GOP Candidate Breakdown #10: Gary Johnson

There's really nothing wrong with former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson.  He seems like a nice enough guy, he's honest and principled.  The main problem with him almost has nothing to do with him: he has zero name recognition beyond his home state of New Mexico.  Beyond that state, voters may remember his name but it's a long way from Albuquerque to Iowa and even further from the White House.

A lot of the accomplishments listed on his website (link above) tout that he was a principled conservative in the face of Democratic majorities and that he continued to hold those principles dear throughout his tenure.  More than likely there was a bit of compromise involved and there's nothing wrong with that (unless you are trying to get the GOP nomination.)

Normally, I'd go through the poll numbers, attempting to read the tea leaves about what the latest batch means for one contender or another, how the affect of a primary or caucus will play out on a particular candidate.  The unfortunate truth of the matter is that Gary Johnson doesn't appear in any of them.  This either means that his name isn't mentioned by the pollsters (and if they are, people don't know or support him) or if the pollsters are asking for candidates that the voter supports, they still don't mention this to him.

Is the media to blame for this?  Yes and no.  The media has had an insatiable appetite for GOP candidates.  The moment that Rick Perry entered the race, they were already looking at each other with wide eyes and salivating mouths wondering if Rep. Paul Ryan was going to enter the race.  Rudy Giuliani is still floated as a possible entrant into the competition and almost any other Republican that has a modicum of respect in the party or one that has conservative appeal is mentioned (Sen. Marco Rubio.)

At the same time, however, Johnson has done little or nothing to stand out as a candidate in the current field.  He can give great answers to debate questions, his appeal is good (not great) and his character is without question.  But when you got a crazy lady like Rep. Michele Bachmann running for president, how's a reasonable guy supposed to get any respect around here?  He's a little to the left of someone like, say Ron Paul, but Johnson still believes that the drug war is bullshit and that the government shouldn't spend the kind of money on it that it has been spending.  And what does that get you?  Well, ask Ron Paul.

In the research that I've done for Gary Johnson, the fact of the matter is that wherever he is, he's starting from square one.  He declared that he was running back in April of this year but if had waited until last month, it would have been better for him.  He would have entered the race and there would have been a flurry of media attention and speculation.  With that, he could have established himself as candidate to be dealt with, got his message out and thereby establishing a foothold in any of the states.

So what are the odds that Johnson is going to make headway? Well, a few of the candidates are going to have to drop out.  Not the top tier, mind you, but the lower tier.  Santorum, Gingrich and Cain would have to quit the race and Johnson would have to stick around (I don't know what would cause them to drop out, but this is a hypothetical, right?)  Then, by being the only bottom tier candidate that is still sticking around, he would get more attention not just from the media but from anybody.  The Campaign That Lived, kind of thing.

If Johnson survives to the actual primary season, he could do well in NH and NV, but he would get decimated in IA and SC (where religion and social issues are more important.  Johnson himself just made a blog post about how social issues were not going to win the White House.  By the way, somebody should tell Santorum that.)

I'm not writing the campaign obituary yet because, again, anything can happen in the campaign, but the chances are beyond dim, they're just plain dark.

Sorry, bud.

---

You can follow me on Twitter where I actually have more positive things to say than this @truthissoap

Hillary Clinton for VP? Let's Get Real...

In a post made on Real Clear Politics (the website I use to site poll numbers in my GOP Candidate Breakdown series), writer Richard Benedetto makes the case that the administration should drop VP Joe Biden and pick up Sec. of State Hillary Clinton for the VP spot.  He begins the article as thus:


"If by early next year President Obama's re-election chances are looking as dicey as they do now, there is likely to be a growing clamor inside Democratic circles to drop Joe Biden from the ticket and replace him with Hillary Clinton."


The first thing to mention is that while Obama doesn't do well against "generic GOP candidate", he does do very well against any named candidate.  So unless the GOP is talking about not running anyone against Obama, his chances aren't that dicey.


Also, there hasn't been the hint of discussion of replacing Biden with anyone, much less Clinton.  This kind of talk usually happens when an incumbent is running for re-election.  They did the same thing in 2004 with Dick Cheney and it was Democrats that was talking about how they were thinking about doing that, not Republicans.  Chances are this is something that is mentioned because the GOP want to cause such a shift to happen.


It wouldn't be to the administration's benefit to switch out the VP.  Reason being is that it is synonymous with instability.  I need only mention President. Nixon and the list of VP's that he has showed that the administration was coming apart (also showed that it was coming apart because it actually was coming apart).


"Clinton would add some much-needed pizazz to a tough campaign that Biden does not."


What pizzaz are you talking about?  Does Hillary have a tap dance number and sequined outfits that she didn't break out during her run in '08?


"Moreover, with the growing possibility that a woman -- Rep. Michele Bachmann -- could be on the Republican ticket either in the first or second slot (more likely the latter), Clinton would provide a formidable counter that an all-male ticket would not. Democrats would love to pit Clinton’s political and experiential skills against those of Bachmann."


This is a description of the current moment, not something that is necessarily going to be true in a year (you know, the moment when this sort of talk would actually matter).  It's being super-generous to Michele Bachmann and makes the same sexist assumptions that put Sarah Palin in the national spotlight.  Here, we see the GOP talking and thinking in the same mindset that they were about three and a half years ago.  As long as we have a pretty woman on the ticket, we'll get those liberals where it hurts!


Now, let's look at it from the political career perspective of Clinton.  Right now, she's got foreign policy experience coming out of her ears, something that Biden already had in spades.  But, because he's the VP and the VP position is a marginalized one, he hasn't been able to run around in the same manner as Clinton.



Switch her out to the VP and she's just as stuck as Biden is now.  When 2016 rolls around, all the foreign policy experience is for naught.  


She should stay where she is.  It's the best position for her and really for the country.  If the nation is going to be persuaded by an artificial change of who the Vice-President is, Obama could probably make a deeper impact by doing something more substantial.






---


You can also follow me on Twitter @truthissoap

Sunday's On the Phone to Monday: Aug 13th and 14th

It was the first big weekend of the campaign between the Fox News Debate on Thursday, the Straw Poll on Saturday, the entrance of Gov. Rick Perry and the exit of Gov. Tim Pawlenty.  I've already reviewed the prospects of Perry and the perils of Pawlenty, but let's review the results of the weekend.

Rep. Michele Bachmann Wins Ames Straw Poll

As I have previously written and in regards to what else has been said on the matter, the Ames Straw Poll is important for two kinds of people:  the people who win and the people who say that they have to win it.  Michele Bachmann falls in the former category.  She's allowed to take a victory lap for it as long as she likes, as long as she realizes that it doesn't amount to a hill of beans in the end.  Mitt Romney can tell her all about that.

But the straw poll had more than just the effect of boosting the ego and campaign of the craziest woman running for President.  Certainly worth-noting is that Rep. Ron Paul placed second and a close second at that.  Does this mean that Ron Paul might be able to walk away with a shot at the nomination.

Well, no.  For the same reason that the straw poll doesn't mean that Bachmann is within the nomination by any means, the perception that Ron Paul placed second somehow means something is faulty.  How could Bachmann winning first mean nothing but Paul winning second (which means that he lost, by the way) mean something?

Gov. Rick Perry had announced that he was running for President that day and still managed to pull in more votes than Mitt Romney, but you know who doesn't care?  Mitt Romney.  He hasn't taken a blow in the polls (maybe for the "corporations are people, too" comment, but not for a lack of will at the straw poll) and his campaign is still going strong.  Romney (and others) treated the straw poll for what it is: a nonbinding popularity contest for a group of Iowans.  This isn't the race for the President of Iowa but for the United States and Bachmann and others have yet to really demonstrate the strength beyond the borders of a sparsely populated state.

Oh, dear God...

Gov. Rick Perry Is In Despite Of Everything That He Has Ever Said

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have been Rick-roll'd.

I'm not going into too much about Rick Perry himself;  I've covered that here.

But, in the strict sense of commenting on the announcement itself, the following points should be made about Gov. Perry.

1- When interviewed in December of 2010 (that was about 9 months ago), Governor Rick Perry said, quote "I don't want to be President of the United States.  I'm not going to run for the Presidency of the United States."  By this past Saturday, he changed his mind.  What changed his mind?  Well, either God told him to run (which is conflicting issue because I'm sure that He told Michele Bachmann to run as well) or because he thought that he could win.  I believe he was told the latter.

2-  He was a strong support of then Sen. Al Gore's run for President back in 1992.  If that's not the GOP equivalent of "palling around with terrorists", then it doesn't exist.

3-  In 1989, then Democratic State Rep. Rick Perry introduced an amendment to the Texas constitution that would require that any elected official that is running for another, different elected office would be forced to automatically resign from their current post.  That is to say 1989 Rick Perry would insist that since 2011 Rick Perry is running for President, 2011 Rick Perry should resign immediately.

If the GOP are going to hold Obama to something that Rev. Wright said ten years ago, then doesn't it follow that we should hold politicians to what they actually said themselves?

Ex-Gov. Tim Pawlenty Forgets Why He Got Into this Race To Begin With and Quits

You can read more about my thoughts of this doomed campaign here.  One of the points that I make is that he got into the race almost a full year before the first votes were to be cast in Iowa and then spent the majority of his time in Iowa.  There wasn't a particular issue that he was running on, and, as has been observed elsewhere, because he is at his heart a reasonable person, he wasn't ready to give out the red meat that other candidates (Bachmann).  Overexposure to sheer boredom leads people only one option:  change the channel.

Now, why would he get into the race about 11 months before the first votes would be cast in the state that he campaigned so heavily in?  Because that's the nomination system that we have concocted for ourselves.

Were the entire process streamlined, a moderate voice like Pawlenty would have a chance of surviving the race and having it heard, instead of having it fall to the wayside not six months into campaigning.  He has to withdraw from the race after a popularity contest that (and I cannot stress this enough) doesn't mean anything.

I suppose in the end, it's just as well that he does withdraw, under the circumstances.  If Pawlenty's campaign cannot get past the fact that Ames Straw Poll doesn't mean anything, if they have the foolish perception, like so many in Iowa do, that the Poll actually gives a sustainable moment and produces actual results, then clearly Pawlenty is not fit to hold the highest office in the country.  Good for him.

Tim who?

---

You can also follow me on Twitter @truthissoap

Also, you can follow my regular posts on www.nuzcom.com for more unique insight and commentary on the 2012 Presidential Election!

Rick Perry. Sigh and Yawn.

Rick Perry Running For President?

I don't feel that I have to remind the public about the rule against voting for former Govs of Texas for Prez, but I think that I'm going to anyway.

DON'T SUPPORT FORMER GOVERNORS OF TEXAS!  That state doesn't get to send another person to be prez.  And if Republicans have a problem with that, I would cite Jimmy Carter.  You want another Georgia Peach heading to DC?  No?  Good... now Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich should drop out any time now...

But most pertinently to the case of Governor Perry is that he said specifically that he didn't want to be Prez.  What does it say when he says something very specific like "I don't want to be President of the United States." and then goes to "I'm going to think about it."?  I mean, for a group of conservative intellectuals (I use the term loosely) that don't allow for ambiguity or shades of grey, this is showing some depth.

It's not that I think that Perry shouldn't run for president.  I mean, he shouldn't but that's not the point.  The point is when you are specific with your constituents about a campaign promise, you have to follow through.  There are some cases when these things change.  A guy running for president usually says that the system is broken and that they are going to change it and, once elected, rarely get to affect the change that they want (at least in Obama's case, he tried.)  You have to go back and talk to the people that put you into office and rationalize everything that happened in the interim (between when you were elected and what happened once you got there.)

But there are certain promises that are EASY to maintain!  "I'm not going to run for President." is a gimme!  Just don't run for president.

Also, I'm not entirely comfortable with a guy who thoughtlessly talked about Texas' "special" case re: secession.   Because I thought that the Civil War settled the whole thing.  And the answer was "No."

But is it just me or is Perry a little boring?  I mean, he doesn't have the colossal  fuck-up comments like W. and everyone in TX seems to be pretty happy with him.  Feel free to correct me.

And here I go correcting myself.  This is a guy that has invited all the other govs. of the nation to get together in TX and have a big prayer pow-wow so that Jesus will come off his Moon Base and help the rest of the country... even though we have God on our side... WAIT, Jesus isn't on the Moon, that's what Mormons think...

But, joking aside, there's no fire in the belly, there's no passion for the office of the presidency, not like when he was running for Gov. of TX.  I don't think that he's actually going to do it, in the end.  After all, he'd have to fight for the Xian vote in the GOP with Bachmann (I almost wrote Palin), but honestly, he doesn't seem like the kind of guy that wants to fight head-to-head with Craaaaazeeeee.