Dead Presidents
By Anthony Bergen
E-Mail: bergen.anthony@gmail.com
Anonymous Asks:
deadpresidents Said:
Well, Romney’s giving a major speech tonight in New Hampshire — and since New Hampshire has already voted and Romney will easily win the five Northeastern states holding their primaries today (including biggies like New York and Pennsylvania) — I’ll go out on a limb and say that the national campaign probably starts tonight. I don’t know what Romney’s going to say, but I would imagine he’ll set his sights on President Obama for good beginning with the polls that close tonight.
It’s the smart thing to do. Romney doesn’t need to fight for the GOP nomination anymore. It’s his. He doesn’t need to waste money fighting off Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul, and he doesn’t need to swing any further to the right than he already has. What Romney must do is start building a powerhouse team around him, keep raising a shitload of money, plug any leaks or repair any damage from the primaries, start moving to the center, and target Obama every day until November 6th.
This is where it will finally get interesting. Sure, things will calm down a bit until we get closer to the conventions, but this is where we find out if Romney can hang with Obama on the big stage. Oddly enough, Romney matches up better with Obama nationally than he matched up against his fellow Republican opponents in the party contests. Romney had a hard time being the the best Republican for GOP voters, but that’s not a problem he has from this point forward. Can he gain some of those independents and moderates? That’s what his chances hinge on.
I’m interested to see if Romney tries to get a boost by naming his running mate sometime soon. Normally, candidates wait until the convention (or a few days before the convention) to do so, but I don’t think it’s an accident that he campaigned with Florida Senator Marco Rubio recently (in Pennsylvania, of all places). I don’t think Rubio’s the best VP pick for Romney, but it got people talking, and that’s exactly what Romney wants. He may shake things up by naming a running mate soon in order to get the press focus and also in order to enlist another heavy-hitter that can raise money or be a surrogate in another part of the country so that the Romney campaign can basically be two places at once. It would also be helpful for Romney because I think he wants to stay above the fray and not get dirty (and I’m not even sure Romney has it in him to be dirty), but a VP pick can be the hatchet man (or woman) and let Romney keep his shiny white dress shirts clean.
There is a precedent for an early VP pick. In 1976, when Ronald Reagan challenged Gerald Ford for the GOP nomination, Reagan announced his choice of a running mate, Pennsylvania Senator Richard Schweiker, and that was during the primaries, before the Republicans even decided between Ford and Reagan. The ultra-Conservative Reagan did that in order to shore up support among Republican moderates that he was trying to win away from President Ford, so I can see the moderate Romney naming a Rubio or Paul Ryan as his running mate sometime soon in order to solidify his standing among the Conservatives that are still wary about him.
After this crazy process, though, I think the pregame show is over and now it’s time for the main event. Unfortunately for us, the main event is almost 7 months long.
This is a pretty awesome column by Ruben Navarrette Jr. about how, technically, Mitt Romney could be considered more Mexican than Navarrette (and me!).
An excerpt from Navarrette’s column:
I am an American, born in the United States to parents who were born in the United States. In fact, three of my four grandparents were born in the United States. And yet, growing up, people in my hometown in Central California referred to me and other Mexican-Americans like me as “Mexican”. That was the shorthand. But comparing bloodlines, you could say that Romney is more “Mexican” than I am. After all, Romney is just one generation removed from our ancestral homeland; I’m two.
This is a really good article from Ben Smith at Politico. Romney is going to be the Republican nominee, and a win in South Carolina would all but clinch the nomination. That will give Romney plenty of time to build a base amongst Conservatives who distrust him, raise more-and-more money, and prepare for facing Obama. Obama is not unbeatable, especially if Romney clinches the GOP nomination sooner rather than later.
Anonymous Asks:
deadpresidents Said:
There are some variables. It really depends on how quickly Romney is able to lock up the GOP nomination and begin focusing on the general campaign. If Romney’s able to clinch it quickly and his former opponents start endorsing him it will allow the Republicans to repair any damage done during the nomination fight, raise more money, organize the Republican base, and zero in on President Obama. The sooner that happens, the better chance Romney will have to defeat Obama.
If the Republican nomination isn’t decided until late-March, it’s going to be tough for the GOP. A lengthy battle will damage the Republican nominee before they even get to Tampa for the convention. President Obama will be able to sit back, raise tons of money, try to get things done as President (there’s no better advertisement for being President than doing Presidential things), and be fresh and energized coming out of the Democratic Convention in Charlotte. Romney could also be in a lot of trouble if there’s a third-party challenge from someone to his right. A third-party challenge won’t siphon votes from President Obama; it will drain some of Romney’s support and it would only require a small shift to split Obama’s opposition into two camps and propel Obama into a second term.
As for your last question, I’m voting for President Obama unless Jon Huntsman is the Republican nominee. If Huntsman’s the nominee, I might vote for a Republican for the first time in my life for any office at any level.
mjmoss Asks:
deadpresidents Said:
How President Obama campaigns will depend on who his opponent is. If Mitt Romney is the Republican nominee, Obama’s going to want to attack Romney’s inconsistencies and fight Romney for the center. In a race between Obama and Romney, the extremists on both sides will basically cancel each other out, and the White House will go to the candidate who wins over the most moderates.
If Obama were to face a more conservative challenger like Gingrich or Perry or Santorum (which isn’t going to happen, it’s going to be Romney), he’d have to portray that conservative as someone who is out-of-touch with the majority of American society. Again, he’d have to shore up support among the moderates, but in this situation he’d seek the votes of the moderates in a different way than if he were facing Romney.
To put it in really simplistic terms, if it’s Obama vs. Romney, Obama’s going to want to win over the moderates by saying, “I’m more moderate and centrist than my opponent is.” If it’s Obama vs. Gingrich, Obama will have to win over the moderates by saying, “Look how far away from your beliefs my opponent is.” In one case it’s “I’m more like you” and in the other case it’s “He’s not like you”, if that makes sense.
No matter what, President Obama will definitely have to remind people of his accomplishments and really do a better job of communicating just what those accomplishments are. It can’t just be “we passed health care reform” or “we killed bin Laden” or “we scaled back the war”. There has to be some really clear examples.
What would really help the President is if his campaign could find that same spark of organizational magic that it had in 2007/2008 in order to get out the vote. We’re not going to see voter turnout in 2012 like we saw in 2008, but it’s in the President’s best interest for his campaign to do everything necessary to replicate that success. Higher voter turnout is good for the Democrats, bad for the Republicans.
Maybe I’m just tired after a long day, but doesn’t the Mexican War version of Franklin Pierce look like Mitt Romney with an A Flock of Seagulls haircut?
ballershots Asks:
deadpresidents Said:
Senator Thune is definitely a very, very conservative and evangelical Christian, but the thing is that he doesn’t sound nearly as crazy when he talks about it as, say, Sarah Palin does (and Thune is far more conservative and religious than Palin).
Thune would probably run into some challenges with independents, but I think moderate Republicans would gladly support him if he looks to be the powerhouse that the party would need to rally behind to beat President Obama in 2012.
I think Thune would have far less trouble due to religion than Mitt Romney might (and, no matter what people say, any issues that Romney faces as a Mormon is due to blatant intolerance from a large part of the population) or even Palin, who rightly or wrongly, has been tagged as pretty wacky when it comes to religion because of some of her comments. I’m not judging anyone’s faith or religious devotion, but Thune (in my opinion) sounds more earnest and educated when he discusses his beliefs.
By the way, another potential 2012 GOP candidate who is in the same boat as John Thune is Mike Huckabee. Huckabee is devoutly religious and ultra-conservative, but he sounds more reasoned when he talks about his faith because there isn’t a question about whether or not he’s thought deeply about his beliefs.
(Huckabee is another Republican who scares me. I know he ran in 2008 and, obviously, lost, but he had a better showing than most people expected and he is very likable. I can see a better-funded, more well-known, tested and prepared Huckabee connecting with voters and surprising a lot of people in 2012.)
