Who ya got?

"The GOP field is now officially so weak that Rick Santorum is going to announce he's entering the race."
Zing! But seriously, it seems like all the real candidates are keeping their powder dry for 2016, when they won't be facing the second coming of Bill Clinton. Which means it's time for the second string, and it looks like it's going to be a party!

Who will enter, who will win?

For my part, my money is on the money, and the money is with my man Mitt. But I think Rick Perry is just dumb enough to run. And except for the scary possibility of him actually becoming president, I think a Perry run would be totally awesome. A failed bid that drags on long enough for the national machines to totally tar him in ways that his regional foes (for example, me) just can't manage might be the only thing that derails him from being our Governor for Life. 

What do you think, dear reader? Gary Johnson? Herman Cain? With Huck out, will Palin actually come in?

* Edited to fix Cain's name. It ain't Herbert, stupid. -Jason


  1. Romney has to be taken seriously because of the money. He has some very real problems with conservative orthodoxy, which in the current climate of purity pledges and tea parties must also be taken seriously. However, if I were to handicap the contest right now I'd make Romney the favorite simply on the basis of the money. But don't sleep on John Huntsman. He's got the chief executive credential as Utah governor, which could trump Romney's Massachusetts experience. He has more foreign policy experience than anyone else in the field including speaking Mandarin. He worked in the Reagan white house. Maybe the only negative aspect of his resume is his Ivy League education, which doesn't play very well in GOP circles, but it's only the University of Pennsylvania. It's not like he has an undergraduate degree from Columbia and a law degree from Harvard or something.

  2. You think Perry has trouble with conservative orthodoxy, but think Huntsman's biggest problem is that he's Ivy League? Let me suggest a few more problems:

    1. In favor of civil unions, and therefore in thrall to the homosexual agenda.
    2. In favor of cap-and-trade, and therefore bamboozled by the global climate change scammers.
    3. In favor of Obama's stimulus package.
    4. Worked for Obama.
    5. Says he likes and respects Obama.

    Unless he suddenly goes birther on us, I don't see how he's going to get national in today's Republican party.

  3. Are any of the Republican contenders bearded? I know that John Ashcroft used to sing from the heart. Perhaps a bearded, singing candidate could ride the current wave of popularity.

  4. Beards are unelectable

  5. I said I thought Romney had problems with conservative orthodoxy, not Perry. Perry has conspicuously positioned himself on the correct side of every right-wing issue for years, including secession. He's never heard a conservative dog whistle he didn't instantly repeat in front of a microphone. But to address your Huntsman concerns:

    1. Ron Paul is also in favor of civil unions, it's a libertarian issue.
    2. Cap-and-Trade is not an issue that will move the needle in a primary.
    3. Wall Street is still the biggest spender on GOP political campaigns and big business loved the stimulus. (They should, they got all the money)
    4. Working for Obama might be an issue.
    5. Even Eric Cantor likes Obama.

  6. I think Michelle Bachmann has a beard....

  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

  8. I'm still troubled by Jason's comment that beards are unelectable. The Civil War era appears to the apex of beards appearing presidential. Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis both wore beards, as did Ulysses S. Grant.

    Styles change as this Library of Congress page on the Presidents shows.

    Mustaches were quite popular in the 19th century, but even they have vanished from the faces of politicians recently.

  9. Anonymous29/5/11 12:36

    Bill, I think Michelle Bachmann IS a beard. Just google Marcus Bachmann.


eXTReMe Tracker