Osler's Razor

Michelle Bachman does not "seem crazy." She seems like the only sensible person in the race. You are going to be surprised how many people vote for her. Not everyone went to Harvard.
 

you forgot a 'pro' with Mitt Romney...good hair.
That seems to work really well for Rick Perry....
 

Mittens is a Mormon, and evangelicals think they're not Christians. That makes him as good as a Muslim, and we already have a Muslim president.

Gingrich divorces his wives when they have cancer and marries his Tiffany's lobbyist mistresses. Can middle America relate to that?

Herman Cain is--get this--black.

Sarah Palin is a liability to the GOP and will never resonate with big donors.

TPaw/Huntsman it is. Meet the new Dole/Kemp.
 

There is no way Romney wins, and it is not because he is a Mormon. It's because he does not connect to people the way Palin does.
 

Anon 12:05: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnQ3kvrIRVs

Yup, it's pretty clear that not everyone went to Harvard.
 

1) Palin
2) Huntsman
3) Romney
4) Bachman

The Tea Party is driving the Republican Party right now. Palin will be their candidate.
 

The people you have listed will only win the nomination if the Republican party basically decides that they have no chance to take back the White House in 2012. If that is the case, then somebody will be chosen based on their ability to do the least damage.

I think if Republicans think they have a chance to win back the White House then we will see people like Paul Ryan and Chris Christie jump into the race, both more serious candidates with real gravitas. I also think you will see people like Rudy Guliani and Rick Perry jump in, who may not have the same spark as those other two, but do have some political advantages (Rudy if he learned from his mistakes 3 years ago).

At this time in 2007 nobody would have considered Obama a serious candidate. At this time in 1991, nobody considered Bill Clinton a serious candidate. So, I think it is too early to know anything.

Anon 8:13 - I watched that video. God Anderson Cooper is such a smarmy and smug a-hole.

I did not go to Harvard. Smoke 'em if you got 'em.
 

None of them seem especially likely. Romney might have had a shot if it weren't for him being governor when universal health care took effect in Massachusetts, but with the Republicans making such a big deal out of defeating "Obamacare," he's probably toast on that one.

12:05 - I respectfully disagree. Michelle Bachmann does not seem to be a sensible person. She's in the same boat as Palin - too fringe and too polarizing to win the Republican nomination. If, by some chance, either Bachmann or Palin won the GOP nomination, President Obama will win in a landslide.
 

The Republicans ought to nominate Marco Rubio.
 

1. Pawlenty -- I like him. A prophet can never be a prophet in his own hometown. I always heard the worst things about Bill Clinton from Arkansans. As a national candidate, I think T-Paw is a real quality product.

2. Hunstman -- another very attractive candidate. The book on Huntsman is that he is an amazing retail politician, which gives him a chance for a surprisingly good finish in IA and NH.

3. Romney -- I like him okay, and he is the default front runner right now--but he is the weakest candidate in terms of substance. It is not that he is too liberal (although Romney care is the latest in a series of unfortunate events in his star-crossed dream to be philospher king). His reputation as a waffler is fairly earned. I get the sense that this man will say anything to be president.

4. Michelle Bachman -- heavyweight resume. Gives the impression that she is a lightweight on cable news. Will be a force to be reckoned with in IA and SC. Formidable and someone to watch.

5. Sarah Palin -- remains the most amazing American politician of our generation. I continue to believe she is too smart to run for president (as it has become a thankless and impossible job), but, OTH, who knows. She might get goaded into it just to make the "lamestream" media miserable.

6. Ron Paul -- makes more sense everyday. Twenty years ago I disagreed with almost every thing he stood for; today I think he is right on a ton of things. And my point, of course, is that he has not changed a bit; the situation has. But he is more and more a man for the hour.

7. Herman Cain -- the talk radio candidate; he will burn hot for a brief moment and then flame out. Right of Return? Right of Return?

8. Newt -- deader than a doornail.

9. Sheriff Rick -- a Texan from central casting, A&M grad, Corps of Cadets, real service in the USAF, Eagle Scout, actually born on a ranch in West Texas, can boast of the best economic record as governor in any state in the USA. Evidently, he is dying to be asked to run for president. He doesn't want to "run" for--but he is willing to "stand" for--the office of president. Interesting times.

I also resist the conventional wisdom that this is a weak field. In fact, it is an incredible field. Maybe the most dynamic set of candidates for the GOP nomination in my lifetime.
 

What about John "the Stache" Bolton? I'd just love to see that guy in a debate with Ron Paul and Newt. Romney would easily win the nomination but for his health care issues. He's by far shown to be the most capable manager, but his explanation for Romneycare has not been convincing. I wonder if he'll have to pull a Pawlenty--who now says his cap & trade position was wrong. Rudy can't win because he's not prolife, just like the mythical prolife Democrat can't win.

Other Kendall
 

The End Of The World Is Nigh! I actually agree with RRL!

I think the R's have no serious candidates, and have written off 2012.

Palin is an ignorant fluff who is a disgrace to the future female candidates.

Newt is an amoral psycho who will do or say anything to get elected. (Witness his 'religious experience' than has somehow absolved him of his lifelong moral turpitude)

Ron Paul has some good ideas, but has been too long on the fringe to be electable - and his age is against him.

Rick Perry has run Texas into the ground while proclaiming how good thing are. He is an 'honest politician' tho - he has stayed bought and staunchly supported every anti-environmental anti-women and anti-education policy possible. He has pandered to the right wing nut fringe to such an extent than he is becoming a joke.

Obama has had to deal with the fiscal disaster left to him by Shrub. This will take decades to rectify. With any luck, we can survive the Shrub debacle, but it will take many years of a responsible policy.

Lee
 

Waco Farmer--

That's a strange thing to say about Pawlenty! It does matter that he created a huge deficit here, given that the heart of his message seems to be "look what I did in Minnesota!" Clinton did NOT run on what he did in Arkansas. He ran on what he would be as President. I think Pawlenty is a surprisingly weak candidate to merit your praise.

That said, I agree with you on the rest of the field. There are a lot of different talents there, and a real diversity of approaches. A good debate among this group would be fascinating.
 

Wow -
TPaw / Huntsman the new Dole/Kemp? We all know how that ended.

Paul Ryan: think he will wait til 2016.

The fact that Romney is a Mornmon is old news. His Dad was electable in Michigan and he in Mass. The bigger question is what has he done since he left office in Mass?
 

I can't vote for Nixon/Lodge or even Rockefeller can I? They are all dead, but better than any of this lot.
 

I LOVE that guy from the Rent is Too Damn High party!
 

Here goes quick....

Of the ones running:
1) Romney- meeeh
2) Pawlenty/Huntsman- (eye roll) meeeh
3) Gingrich- Time has passed, making himself seem smaller by running
4) Palin/Bachman- There's a role for them, but we generally don't elect bombthrowers president
5) Cain- He's not terribly impressive... I could rant about being an outside and crib Hannity talking points
6) Paul/Johnson- The libertarian wing is growing, but it's not ready for primetime yet (note to these guys, may want to back off the legalizing heroin platform)

The best case for the GOP is that Paul Ryan decides he's the only man to cogently debate Obama on budget issues and sell an alternative narrative. And then decides to add a VP nominee who gives him some foreign policy creds, has no presidential aspirations of their own to allow a Rubio or Jindal to run after, and helps balance the ticket demographically... say, Condi Rice.

Ryan-Rice '12? Heckuva lot more appealing than the names we've listed.
 

Mark--

Admittedly, I am no expert on Pawlenty's record in MN. I only know the basics, twice elected in a state that is no slam dunk for the GOP. I am skeptical that he is wholly to blame for MN's current financial woes. There are 48 states struggling mightily right now, mostly due to external factors.

I like his tone. I like his style. I like him on the issues--for the most part. I like it that the Club for Growth does not like him.

As for Clinton and not running on his record in AR, I think it was implicit. All governors who run for president run as successful chief executives. If nominated, however, Pawlenty will run the Clinton campaign of 1992: "the President is responsible for an abysmal economy. Elect me and happy days are here again."
 

My guy was Mitch Daniels.

I could vote for Pawlenty or Huntsman without reservation at this point.

I guess I could hold my nose and vote Romney, but his cynical approach to issues bothers me. He is mean, plastic and not likeable. But maybe that's what the country needs right now... a tough SOB CEO type.

Gingrich.... I'd have a tough time, but in the end could vote for in him in the General Election.... maybe. The biggest problem I have with him, as well as Bachmann and Paul is that they've never held any sort of "executive" position. Voting on a bill is not the same as executing a policy. To some extent, that's been a problem for Obama too.

Newt is professorial in his approach, he can and does see more than one side to an issue. That's good. But one must make decisions as President. And one must delegate. He proved to be terrible as a manager when Speaker.

I was able to tolerate Palin for a while, but after she a) quit as Governor, and b) signed on with the birthers I had to take off the rose colored glasses. She's an egomaniac with no intellectual depth.

Ron Paul. Sorry, anyone who believes in the Gold Standard in today's complex economy is nuts. See comments above about lack of executive experience.

Bachman. I think she's shrill and opportunistic, but at least she doesn't hide from the press like Palin. But way too aggressively partisan, not at all Presidential and again, see above.

Cain...Wow. He says a lot of clever things, but he is NOT well versed on current events, history, geo-politics, foreign policy or a lot of other important elements. If he can get educated quick and surround himself with sober, serious, intelligent advisors...maybe.... but I doubt it.

Perry's views on Federalism/States Rights are a little disturbing to this Twice over Great-great Grandson of Union Veterans.

Yes, put me down as hoping for a Christie candidacy, or even Jeb Bush. But I think the serious candidates like these two are waiting for 2016.
 

Actually you left out the very intriguing Gary Johnson, former Governor of New Mexico. Quasi-Isolationist foreign policy, but good track record as Governor. Pro Marijuana Legalization. Probably doesn't stand a chance of getting the nod, but Willie Nelson supports him.
 

I think that Minnesota's budget deficit is actually $5 billion rather than $50 billion. But that's still billion with a "b" and, therefore, a lot of SPAM.
 

The more the tea in the GOP nominee, the bigger his or her defeat.