GOP 2012 Nominee: Is Mitch Daniels the most likely to actually beat the President?

[BrentWil]

I have been looking over who may be running in 2012. I think most agree the GOP putting up Palin would be wonderful. However, taking the other side of that, who is the most dangerous, in terms of actually winning? I would say, Mitch Daniels. What are your thoughts?

[democraticinsurgent]

1. Possibly

We here in Indiana are closely watching what our Gov is up to. Clearly, he is running.

He has a fair amount of skeletons in his closet, but that no longer seems to matter. So even though he profited handsomely from our local Enron--when Indianapolis Power and Light merged with another company, and those on the board of directors pocked big-time cash profits while workers were not allowed to sell stock until after it had completely tanked. Very controversial, but the good ole boy courts here found "no wrongdoing".

Mitch will have the hardest time surviving the primaries since he is not a cultural warrior. He might--if very lucky--become the nominee if Huck and Palin and the other nutballs take each other down. Daniels is not a great speaker, and he is a short, bald guy. But he looks like a guy who can get things done, and in Indiana, he's made a lot of changes, taken a lot of risks. A lot of ill-advised ones, to me, but he comes across as a man of action.

If he were to run against Obama, he might have a shot. He'll come across as the "adult", or at least try to. He sounds very practical and down to earth. And as long as Obama continues to tack towards the right, many voters will choose the real Republican instead of the imitation one.

So I agree, I think he is dangerous if he gets taken seriously enough to get nominated.

[BrentWil]

2. I think he has a pretty good shot...

I think he becomes the establishment candidate over Romney. Palin and the rest are too crazy, even for the GOP primary.

[Badfish]

3. Mitch would be a blessing.

On a one on one he could be a danger to Obama.

But Mitch would spawn a third party run, he is a moderate ...that would split the vote. Obama landslide.

[BrentWil]

4. I don't think so...

I think he the GOP do not form a third party. BUt if they do, it is a landslide.

[Badfish]

6. The entire party would never get behind another Mccain.

Things have changed.

[Voltaire]

36. Mitch is a great many things

But a moderate is not one of them. As a state employee and as one of many who have suffered mightily under his mismanagement, I will testify that he is no moderate. Within 10 minutes of taking office in 2004 he terminated bargaining rights for state employees, a move that he said "would help the children" of Indiana. Don't know what that means. If he runs, he will be a danger to Obama. He has one of the few states that has cut taxes and not gone bankrupt, in fact Indiana has a surplus largely built on the backs of its employees. I have maintained for years that said surplus would be his calling card to jump into the 2012 race.

[Clio the Leo]

20. "Daniels is not a great speaker, and he is a short, bald guy."

So then your answer would be "no."

HUGE factor in any election is which one is the most virile. We dont like to admit it, but it's true. I fire up up the old Youtube machine each time the latest challenger's name is mentioned and the same factor is always in play, "weird looking old white guy." Eventually these people will have to be on the same stage with the President. He would crush them. And that's JUST talking about the aesthetic.

There is only ONE man who can beat Barack Obama ......... Barack Obama.

[mikekohr]

38. Bingo, the President currently leads all contenders by 7-21%

nt

[still_one]

5. The most likely person to beat Obama will be Obama /nt

[BrentWil]

8. Some truth in that...

But some truth in the fact that however he performs, having Palin as an opponent would help.

[Clio the Leo]

21. Having ANYONE currently in the picture would help...

.... because they're all idiots who have the looks and personalities that would appeal to mainstream Republicans. The only person who I see now that could touch him would be Rubio and so far he's showing that he's smart enough not to give any indication of running.

[LeftyAndProud60]

7. He'd look like a muppet standing next to Obama in a debate. NT

[AngryAmish]

9. Mitch "Blood" Daniels

[BrentWil]

10. Why blood?

Just asking. Why that nickname?

[Nedsdag]

11. There was a boxer with the same name.

His nickname was "Blood."

[Badfish]

12. Doesn't make much sense.

Maybe if he liked Whiskey , We could call him 'Jack'

[mikekohr]

39. You are thinking of Mitch "Blood" Greene

a heavyweight that got hammered by Tyson. They were also involved in a street fight that made the scandal sheets.

[Thrill]

13. Dude has no hair

I hate to say it but I can't see a guy with no hair winning these days.

[BrentWil]

14. I actually disagree...

No hair might be a positive actually.

[Clio the Leo]

22. He LOOKS great.....

.... if he were running in a primary against John McCain.


Againt Obama? Ehh, not so much.

[FrenchieCat]

15. What has Mitch Daniel achieved to date?

What are his ideas? Or does that even matter in order for him to be a threat to a Sitting President that's done so much more than folks will credit him for? Did he prevent a depression? Did he bring the Auto industry back from the Dead? Did he withdraw most troops from Iraq? Did he diplomatically do what was required to have us start seeing real change in our relations with the ME? Did he win a Nobel Peace Prize? Did his wife innovatively start up programs that helps families understand the need for good nutrition and excercise for their children, and even for themselves? Did he establish a consumer protection bureau, revamp credit card and student loan laws? Did he preside over a tax system that is at its lowest for middle class Americans in a really long time? Did he get BP to fork over 20 Billion dollars for the mess they made? Did he institute a strong EPA that is dealing with mountain top mining and various other environmental issues? Did he select 2 women for the supreme court? Did he revamp our fucked up health system so that now college students and graduates and children with pre-existing conditions can be insured and receive health care....as well as the other 30 million that will be insured, when otherwise they would not be?

I'm just curious about what it is that would makes tiny odd looking receding hairline soft talking Mitch "most likely" to beat the President, apart from being born with fair skin that makes him such a threat? :shrug:

What is it that makes him so electable based on his achievements?

[BrentWil]

16. Well first...

The President Achievements, do not have much bearing on who the most dangerous

The better question is, is he more likable then Palin or Romney?

[FrenchieCat]

17. Oh...... this OP is posted at DU but is meant for the minority Fox Audience.

who don't find Obama more personable than both Romney and Palin.
I see.
Interesting.

The overwhelming majority of Americans find Obama likeable....
even if they don't agree with his policies. So what does that tell you?

------------
In the first place, despite high unemployment and record deficits, Obama is not particularly unpopular. In the latest Gallup poll, 48 percent of Americans approve of his performance. At this point in his presidency, Reagan had an approval rating of 35 percent.

Even after the GOP surge in November, Americans are not itching to dismantle big government. Hoover Institution pollster Douglas Rivers reports that in 15 of 16 areas of federal spending, most people want spending to stay the same or increase. The only program they would cut is foreign aid -- which is 1 percent of the budget.

The temptation of any political party is to interpret any impressive triumph as an enduring affirmation of its ideology. Democrats did it after their 2008 triumph, with the left-of-center magazine The New Republic running an article titled, "America the Liberal."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/02/07/the_pendulum_of_popular_opinion.html
------------------

One thing the polling data have confirmed over the last two years is this: President Obama is more popular than his policies. Going back to the earliest days of his presidency, Obama's overall job approval rating has typically been higher than the ratings he's received from voters on most individual issues - particularly on top domestic concerns like the economy, spending, the deficit and health care.



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/02/09/what_obamas_approval_rating_says_about_2012_108818.html

[BrentWil]

23. It is not about being likable or whatever on Obama side...

It is simply about who would be the most dangerous on their side. It is a thread of political judgement, not a thread of who I want to win. Believe me, it isn't Daniels.

[Voltaire]

37. he has cut taxes and maintained a surplus in Indiana

and for the Republidummies we have here, that is the coin of the realm.

[Honeycombe8]

18. I wonder who that is. (Maybe that answers your question.) nt

[golfguru]

19. Herman Caine is the only one who could win over Obama

http://www.therightscoop.com/herman-cain-stupid-people-are-ruining-america#disqus_thread

[DCBob]

24. Daniels would be a legitimate candidate but I think Jeb Bush would have best chance..

of actually beating Prez O.

[Alexander]

25. Daniels got arrested for marijuana possession when he was younger.

That's going to hurt, especially when he has to explain why he favors tough sentences for drug users.

[Umbral]

26. If he were to win, at least Arne Duncan's job would be safe. nt

[Proud Liberal Dem]

27. Daniels MIGHT be a threat if he makes it through the primaries

However, as others have pointed out, he's going to run into some major problems with the social conservatives. Whether they would bolt and/or push a third party candidate or beg Sister Sarah to run would be hard to tell but the anti-abortion crowd is not happy about his lack of enthusiasm for abortion restrictions. He signed an EO during his first few days banning discrimination on the basis of sexual and/or gender orientation (which had some conservatives fearmongering about an invasion of gays in womens bathrooms LOL). They also don't like his call for a "truce" on social issues that he first advocated at a conservative conference last year (CPAC?) He tried to "walk it back" and claim that he was talking to liberal activists though a "truce" would, of course, be meaningless without both sides agreeing to one, so...........? :shrug: He's simply not going to be enough of a "firebreather" for the righties methinks. Economically, he is right where he needs to be though. Whether that would be enough to take out Obama (if he somehow managed to win the nomination) remains to be seen. He was George W. Bush's first budget director, so the Obama campaign could make good use of THAT, as well as the well-publicized failure of the welfare privatization that he pushed here in Indiana.

[Myrina]

28. GWBush: "My Man Mitch" ... director of OMB

... and look how well the Bush Administration did with the Budget Surplus. Oops.

[GoCubsGo]

29. How many people outside of Indiana ever heard of this guy?

I'm not talking political junkies. I'm talking your average, ill-informed American. I suspect he's just another pasty-faced right-wing guy to most.

[BrentWil]

35. Well the elites are the one that seem to be getting around him..

That is what you need in the GOP primary.

[karynnj]

30. Mitch Daniels is not hugely popular in Indiana even with Republicans

- at least from what I hear from family in Indiana, some of whom are Republican.

[and-justice-for-all]

44. I live in Indiana...cant stand the clown

and I am not a puke

[Bobbie Jo]

49. +1

This Hoosier agrees.

[RightPoliticalJunkie]

31. Electoral College Math

At the risk of getting banned, I was interested (as a Conservative) to see what folks at DU were discussing in sizing up 2012. Of course, we all know it comes down to the Electoral College Map, which admittedly, is in favor of the GOP side for 2012. I was interested in seeing what some of your impressions would be with the new map given the Census results, and if anyone would like to go head-to-head in an Electoral College challenge.

As for Daniels, I think he would be a formidable challenger in 2012, but honestly I don't think he'll get the nomination. However, based on what I've seen with the 2012 Electoral Map, the GOP can run right.....far right, and get away with it this time around and our think tanks at the RNC realize it this time. So do the Carville/Begala's on the left. Until the Census numbers shifted, I didn't think Palin stood much of a chance either. However, take a look at the math below. I think I've been as fair as possible because I would rather be correct rather than wrong, but I believe that she (or any generic conservative GOP candidate) can win in 2012 IF the current political climate remains unchanged.

Right now, I have "Safe" GOP States leading "Safe" Democrat States 209-196. I feel that these states are virtually locked up on either side of the spectrum, and if one party ends up in danger of losing one of the states on this list, it's more than likely game over:

Obama - 196 SAFE
California (55), Washington (12), Oregon (7), Hawaii (4), Minnesota (10), Illinois (20), Maine (4), Vermont (3), Massachusetts (11), Rhode Island (4), Connecticut (7), New York (29), New Jersey (14), Delaware (3), Maryland (10), District of Columbia (3)

Conservative GOP Candidate - 209 SAFE
Alaska (3), Idaho (4), Montana (3), Wyoming (3), Utah (6), Arizona (11), North Dakota (3), South Dakota (3), Nebraska (All 5), Kansas (6), Oklahoma (7), Texas (38), Arkansas (6), Louisiana (8), Mississippi (6), Alabama (9), Georgia (16), South Carolina (9), Tennessee (11), Kentucky (8), West Virginia (5), Indiana (11), North Carolina (15), Virginia (13)

I don't think anyone will argue with me about the states I listed as Safe Obama states. On the GOP side, let me clear some of my reasonings. First, whether you like it or not, the immigration stance in AZ has been successful for the GOP and is popular with a majority of voters there as evidenced with Brewer's reelection. Likewise, whether you hate the tea party or not, you cannot deny that based on 2009/10 voting data they have firmly returned what were historically "Red" states of Indiana and North Carolina. My guess is you won't see the DNC spending vast amounts of money here. Likewise, Virginia appears headed back to the red side, with Webb's retirement announcement and George Allen's decision to run for the seat. Just as Obama got a boost with Mark Warner in 08, Allen gives the GOP candidate a boost in VA (if that candidate is a conservative).

In terms of the "Likely/Leans" Obama States, I see 4 States:
New Hampshire (4) - Unless Romney were the nominee, my guess is this remains blue.
Pennsylvania (20) - Sestak almost narrowly beat Toomey in a very low off-year for Democratic turn-out, while the right was firmly energized. While I suspect a lower enthusiasm turnout on the Democratic side this time around, there's still enough voters here to keep the state blue.
Michigan (16) - I have friends telling me this state will finally be in play this time around. I told them I'll believe it when I see it.
Nevada (6) - Harry Reid survived in 2008. Whether it was the "Las Vegas Machine" or whatever, if the right couldn't win it this time, chances are slim in the 2012 election, considering "Angle"-like Republicans make up a plurality of conservative voters in that state.

In terms of the "Likely/Leans" GOP States, I see 2 States:
Missouri (10) - This is our equivalent of Pennsylvania. We have enough votes to offset the Democratic advantage in KC/STL and the college areas.
Florida (29) - Look at the 2008 map. Obama won FL not because he racked up larger margins than Kerry/Gore in the traditional Democratic strongholds, but because he performed significantly better than them along the I-4 corridor, Duval County, and even the GOP strength areas. That will not happen this time. The Independents in FL voted for a "Centrist" Obama, not a left wing-one. If this had been the case, then Meek should have done much better in the Senate contest. You can argue your party abandoned him, but the result would have been the same. Statistics show that the more conservative a GOP candidate is perceived, the better the likelihood that candidate has of winning the state. Rubio's near 50% mark in the general election in a three-man race shows the strength of conservatism in FL. Additionally, the GOP convention is in Tampa where I believe Rubio will be a key-note speaker (if not on the ballot himself). I know there are people here who would say Sarah Palin has no shot in hell winning FL, but I would beg to differ. If Obama's numbers don't change, I think a Palin v Obama matchup, particularly in FL would result in lower turnout overall than 2008, with Independents who like neither of the two staying home or voting third party.

That's 248-242 for the GOP with 5 states remaining:
Ohio (18) - This is much harder to decide than FL. The key you guys should watch for here is who the GOP nominates to run against Sherrod Brown for the Senate race again. If we put up Mike DeWine, Obama's chances look really, really, good. Even if we get a conservative Senate candidate, it's still unclear how the state swings. Probably whoever wins OH wins the election, but there are some actual mathematical possibilities where this may not be the case this time around.

Wisconsin (10) - I certainly didn't have this as a toss-up prior to the 2010 mid-terms. I'll be honest, I didn't think Feingold was going to lose. But he did, and most Wisconsin turned right in the election. While Democrats outnumber the GOP here, its clear that if voter enthusiasm is anything but stellar for Obama here, he's going to be spending a lot of time in WI trying to shore it up. 2000 was the last time WI had a razor-thin margin, and it took almost everything in 2004 for Kerry to hold a 4% win. Obama cruised in 2008, but signs are pointing to a much closer contest this time around.

Iowa (6) - Social conservatives make up the pluraity of GOP voters here. Bush was competitive here going 1 for 2, while McCain was a dud in both the Caucus and the general. If the GOP candidate is not perceived as at least strong on social conservative issues, then Obama will cruise to another victory here. Otherwise, it will be another tough fight.

Colorado (9) - Let's just save some travel expenses now. All the lawyers should be heading out to CO now. This is my choice for the ultimate battleground state (even moreso than OH). The mainstream GOP got shellacked by Tom Tancredo here, who pulled over 40% of the vote for Governor, while the Senate race was razor-thin. What this tells me is that the GOP nominee must have Tom Tancredo's support to be compettive in the state, which means taking a tough stance on illegal immigration. Watch Tancredo close. If you see him wavering from support on the presumptive GOP nominee, that is a good sign that Obama will be headed to reelection. Otherwise, get ready for a long, tenuous, round of recounts after recounts, because I feel that is what in store for this state come 2012.

New Mexico (5) - Another state up in the air. The GOP gained control of the Governorship, does it help them for 2012? I don't know. It's possible whatever events transpire in CO cause a domino in NM. Too early to tell.

Anyway sorry for the long post, but this is the analysis I have done so far. Like I said, while I lean to right in my beliefs, as a numbers cruncher, I prefer to be correct rather than wrong, and I hope some of you number crunchers on the left feel the same.

[mikekohr]

40. The Electorate Will Be 24-28% Larger, 20% Younger, and 14% Browner in 2012

ANY of those three demographics spell big trouble for any Republican contender.
VA and NC are not safe Republican, nor will be FL a Republican leaner.

Basing projections on the low turnout 2010 is a recipe for failure. The economy has entered an accelerated phase of recovery from the economic fubar of yet another "Republican Tinkle Down Economics" generated recession.
(see History of Recessions: http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/p/history-of-recessions.html )

The current focus on the National Debt will remind voters who is responsible for nearly 100% of the increase since 1981, namely Republican economic policy.
(see: http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/p/national-debt.html )

The battle over spending cuts will once again demonstrate to American voters who's side the Democrats and Republicans are on. The baggers will over-reach and the Republican Party will splinter.

The President leads ALL Republican challengers by 7-21%. There are compelling reasons why this is so. President Obama will carry 52.4% to 56.4% of the popular vote. The only question will be how long and deep will be his coattails. 63 Republicans sit in seats carried by the President in 2008. They are all on thin ice.

25 in '12

[mikekohr]

42. Here's some poll data that bears out President Obama and Democratic Success in 2012

-clip-
A total of 58% of voters say they are "very excited" to vote in the 2012 elections, unchanged from two weeks ago when we last asked the question. Democrats continue to maintain an edge here as well: 64% say they are very excited compared to 61% of Republicans.

Demographically, the two most excited groups are young people and African-Americans. A total of 80% of 18-29 year olds and 71% of blacks say they are very excited to vote in 2012. Ideologically, 66% of liberals say they are very excited to vote, compared with 64% of Tea Party supporters.

So net/net, despite the 2010 results, at the start of the 2012 cycle, the numbers for Democrats continue to look better than the numbers for Republicans
-end of clip-

http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/475788/obama%2C_dems_maintain_edge_over_gop_in_approval_ratings/#paragraph6

[sofa king]

46. And the circus has only just begun.

The Republicans are the ferret, and the tax cut extension was the potato chip bag. In two years, Republicans will be fighting each other over the warm corner of the cage, while we continue cleaning up after them.

500+ electoral vote win. You have twenty months left to laugh.

[davidpdx]

41. I agree with your list for the most part and it is interesting

The parts I disagree is: North Carolina and Virgina. Even though there may have been a swing toward the Republicans in 2010, doesn't rule them out in 2012. I personally would put them leaning Republican if anything.

I have feeling that Florida, with a mostly Republican delegation and governor is going to go Republican this time. Missouri I agree leans Republican, but that could change.


Republicans Safe 181
Democrats Safe 196

Republican lean 67
Missouri (10)
Florida (29)
North Carolina (15)
Virgina (13)

Democrat lean 46
New Hampshire (4)
Pennsylvania (20)
Michigan (16)
Nevada (6)

Republican Safe + Lean 248
Democrat Safe + Lean 242

Toss up 30
Wisconsin 10
Colorado 9
Iowa 6
New Mexico 5
Ohio 18

That would get to you the same place you were, just moving a few leans (North Carolina and Virgina).

Going form the safe states Obama would need 74 from safe or tossup states
The Republican Nominee would need 89 from safe or toss up states.

If we made the assumption that this is true, then hear are the possible outcomes from an Obama win:

Wins
New Mexico 5
Colorado 9
Wisconsin 10
Penn 20
Michigan 16
Nevada 6
Virgina 13

Losses: Iowa, NH, NC, Missouri, Florida, Ohio

[Arkana]

45. Virginia is not "safe GOP" by any stretch. By the same token

I could claim that New Jersey will vote Republican next election because they elected that shitbarge Christie to the governorship.

New Mexico will stay blue because of immigration issues--a massive portion of the state's electorate is Latino.

Wisconsin is in turmoil right now--I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Scott Walker was no longer governor by 2012.

And your party is in a battle for its own identity right now. If you put up a nut like Palin, you'll suffer a McGovernesque beating. Count on it.

[bigwillq]

47. Hello.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[AlinPA]

32. No. John Thune running with Rubio would be very tough. nt

[Hawkowl]

33. Agree 100%

A moderate Rethuglican, his policies would be virtually indistinguishable from Obama's. He would capture all the racist votes and certainly sweep Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio. He'd probably take Virginia and North Carolina as well as Pennsylvania. Game over for Obama. Then I can get back to properly hating Rethuglicans instead of pretend Democrats.

[BrentWil]

34. Alot of that depends on the economy. NT

[davidpdx]

43. He could put Indiana out of play

But he wouldn't win. Obama won Indiana by only less then 30,000 in 2008. I'm sure he could make that up somewhere else though.

[Thrill]

48. Another guy not wacky enough to win the nomination

I just don't see anyone beating Huckabee for it

[WolfoftheWild]

50. nobody has any likelihood of beating Obama

[GrantDem]

51. His "accomplishments" are truly overrated...

There is the FSSA debacle that badly damaged the public trust with respect to social services, press releases about jobs that never materialized, a budget deficit, and “Major Moves” (he sold the toll road to a foreign conglomerate) money is about to run out and there goes that surplus you speak of.