.
=========================================================================
Sorry, your wrong. See Fred Thompson 2008.
April 29th, 2011 at 1:53 pm
“A consistent theme among those who think Mitch Daniels won’t run (and among those who hope he won’t run, for one reason or another) has been that he has waited too long, and has done nothing to build a campaign organization.
I will admit that I have been concerned occasionally”
You should be afraid. Compared to Mitt Romney’s well-oiled, titanic organization, everyone else’s will look like a Cub Scout effort.
April 29th, 2011 at 1:54 pm
teledude Says:
I have a question about the Fox SC debate…does anyone know who is going to be there?
=============================================
They may cancel for lack of interest.
April 29th, 2011 at 1:54 pm
Compared to Mitt Romney’s well-oiled, titanic organization…
And we all remember what happened to the Titanic…
April 29th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
14. That’s what I thought, but it seems like they are pimping it this week. They should cancel (postpone)
April 29th, 2011 at 1:59 pm
There are some things that indicate he is not running as well. We will likely know soon since he really can’t wait because he would likely have a traditional campaign structure. Safe to say he will have the best organization among the lower tier candidates if he gets in.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:03 pm
I could see a lot of Romney’s staff and most of his financial backing switch to Daniels.
The establishment has been soft on Romney for some time now.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
The only important question right now is, does Daniels have a spine? If he doesn’t sign that bill limiting abortions then the answer is no.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:09 pm
This is so lame.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:09 pm
Amen, Craig. This is mega lame.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:10 pm
I hope they cancel the debate. I don’t really see any reason to be debating this early anyways. This is fundraising period, not getting your message out period. We don’t need an entire year of debates (most of which are completely useless anyways).
April 29th, 2011 at 2:11 pm
18 – In your dreams.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:15 pm
Someone needs to call me when Daniels decides what to do about that PP bill. I got a lot of money on Intrade I’ll either need to sell or buy quickly.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:20 pm
What if he allows it to become law without signing it? What if he says positive things about it and points out other bills he supports that he allowed to become law without signing? What if in doing so he points out other profile legislation he actually signed?
The first question I wrote is a possible outcome.
JFH
April 29th, 2011 at 2:22 pm
I meant to say in the last sentence “….other pro-life legisation….”
Sorry for the typo
April 29th, 2011 at 2:33 pm
25,
I don’t see how a Republican governor can veto a swing-voter-friendly abortion ban (20 weeks is halfway through the pregnancy, after all) and then turn around and launch a bid for president within the next 72 hours. It just won’t fly with the Republican base.
If Daniels vetoes the bill, then it probably means he’s not running. In fact, this could be Daniels’ “Cartman moment,” Cartman being the South Park character who regularly tells the other guys, “Screw you guys, I’m going home!” If Daniels decides that he just doesn’t feel like trying to lead the Republican Party in its current form, he may very well veto the bill and then announce he’s not running, i.e., “Screw you guys, I’m going home!”
April 29th, 2011 at 2:34 pm
Joe: I have little doubt he’ll sign it. He’s signed every other piece of right-to-life legislation:
April 29th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
Dave (27): Could be, but I doubt he’d veto it, even if he’s not running. Why would he?
April 29th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
http://data.intrade.com/graphing/timeAndSalesChart.gif?contractId=735285&timePeriodType=LastDay&intradeChart=true&transBackground=true
April 29th, 2011 at 2:38 pm
30. ^ that was Daniels in today’s trading.
Here is Huck’s..
http://data.intrade.com/graphing/timeAndSalesChart.gif?contractId=735284&timePeriodType=LastDay&intradeChart=true&transBackground=true
April 29th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
Here’s everyone today..
Who will announce they will run for President in 2012? (Open to Suggestions)
http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/contractSearch/index.jsp?clsID=19&grpID=8628
April 29th, 2011 at 2:41 pm
Bob,
The only reason I can think is that he’s always been secretly pro-choice. Not likely given his record though. I wish he’d just sign it already and be done with it.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:41 pm
I simply cannot fathom why Daniels is claiming he hasn’t made up his mind on this bill.
Few things are as high-profile as an abortion bill. Daniels has known about this bill and its contents for sometime now. It’s not like the legislature rammed through surprise legislation in the last minute. It’s been in the works for weeks now.
Daniels has had plenty of time to study out the issues involved and come to a conclusion as to how to proceed. If he is a religious man, he has had plenty of time to take the matter to the Lord in prayer. Yet he dithers.
Does that not sound a whole lot like current occupant of the White House? We don’t need another ditherer as President, thank-you very much.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
“The only reason I can think is that he’s always been secretly pro-choice.”
Dave: What makes you think that he’s secretly pro-choice?
April 29th, 2011 at 2:45 pm
Mark: He supported the original bill, to limit abortion to 20 weeks, from the beginning. Whether Planned Parenthood would be a part of the final bill was not settled until Tues/Wed.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Bob,
I don’t think he is secretly pro-choice. It’s just that I can’t think of any other reason he would be undecided on the bill. If it’s about the state losing the PP funds, as you said the other day, those funds are chump change when it comes to the coffers of a state like Indiana. So I just can’t figure out why he’s hesitating.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Bob,
That is better, but still not good enough. Unless the Plan Parenthood bit came in completely unexpected out of left field with no prior warning, he should have had his decision made by now.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:51 pm
Sign it already!
April 29th, 2011 at 2:52 pm
Hell froze over…
I’m agreeing with Mark
April 29th, 2011 at 2:53 pm
No more truces.
April 29th, 2011 at 2:58 pm
Whether or not Daniels enters the race is of no real concern of mine. If he enters, he’s just one more guy Mitt has to beat. If he stays out, he’s just one less guy he has to beat. It’s all good.
What I am concerned about is if Mitt doesn’t get the nomination, who gets my support? Right now I like the looks of either Pawlenty or Daniels. But I’ve got to tell you that if this dithering on such a high-profile bill as this is a glimpse into Mitch’s executive style, I have to say “good riddance to Daniels”.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
I wish we could go back to the days when social conservatives and liberals were divided among the two parties.
That way, elections could be about economics, and we might have a chance at fixing our bloated government.
The social wars could still be waged, with members from both parties joining forces in Congress.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
Dave/Mark: I think we may be making too much out of not signing it yet. He hasn’t signed the school voucher bill either, which passed roughly the same time and was his biggest priority.
The question about Planned Parenthood became more complicated when last week the state’s director of social services started raising the federal funding issues. I’m only speculating, but it seems not unreasonable that it might take some time to check out all the financial issues — whether or not the final decision is financially based.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:01 pm
On a related note, I wish even more so that the parties were defined by IDEAS instead of demographics.
We’d have more of a chance of convincing people that way. You can’t convince people after you’ve defined yourselves with demographics. Then people are either in or out.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:02 pm
“But I’ve got to tell you that if this dithering on such a high-profile bill as this is a glimpse into Mitch’s executive style”
I would think a seven-year record of solid accomplishment would give some insight into his style.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:27 pm
Dave,
#15 LOL!!!!!
April 29th, 2011 at 3:32 pm
Bob,
#36, So he has vocally supported the abortion ban all along? That was in the original bill he supported?
Just want to make sure I’m clear on that.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:39 pm
Please leave the dithering to me.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:40 pm
Hey now! There’s plenty more dithering that I’m planning to do.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:44 pm
Trump drops 3 F BOMBS IN A SPEECH, PRETTY MUCH RULES HIM OUT!!!!
April 29th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
I really don’t know if I want to reform entitlements. I really have to watch how this Daniels guy handles this. I hope I can pick up a few tips in how to not do anything.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:50 pm
Telldude. Your gal has not confirmed yet either?
Not running.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:53 pm
I have one tip for Daniels. Don’t use live bait, then you don’t have to cut bait. I prefer using artificial lures. My favorite is the gold plated, diamond encrusted dogfish chum that emits a very obnoxious rhythmic barking sound. It drives the fish nuts and they strike out of pure annoyance.
April 29th, 2011 at 3:55 pm
I sure liked that dogfish lure for a long time. It was one of my favorites. Until that disastrous fishing trip when I left it on top of my car and it got sick and filled the fishing pond with diarrhea.
April 29th, 2011 at 4:11 pm
I hope Mitch runs, partly to elevate the sophistication of the debate, especially on financial issues and what needs to be done.
April 29th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
hamaca,
I think the other candidates are less likely to get away with BS on the deficits if Mitch is in.
April 29th, 2011 at 4:49 pm
Matt “MWS”,
I think other candidates will also be forced to learn their stuff on the deficit and how to seriously reduce it enough to actually make the needed difference, otherwise they’ll look/sound incompetent by comparison in the debates and on the Sunday circuit.
April 29th, 2011 at 4:56 pm
Matt (36): “#36, So he has vocally supported the abortion ban all along? That was in the original bill he supported? Just want to make sure I’m clear on that.”
Yes — I’ve seen statements to the effect that he supported the original (20 week) bill, but I have to admit I have no links to prove it.
April 29th, 2011 at 6:15 pm
Bob,
That’s good to know. Thanks.
April 29th, 2011 at 6:16 pm
hamaca,
Absolutely. Other candidates aren’t going to be able to fake their way through fiscal issues with Mitch on the stage.
April 29th, 2011 at 11:17 pm
It sounds to me like Daniels is reluctant to get in the race….and that he is kicking and screaming anybody but me along the way…..It’s Jeb Bush and his group using Carl Rove and the leftover GW Bush that’s desperately trying to draft a candidate from the Neo-Con pool. FOX news is pushing Daniels big time…even though he’s only polling 2%.
Daniels might run, but if he doesn’t really want to it will show and it won’t matter who he has behind him.