Republicans do not need to nominate a candidate anytime soon. On the contrary, if they want to beat President Obama, they should take their time before settling on a nominee.
In January of 2010, Harry Reid looked like a “dead man walking” politically. Fourteen percent of Nevadans were unemployed, and he was having a hard time getting above 43 percent in most polls. There was only one way he could win: destroy his Republican opponent before he or she ever got out of the blocks.
Advertisement
Sharron Angle eventually won the Republican nomination in June of 2010. I joined her campaign post-primary and had a front-row seat for the race. Within 48 hours of the primary, Reid went on TV with hundreds of thousands of dollars in attack ads, while Angle — a surprise candidate lacking a professional staff at that point — had not even hired a TV firm yet. The attacks came in waves and never let up. Her favorability rating dropped to 39 percent, with 54 percent rating her unfavorably. By September, Angle had hired an experienced team and righted the ship, but the damage was already done. Reid won reelection by defining Angle before she could fight back.
The GOP nominee will certainly be far more ready to take on Obama than Angle was to handle Reid in June of 2010. But heading into the 2012 campaign, President Obama is in a spot similar to Reid’s. Unemployment is at 8.5 percent, and Obama has a job-approval rating of 45 percent according to Gallup.
Like Reid, Obama will not be able to convince voters to give him a second term based on a record of achievement. Obama foreshadowed his playbook recently when he said, “Don’t judge me by the Almighty; judge me by the alternative.” One Obama staffer was even more blunt, telling GQ, “In a re-elect, all you’re really doing is trying to destroy the other guy.”
Armed with a billion dollars, Obama’s “killing machine” is poised to do a more effective job “destroying the other guy” than any presidential campaign has before. The advent of “super PACs” and their unlimited corporate contributions make it plausible that at least another billion dollars in vicious, personal attack ads will come out of Chicago. The aim will be to demolish the Republican nominee as early as possible.
The Republican establishment says the best way to counter this is to quickly pick a nominee. The thinking goes that a long Republican primary process weakens the eventual candidate, because the candidates will spend money on beating each other that is better aimed at beating Obama. But this year, that strategy plays right into Obama’s hand.
Ending the primary season early simply allows Team Obama more time to focus their fire on the GOP nominee. Spending the next five months under a blistering assault from the Obama “Death Star” in Chicago, aided by super PACs and the media, could be a disaster for Republicans.
As for the argument that the GOP nominee will suffer from depleted resources, don’t believe it. In 2010, Angle raised $28 million against Harry Reid in only four months. The Republican nominee for president has never lost because of a lack of money. He will have no trouble raising money against Obama.
Campaign advice from the guy who put both Sharron Angle and Herman Cain on the road to victory. Hey Jordan, did you ever work with someone who actually won something? Cordially, Bill
A snarky comment from a cheap shot shooter. Mr. Gehrke's insights reveal what many voters tend to do, which is to believe what the media tells them instead of doing the research to find out the truth. The truth may be what the media is saying, but at least read and educate oneself instead of only listening to ads. People can be manipulated by negativity and perceptions quickly hardened.
I agree. The more debates that detail the failures of this administration and discuss alternatives, while educating the public on what drives the economy and defines America, the better chance we have.
They're afraid if they get Ron Paul out, Santorum and Gingrich will reap the benefit - hence the hurry. Romney is on top now, if Ron Paul leaves, the conservatives will absolutely be on top.
I doubt their analysis of the situation is correct if that is what they really think. Pauls 10-20% will not be quick to jump to anyone else even if he did drop out. He's not dropping however, he's in it to the convention to collect all the delegates he can, and maybe have some impact on the party. I do believe they are afraid that the gingrich/santorum/huntsman/perry vote will coalesce and be a clear majority over Romneys ceiling of about 25-30%. The only way Romney wins is if the 20-25% of Republicans who want to vote for the winner jump onto the Romney bandwagon. Of course, I think they mostly are, because he is running on nothing but his perceived electability.
Why ask a big and faceless enterprise as the GOP? Ask instead the editorial board of National Review. They have worked quite tirelessly to reduce the field with their hit pieces. Though, they will actually need to throw their hat into the ring and offer up an endorsement.
We've been waiting a long time for a small government conservative. It's pretty sad when the last nominated candidate who said the era of big government was over was _Bill Clinton_. Every four years since, we've been waiting to hear that again, through George W and John McCain, we're still waiting and tired of listening to these statist clowns.
How can you NOT believe that? Obama has a high approval rating despite evidence to the contrary. Non Romney candidates are rising/falling according to the media action of the moment. They want Romney.
You're right. BO and the choice of the conventional wisdom, Billary, fought up until almost the convention. Let these guys fight it out until July, August, September. It will toughen them up, just like it did Barry Sowerto.
The reason to end this quickly is that Obama can't do as much damage to Mitt than his fellow Republican candidates are doing. Obama's attacks will be seen as the inevitable partisanship of a campaign, and will have little effect on committed Republicans. The attacks of Newt and the others will weaken Republican support for the nominee.
It's interesting to hear commentary on nominating the Republican challenger to Obama from a guy who worked on the Tim Cahill INDEPENDENT bid to be Massachusetts governor. The Repbulican candidate, Charlie Baker, would've beat Obama clone Deval Patrick without the efforts of Mr. Gehrke. Thanks for nothing.
Yeah, why the hurry? We're only talking two states out of 50. Alot can happen in the next few months.
We need to forge a candidate to fight Obama, and that means we put them through the fire now. All of them.
The only ones pushing for a quick resolution are Team Romney and the Media. And that fact right there should give everyone a big long pause.
As I was reading this article, the same thing occurred to me. All the National Review columnists and editorial board have been doing is pushing Romney relentlessly. So why did you publish this piece? To make it seem as though you're bipartisan? If that's the case, I have some swampland in Florida to sell you.
The "debates" and the retail politicking in Iowa and NH have brought is to this point where faithful look around and can only wonder how these 2nd and 3rd tier players are the final "choices"
What to do??
A Republican Governors Council, including past and present R state governors caucus without cameras or microphones or political assistants for 3 days with the agenda of producing the name of a recommended candidate that they will commit to endorse. Currently declared candidates who are or have been R governors can attend but not vote and are not bound to endorse an opponent for the nomination.
Perhaps there could be a breakout candidate resulting from the council. Right now this looks like a dreary slog to the convention, getting murkier and less appealing by the day.
