Bad signs for the GOP in 2012

Jeb Golinkin

writes at FrumForum.com that a quick glance at the 2012 GOP contenders reveals that the overwhelming majority of these candidates would have no chance of defeating an incumbent president, much less the Obama campaign machine, in a general election.
.

Newt Gingrich: Gingrich is too old, too polarizing, and too Washington to have a fighting chance at winning the presidency.

Sarah Palin: 55% of Americans view her unfavorably. That’s pretty much game over, but even if it wasn’t, the fact that the number holds among independents (55% of them view her unfavorably and 40% of that group said they view her in a “strongly unfavorable” light) also would be a knockout. 41% of all polled view her as strongly unfavorable. In short, that means she can write off 40% of the electorate before the race even starts. Her chances of beating Barack Obama are slim.

Mitt Romney: Deemed the “frontrunner” by many, Romney would get destroyed in a general election. Flip-flop. Flip-flop. Flip-flop. The label destroyed John Kerry, and Romney’s propensity to change his mind makes Kerry’s switches look tame to the point of irrelevance. And did I mention that Obamacare looks like Romneycare on steroids? No chance.

Mike Huckabee: Christians heart Huckabee. Independents do not. Next.

Gary Johnson: Who is Gary Johnson?

Rick Santorum: Staunch social conservatives need not apply for the presidency. Santorum tried to mandate the teaching of intelligent design nationwide in 2001. Not a single Latino in America is going to vote for this guy. Neither are independents, moderate Democrats or a lot of moderate Republicans. If he is lucky and Obama does a lot of things very, very wrong between now and 2012, Santorum might… just might lose 65-35 to Obama.

Ron Paul: The man is a fringe lunatic. The answer is no.

Mike Pence: Who is Mike Pence?

Tim Pawlenty: The only candidate of the batch that I am not 100% confident would get absolutely mauled by Barack Obama in 2012. A smart, competent, seemingly likeable candidate. Relatively moderate. But he is from Minnesota and not really popular there anymore. In March, a poll of 500 Minnesotans pegged his approval at 42%. If his own voters don’t like him, it will be hard for him to beat an incumbent in a general election for the presidency.

And if you think this is meaningless because the Republican savior just hasn’t shown themselves yet, think again…

The GOP’s star is not coming. Obama became a superstar at the Democratic Convention in 2004 and by 2006 (two years before the election….), every single person that followed politics knew who Barack Obama was. We have neither a Hillary Clinton (a powerhouse presumed nominee) or a rising star who captured the nation’s attention. Paul Ryan is a darling amongst conservatives but about ten mainstream Americans have ever heard of him. Jindal was supposed to be the rising star, but he blew his “national unveiling” with an awkward response to Obama’s State of the Union.

But FrumForum commenter MaxTwain puts this analysis into context with a historical record of GOP candidates:

Let’s review the GOP fields from the past few elections. I think after you see where we’ve been and what we had running in the past you will realize just how much better the 2012 field can be.

1996: Bob Dole, Pat Buchanan, Steve Forbes, Phil Gramm, Richard Lugar, Robert Dornan, Pete Wilson, Arlen Specter, Alan Keyes

2000: George W. Bush, John McCain, Steve Forbes, Orrin Hatch, Gary Bauer, Alan Keyes, Lamar Alexander, Dan Quayle, Elizabeth Dole

2008: John McCain, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter, Ton Tancredo, Sam Brownback, Tommy Thompson, Jim Gilmore

2012: Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, John Thune, Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, Mike Pence, George Pataki, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Herman Cain, Ron Paul, Gary Johnson

If you look at our primaries in the recent past you begin to realize our field is deeper then in the past. In fact, without George W. Bush in 2000, you could argue 2012 will have the best potential field of candidates. Sure, no one is the next Reagan, and no one will have the media drooling quite like Obama did, but we have a solid list of credible candidates, far more credible then Dole or McCain were when they got the nomination.

I think the problem you are having is that for decades the GOP nomination has been a orderly process, and now, just as in 2008, we are starting to have primary campaigns that are more like Democrats, where the next in line might not be the next in line, and where someone new could emerge from the pack and upset the established order just as Carter and Obama did.

Huckabee Responds to Coulter

Team Huck has released this response to Coulter on MikeHuckabee.com. It addresses further comments by Coulter made in a column and not the appearance above specifically:

Ann Coulter’s comments are based on a response I made during a radio call-in show in which a caller asked what I thought about the Supreme Court ruling on Lawrence v. Texas. At the time I had not read the ruling and was basing my opinion on the summary by the caller. After reading the decision I believe it is obvious that the ruling was wrongly
decided. Lawrence v. Texas is an extreme example of judicial activism. It could, in fact, be inappropriately used to attack our marriage laws nationwide.

I am in agreement with the dissent by Justices Scalia, Rehnquist, and Thomas:

“[The ruling] dismantles the structure of constitutional law that has permitted a distinction to be made between heterosexual and homosexual unions, insofar as formal recognition in marriage is concerned. If moral disapprobation of homosexual conduct is ‘no legitimate state interest’ for purposes of proscribing that conduct, …what justification could there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples exercising ‘the liberty protected by the Constitution’?”

Furthermore, As Justice Thomas said, we might disagree with the wisdom of a law, but that is the province of the Legislature, not unelected judges. No such activist Justices will be appointed as long as I am President.

I wish Ms. Coulter had contacted me or my campaign to discuss my position in detail before writing her column. I would have appreciated the opportunity to clarify this matter.

The Mike Huckabee Immigration Plan…

The Mike Huckabee Immigration Plan…

The Secure America Plan A 9-Point Strategy for Immigration Enforcement and Border Security

Overview: Implement a broad-based strategy that commits the resources of the federal government to the enforcement of our immigration laws and results in the attrition of the illegal immigrant population.

1. Build the Fence

  • Ensure that an interlocking surveillance camera system is installed along the border by July 1, 2010.
  • Ensure that the border fence construction is completed by July 1, 2010.

2. Increase Border Patrol

  • Increase the number of border patrol agents.
  • Fully support all law enforcement personnel tasked with enforcing immigration law.

3. Prevent Amnesty

  • Policies that promote or tolerate amnesty will be rejected.
  • Propose to provide all illegal immigrants a 120-day window to register with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement and leave the country. Those who register and return to their home country will face no penalty if they later apply to immigrate or visit; those who do not return home will be, when caught, barred from future reentry for a period of 10 years.

4. Enforce the Law on Employers

  • Employment is the chief draw for most illegal immigrants and denying them jobs is the centerpiece of an attrition strategy.
  • Impose steep fines and penalties on employers that violate the law.
  • Institute a universal, mandatory citizenship verification system as part of the normal hiring process.
  • Prevent the IRS and the Social Security Administration from accepting fraudulent Social Security numbers or numbers that don’t match the employees’ names.*

5. Establish an Economic Border

  • Move toward passage of the FairTax.
  • The FairTax provides an extra layer of security by creating an economic disincentive to immigrate to the U.S. illegally.

6. Empower Local Authorities

  • Promote better cooperation on enforcement by supporting legislative measures such as the CLEAR Act, which aims to systematize the relationship between local law and federal immigration officials.
  • Encourage immigration-law training for police. Local authorities must be provided the tools, training, and funding they need so local police can turn illegal immigrants over to the federal authorities.

7. Ensure Document Security

  • End exemptions for Mexicans and Canadians to the US-VISIT program, which tracks the arrival and departure of foreign visitors. Since these countries account for the vast majority of foreigners coming here (85 percent), such a policy clearly violates Congress’ intent in mandating this check-in/check-out system.
  • Reject Mexico’s “matricula consular” card, which functions as an illegal-immigrant identification card.

8. Discourage Dual Citizenship

  • Inform foreign governments when their former citizens become naturalized U.S. citizens.
  • Impose civil and/or criminal penalties on American citizens who illegitimately use their dual status (e.g., using a foreign passport, voting in elections in both a foreign country and the U.S.).

9. Modernize the Process of Legal Immigration

  • Eliminate the visa lottery system and the admission category for adult brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens.
  • Increase visas for highly-skilled and highly-educated applicants.
  • Expedite processing for those who serve honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces.
  • Improve our immigration process so that those patiently and responsibly seeking to come here legally will not have to wait decades to share in the American dream. Governor Huckabee has always been grateful to live in a country that people are trying to break into, rather than break out of.

*This policy will be drafted to comply with the final federal court decisions on this issue.

Note: This plan is partially modeled on a proposal by Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies. (“Re: Immigration: Ten Points for a Successful Presidential Candidate,” National Review, May 23, 2005.)