The GOP is going through more auditions for a presidential candidate than a revival of "A Chorus Line." It's hard to keep up with the latest.
Barbour, Daniels, and Huckabee have opted out. Trump jumped out, but then said he might come back. Nut is at the being-ignored stage, and going nowhere in the polls. In fact, Nut (8%) came in behind Herman Cain (10%) in the latest Gallop poll, which means he's got to make a big splash soon, or he's out.
Romney is still the nominal front-runner at 17%, but nobody seems happy about it. Palin comes in second at 15%, but may or may not announce, although she's doing a good job of building expectations this week.
Ron Paul is a perennial also-ran who won't catch any more fire than he has now. Pawlenty keeps plugging along without any increase in his poll numbers (currently in 6th place with 5%). Herman Cain? Seems to make a big impression when he speaks to a conservative crowd, but not likely to be acceptable to the GOP powers that be. Santorum? He'll never make it out of the distant pack. Nothing much to recommend him, and he tends to shoot himself in the foot and leave crazy tag lines behind, like "man on dog sex," in his attempt to disparage gay rights.
Huntsman has a lot to offer, but may have too much (good) baggage: he's bright, thoughtful, sane, and has more liberal views on some social issues than the right wing can handle. But he's handsome, speaks Mandarin Chinese fluently, was Obama's ambassador to China and distinguished himself; was a popular governor of Utah, he's also a Mormon and fiscally conservative -- and, proving his manly bona fides, he rides a motorcycle.
Jeb Bush continues to lie low, repeating that he will not be a candidate. Texas governor Rick Perry is subtly allowing his name to be floated, and hinting that he'll "think about running." And Rudy Guiliani is headed for New Hampshire. That was the one bright spot thus far: we've been spared his toothy grin and megalomania. The Donald has enough New York narcissism for everyone, thank you very much.
Oh, I forgot: Michele Bachmann, who insists that Sarah Palin's entry into the race won't change her plans. "We're not interchangeable," she proclaims. If Palin announces, Bachmann may just have to jump in to prove her point. Lately, she's taken to saying she feels "a calling" to run. That's code to the religious right that it's God's will that she run.
And then there are the hardly known and the completely unknowns: Buddy Roemer, Greg Johnson, Fred Karger.
So there you have it. Short of a white horse knight like David Petraeus (who wouldn't be popular with the get-out-of Afghanistan crowd) or possibly Michael Bloomberg, I don't see the winner they're waiting for.
They're going to have to choose him/her and turn her/him into that white knight (or knightess).
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
TILT !!!
ReplyDeleteA poll by CNN/Public Reserach included Giuliani in the list, and he came in on top.
Guiliani 16%, Romney 15%, Palin 13%, Paul 12%, Cain 10%. Others, including Nut, all below 10%.
I think the really significant thing is Cain at 10%. The others all have name recognition from 2008 campaign. He came out of nowhere and is ahead of both Gingrich and Pawlenty.
Guiliani? Nah. He was the "new" name on the list. Wait 'til people remember why they didn't like him in 2008. And his wife problems rival Nut's. Remember his being kicked out of the governor's mansion, when he wanted to have his mistress come to a party?
Poor Romney. He always misfires when he tries to do jokes. He was in Chicago this week and went to a famous pizza joint there, ate a piece and then had them send the leftovers over to Obama's campaign headquarters. He thought it was funny, but no one else quite got the point.
ReplyDeleteSounds to me like a dog fighting over territory: see? I invaded your territory, and here's the proof? Or, see, I'm rich and your poor staff needs a food handout?
So what? It's a childish stunt and backfires on Mitt.
George Will, always with some good lines trashing Sarah Palin, said on This Week this morning that she is a "genius of manipulation," for whom there cannnot possibly be an undecided voter at this point.
ReplyDeleteBut, he adds: "Should this person be given nuclear weapons? The question answers itself."