As a prominent and outspoken Democrat, I often get asked whom I would want to see as the Republican nominee against President Obama in 2012. Furthermore, I always get asked whom I would least like to see as the Republican nominee, and the reasons why. In this blog post, I am going to give my opinion (as a die-hard Obama supporter) as to which Republicans I would love to face off against (other than everyone’s obvious choice --- former half-term governor Sarah Palin). In Part#2 of this post, I will name the 5 most formidable Republican possibilities. My opinions may surprise you.
I would like to be adamantly clear. If Vegas were to have a betting line on the 2012 election, nearly every intelligent political scientist in this country would have to proclaim Barack Obama the favorite. Karl Rove recently indicated as such during an appearance on FoxNews, in which he accidentally assumed that Obama would be re-elected in 2012 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K57TQqketg&feature=player_embedded). Furthermore, inTrade (the website where you can bet on future events, ranging from the average snowfall next year in Central Park to the probability that Israel takes military action against Iran by the end of the year, currently at 7% for those concerned) has Obama re-elect at 63.6%. Honestly, given the improvement of the economy, the radical Tea Party cohort of the Republican Party, as well as Obama’s general approval ratings (much higher than Clinton or Reagan at this point in their presidencies), I expect Obama to be re-elected. Still, I would certainly breathe a lot easier if the nominee were someone blatantly unelectable. These are the list of candidates, in order of my most-desired to the scariest.
1. 1. Sarah Palin - This one should be obvious to most Democrats. From her lack of experience in foreign affairs, to her marginalized base of fervent supporters, Barack Obama himself might just take off the campaign season should Mrs. Palin somehow win the nomination. Her dangerous incompetence is scary, even for the overwhelming majority of independents in this country. Her polarizing demeanor is best suited for a FoxNews contributor, not a serious candidate against an overwhelmingly popular incumbent President. In frequent polling matchups, she trails President Obama by double digits, even losing in hypothetical matchups in red states such as South Carolina and Mississippi. According to a recent CNN poll, her 38/56 approvals are extremely poor, and quite honestly, I think Sarah Palin would struggle to defeat a goldfish in a general election. She is the dream.
2. 2. Newt Gingrich - “The next best thing to Sarah Palin.” While he is not quite as incompetent as the half-term, half-baked former governor, Newt has his own realm of difficulties. The difficulties in his personal life are not likely to play well with the deeply religious GOP Iowa Caucus-goers, and he has only regional appeal. A former Congressman from Georgia, Newt was a controversial Speaker of the House before he was driven to resign in 1999. Even if he should somehow win the nomination, he polls terribly against Mr. Obama, and he would be a great candidate to face off against. His moral issues will continue to linger, and his abrasive, highly partisan attitude will not benefit him, especially with independents in the Midwest (Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin in particular). While he certainly polls well in the South (he would probably remove Georgia, North Carolina, and maybe even Virginia from the playing field), his flaws make him a desired opponent.
3. 3. Tim Pawlenty - This former governor of Minnesota lacks both charisma and the independent credentials to be a serious challenger for President Obama. Having served as the governor of Minnesota, he took a number of moderate positions (particularly on cap-and-trade, healthcare, and campaign finance reform), on many of which he has already begun to walk back. This flip-flopping can be easily exploited in a general election campaign, something that I am sure the Obama team would relish. Furthermore, should Pawlenty move so far to the right to win the nomination, he would lose his appeal for independents. His lack of name recognition will force him to differentiate himself in a crowded field, encouraging him to make outrageous statements to get attention. With a name recognition of 14% in Iowa (despite the fact that Minnesota borders Iowa), he has already had to make controversial remarks just to get media attention. Just the other week, he claimed that shutting down the government may be the only responsible thing to do; he RAILED against this course of action in 2005 when the Democrats threatened to do so. These types of outrageous and hypocritical statements will end up hurting Pawlenty, should he make it to the general election. Plus, his approvals in his home state are lukewarm at best, and his soft-spoken demeanor will not contrast well against the lovable and eloquent Obama. Should Mr. Pawlenty be the nominee, I would personally be ecstatic.
4.
4. Haley Barbour - This Mississippi governor can’t seem to recall why segregation was such a bad thing. He would actually be more formidable in the sense that he has some brains. He actually understands the issues, and can articulate his thoughts (much like Mr. Gingrich, who is actually quite intelligent on policy issues). However, as a Southern governor from Mississippi, he suffers from the same problem that Mr. Gingrich does, namely regional appeal. He polls well in Southern states, but little elsewhere. His strong Southern accent is distinguishable, and while the kind folks from Tennessee might find it charming, the key independents from New Hampshire might find it annoying as fuck (as do I). One more thing on Mr. Barbour. In 2012, the Republican Party will HAVE to reach out to Hispanics and African Americans. There is no doubt that Barack Obama will win the black vote (as well as the Hispanic vote), but the Republican Party CAN’T afford to lose these key demographics by 98% and 66% respectively. Now picture this. The old, white governor from Mississippi, who has a history with the KKK (he claims it was an innocent community group) going up against the nation’s first black President. Imagine how that would look to minority voters, especially in debates. While in no way am I saying that Mr. Barbour is a racist (I take him at his word when he said that he agrees with the Civil Rights Act), I am merely excited about the opportunity for the Obama team to paint that subtle contrast in its campaign.
4. Haley Barbour - This Mississippi governor can’t seem to recall why segregation was such a bad thing. He would actually be more formidable in the sense that he has some brains. He actually understands the issues, and can articulate his thoughts (much like Mr. Gingrich, who is actually quite intelligent on policy issues). However, as a Southern governor from Mississippi, he suffers from the same problem that Mr. Gingrich does, namely regional appeal. He polls well in Southern states, but little elsewhere. His strong Southern accent is distinguishable, and while the kind folks from Tennessee might find it charming, the key independents from New Hampshire might find it annoying as fuck (as do I). One more thing on Mr. Barbour. In 2012, the Republican Party will HAVE to reach out to Hispanics and African Americans. There is no doubt that Barack Obama will win the black vote (as well as the Hispanic vote), but the Republican Party CAN’T afford to lose these key demographics by 98% and 66% respectively. Now picture this. The old, white governor from Mississippi, who has a history with the KKK (he claims it was an innocent community group) going up against the nation’s first black President. Imagine how that would look to minority voters, especially in debates. While in no way am I saying that Mr. Barbour is a racist (I take him at his word when he said that he agrees with the Civil Rights Act), I am merely excited about the opportunity for the Obama team to paint that subtle contrast in its campaign.
5.
5. Rick Santorum - This long-shot former Senator from Pennsylvania actually has the audacity to think his extremist, race-baiting form of politics will succeed in a general election. For one, he was defeated in the 2006 Senatorial race by Bob Casey in double digits. Since then, his approvals in Pennsylvania haven’t increased much (currently at 39/51), so he would immediately be starting in a hole in a key swing state. Additionally, Santorum faces the problem of explaining his blatant homophobia. In a 2003 statement, he derided homosexuality as immoral and said that two gay men were just as bad as a priest molesting a child. Other than that obvious problem, he is an extremist, with little independent appeal, and he is currently polling at 1% in Iowa. He is as far to the right as it gets, and he proposes teaching only intelligent design in public schools, outlawing homosexuality, and turning America away from the fascist Islamic politicians who are controlling the country (his words, not mine). Regardless, I would love to run against this nut in a general.
5. Rick Santorum - This long-shot former Senator from Pennsylvania actually has the audacity to think his extremist, race-baiting form of politics will succeed in a general election. For one, he was defeated in the 2006 Senatorial race by Bob Casey in double digits. Since then, his approvals in Pennsylvania haven’t increased much (currently at 39/51), so he would immediately be starting in a hole in a key swing state. Additionally, Santorum faces the problem of explaining his blatant homophobia. In a 2003 statement, he derided homosexuality as immoral and said that two gay men were just as bad as a priest molesting a child. Other than that obvious problem, he is an extremist, with little independent appeal, and he is currently polling at 1% in Iowa. He is as far to the right as it gets, and he proposes teaching only intelligent design in public schools, outlawing homosexuality, and turning America away from the fascist Islamic politicians who are controlling the country (his words, not mine). Regardless, I would love to run against this nut in a general.
This Post does not necessarily reflect the views of Penn Democrats.
o
No comments:
Post a Comment