Matt Bai makes some good points about Jon Huntsman, and an even better point about New Hampshire. One thing people forget is that independents can vote in the New Hampshire primary simply by showing up and declaring for one party or the other. In some years, like 2000, there are compelling contests in both parties and independents have to decide which race they want to weigh in on. For example, you may have been kind of a fan of Bill Bradley but have been most concerned that the airhead George W. Bush not win the Republican nomination. In that case, you might have opted to vote for McCain even though you’d probably not vote for him in the general election. In other years, like 2004, there is no contest for one party’s nomination, and independents are free to make mischief for the party they like the least. Maybe you were conservative-leaning and wanted the Democrats to field a weak candidate. So, you voted for the candidate that seemed the weakest. If McCain hadn’t been so strong in 2000, Bradley probably would have won New Hampshire. And who knows if Kerry would have won in 2004 if there had been a contested primary on the other side.
We know that Obama is going to have no more than token opposition, if any at all. So, that frees up Democrats to re-register as Republicans and for all independents, regardless of their lean, to weigh in on the Republican contest. This creates much, much more room for a moderate Republican to win the New Hampshire primary than would be the case in other years.
Jon Hunstman can’t compete in a closed Republican primary, but he has a puncher’s chance in a wide-open one. If Romney is seen as too wishy-washy, Huntsman might catch on as a better alternative than Tim Pawlenty.
Unfortunately, under the new Republican rules, whoever wins New Hampshire will only walk away with a few delegates more than their closest rival. The only winner-take-all contests will take place at the end. So, winning New Hampshire can’t even begin to deliver a knock-out blow. It can provide momentum and media adoration. It will keep the money flowing. But it can’t transform Huntsman into a front-runner. At best, it can make him a serious contender.
I think it’s more realistic to think of Huntsman as a candidate for vice-president. If the nominee is sufficiently conservative to motivate the mouth-breathers and worry every one else, then picking a moderate guy who is a good debater with excellent foreign policy chops could be a smart move. But, first, Hunstman would have to show some strength at the polls. Winning New Hampshire would demonstrate that Hunstman has some appeal with moderate voters.
Of course, if someone like Bachmann were to miraculously win the nomination, she couldn’t pick Huntsman as her running-mate or we’d all be wondering why the ticket wasn’t flipped. So, even a run for vice-president seems like a long shot. On the other hand, the field is so incredibly weak that anyone halfway sane and competent has to be considered a definite possibility.
Well, either someone like Bachmann will “miraculously” win the nomination or Romney will. No way even tone-deaf Romney is going to choose a fellow Mormon or someone noticeably smarter than he is. Same for Pawlenty except for the Mormon part.
If one of the open loonies gets the nomination, I can’t see them putting up a pro-choice “liberal” by their standards, no matter how convincing their schemers are about the electoral cleverness of it. At least not unless Huntsman is bullied into getting born again into absolutist bigotry, in which case he does nothing to win indies. Besides, he has no home-state constituency to deliver.
So seems to me he either gets the nomination or he’s off the national ticket.
I don’t want to be Captain Obvious here, but let’s forget about any serious Romney campaign for president. He’s a Mormon. The GOP fundie base would no more turn out in support of a Mormon candidate than they would a Jehovah’s Witness or a Mooney. Or a Scientologist, or for that matter even a Jewish candidate. I doubt they’d even turn out for a Catholic. It’s Protestant Jesus straight-no-chaser all the way, or it’s nothing, and the fundies will stay at home if that’s the choice they’re offered.
Given that calculus, so far I see a lot more opportunity for Bachmann or Santorum than there is for Romney, notwithstanding he actually appears more presidential on TV than either of them. Perry also has a chance. The big question is to what extent the wise old heads of the GOP still exert any control over the party, because surely they don’t want to see ‘012 go over the cliff in a clown car, even if they don’t expect to unseat Obama and wouldn’t rather place a higher priority on House and Senate control, which assuredly they do.
I hope Bachmann gets the nom. Citizens United money scares me a bit, but overall I’m betting this would be the way we dislodge her from that congressional seat and catapult her into that Fox career we all know is in her future.
I don’t know — they voted for a dry drunk in droves, so why not a Mormon? They’d vote for Satan himself if it would get that demon out of the White House. And who’s to say that Romney is too principled to get himself Born Again into the One True Faith?
I’m more and more thinking some new face will emerge from the smoke-filled rooms and take the nom by storm. Unlimited TV money is good at doing that.
I’ll agree with that last part. Chances are the true candidate has yet to emerge. This field has to be embarrassing even to the famously shameless GOP.