Report: Mitch Daniels wants to run, simply waiting for wife’s okay

posted at 7:18 pm on May 9, 2011 by Allahpundit

What if we ended up in a two-man race between this guy and Romney? Which way would grassroots conservatives break?

If you think those Gallup numbers on Republicans who support a third party are high now, just wait.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels wants to run for president and is not in the process of convincing himself to do it, a close adviser said. The last hurdle remaining is ongoing discussions between him and his wife, Cheri Daniels, over whether she is ready to face questions about their past.

“I think he would like to do it,” the Daniels adviser told The Huffington Post by phone. “I actually think he’d have a decent chance of getting the nomination.”

The insight from a source close to the governor contradicts many of the reports that have focused on whether Daniels will run or not. Daniels has been portrayed — and has in some ways portrayed himself — as a reluctant potential candidate, someone who had hoped the GOP would find someone else to be their standard-bearer but is unimpressed with the candidates who have so far declared their intent to run.

The confirmation that the Daniels’ marriage is the last hurdle in front of a bid for the White House highlights the delicate situation in which the Governor finds himself.

I hope he runs just because I’m really curious to see if he’s able to build any support among base voters. In theory it’s a perfect match between man and moment, the fiscal specialist emerging to tackle the debt crisis. But he already has a bunch of strikes against him: The truce talk on social issues, the taint of “elite” support, a rhetorical style that eschews partisan red meat, and an awful lot of liberal verbiage in the media about how superior he is to tea partiers, which naturally makes grassroots righties suspicious. Via Freedom’s Lighthouse, here’s 10 minutes from Rush Limbaugh’s show today wondering why the dreaded MSM would be tossing so many bouquets at a “boring and moderate” candidate like Daniels. That’s not fatal to Mitch the Knife — if talk radio decided primaries, we would never have ended up with McCain as nominee — but he probably needs a crowded field with votes split several different ways in order to win. If he ends up head to head against virtually anyone else in the race, the base will likely line up behind his opponent. Exit question: What if it boils down to Daniels versus Huckabee?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

No, HE didn’t. You lie.

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:07 PM

No, you rationalize. Don’t call me a liar when you know otherwise ever again. If the people he hires to give his views to the media aren’t acceptable as disseminators of his views…then what are they? Dude, wake the f**k up. Your choices for candidates SUCK. And your constant sniping at Palin with no ability to actually attack her positions is the true pathetic display.

MadisonConservative on May 9, 2011 at 8:18 PM

Let’s see what shakes out. It’s hard to know how I’d vote before any Republican announces he/she is running. Anyone. Even Newt is still waiting.

I don’t know if I’d go for another Bush-lite. One of the reasons W’s approval ratings went so low is he NEVER defended himself or his programs when the Demobastards were shouting and ranting. Mitch looks like he’d squish the same way.

Besides. I want someone who fights like a girl.

Tennman on May 9, 2011 at 8:18 PM

sigh.

Fortunata on May 9, 2011 at 8:18 PM

But didn’t you say he’s not on board with the 2nd Amendment? Is there any other part of the Bill of Rights that are negotiable?

Cindy Munford on May 9, 2011 at 8:08 PM

Christie supports the Ground Zero Mosque, appointed a Muslim with radical ties to the state court and is pro-amnesty.

bw222 on May 9, 2011 at 8:21 PM

Charlie Daniels just sang the National Anthem before the Predators-Canucks playoff game. How’s about we nominate Charlie instead of Mitch?

bw222 on May 9, 2011 at 8:17 PM

It`d be a better choice, I`m on board

NY Conservative on May 9, 2011 at 8:25 PM

See, there’s no way in heck Daniels is a squishy RINO…Allah isn’t sold on him.

;)

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 7:28 PM

But, you are so the odds of Daniels being a squishy RINO are remarkedly good.

bw222 on May 9, 2011 at 8:25 PM

But didn’t you say he’s not on board with the 2nd Amendment? Is there any other part of the Bill of Rights that are negotiable?

Cindy Munford on May 9, 2011 at 8:08 PM

This is his campaign material.

http://www.njcsd.org/joomla/images/Christie1995001.jpg

http://politicons.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/christie1995.jpg

sharrukin on May 9, 2011 at 8:26 PM

Daniels is amazing and very conservative. People who oppose him apparently do so because of his style, not the substance of his record or positions.

therightwinger on May 9, 2011 at 8:26 PM

Don’t call me a liar when you know otherwise ever again.

When you say, or even infer, that Daniels said “no comment” when you know full well it was a staff member…secondhand quoted no less…it’s either a lie or you’re off your meds again and not thinking clearly.

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:27 PM

Thor 2012!!!

PappyD61 on May 9, 2011 at 8:30 PM

Thor 2012 theme?

America…..it’s HAMMER time!!!

PappyD61 on May 9, 2011 at 8:31 PM

It’s like a double edged sword. On the one hand we need to rid the Capitol of scoundrels by having someone outside the establishment to run the nation the right way. OTOH we need someone with executive governing experience at the State level. Sigh.

Key West Reader on May 9, 2011 at 7:58 PM

We have an ACTUAL leader ready to go. someone with 20 years of leadership, most of it at the executive level. Even better, SHE has NO stupid mistakes on her resume. She’s a 100% certified Reagan Conservative.

Why in God’s name we’d even look at a loser like Daniels who gives RINOs a bad name is beyond me.

This guy wouldn’t know leadership if it walked up to him and slapped him in the face.

Plus he’s a bigger gaffe machine than Biden and Obama combined. I’m convinced he is a functional moron.

The guy got rolled by the fleebaggers and killed the bill that would have made Indiana a right to work state. He was also Bush’s OMB director, and boy was he a screw-up there.

There’s only one candidate that can win, and will actually govern with common sense.

Time to get on the Palin Express. It’s the winning team

gary4205 on May 9, 2011 at 8:32 PM

When you say, or even infer, that Daniels said “no comment” when you know full well it was a staff member…secondhand quoted no less…it’s either a lie or you’re off your meds again and not thinking clearly.

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:27 PM

Cute. Except you’re the one still picking hat out of your teeth over your impassioned defense of Crist. And Boehner. And McCain.

MadisonConservative on May 9, 2011 at 8:32 PM

Thor 2012 theme?

America…..it’s HAMMER time!!!

PappyD61 on May 9, 2011 at 8:31 PM

Heh…obligatory

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:34 PM

And I don’t get it, SoGent and MadCon….Daniels never said “no comment” on UBL killing. He was on FOX and Friends opining on it the next day for cripes sake.

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 7:56 PM

Get real. Saying you are happy OBL got killed takes about as much courage as saying you are in favor of Mothers’ Day.

bw222 on May 9, 2011 at 8:34 PM

Daniels is amazing and very conservative. People who oppose him apparently do so because of his style, not the substance of his record or positions.

therightwinger on May 9, 2011 at 8:26 PM

Sure, I don’t like his “style” of calling a “truce” on social issues.

MadisonConservative on May 9, 2011 at 8:35 PM

Cute. Except you’re the one still picking hat out of your teeth over your impassioned defense of Crist. And Boehner. And McCain.

MadisonConservative on May 9, 2011 at 8:32 PM

Oh, sure. When all else fails, play the Crist card.

:P

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:36 PM

Daniels is amazing and very conservative. People who oppose him apparently do so because of his style, not the substance of his record or positions.

therightwinger on May 9, 2011 at 8:26 PM

Exactly where is Daniels Conservative? Everything about the guy screams “I’m in the wrong party!”

Not sure why we are even talking about the guy. He’s as big a fringe candidate as Gary Johnson or Buddy Roehmer. seriously, outside of the National Review editorial staff, and the democrat industrial media complex, absolutely NO ONE supports this loser.

He’s anti-Semitic, and very much a statist.

No thanks.

gary4205 on May 9, 2011 at 8:38 PM

Oh, sure. When all else fails, play the Crist card.

:P

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:36 PM

I play all three cards, especially when you’re rationalizing what Mitch’s staff release to the media as a statement as anything other than representative of his views. Was that report about potential mileage taxing not representative of Obama’s views? Give me a f**king break. Daniels is a milquetoast who will get pummeled in a debate with any decent conservative. Hell, I could probably do it myself. Against Obama, it’ll just make for the best insomnia cure anyone’s ever experienced.

MadisonConservative on May 9, 2011 at 8:39 PM

Sure, I don’t like his “style” of calling a “truce” on social issues.

People are really going overboard about this. The amount a president can do about social issues is very minimal anyway.

Mitch is a fiscal and social conservative.

therightwinger on May 9, 2011 at 8:42 PM

I think this is very serious.

Yeah, I’d still vote for him, but so what? I’d vote for ANYBODY over Obama, as would most of those here.

The general public will not take too kindly to a woman leaving 4 children for another man. Even if she repented and came back. If she simply left her husband, that would be one thing. If she left her children because of a drug problem and she felt incapable of being a mother, that too would be forgiven.

But to leave 4 children for another man? I’m not judging her and I’m happy they reconciled. Again, I’d vote for him in the general.

But we should not underestimate how this will play in the general election with moderates and independents.

they better think of something good to explain this in detail before he runs.

Amazing to me how Palin (who has been vetted beyond belief) is still thought of as unelectable. Yes, it’s an uphill battle for her because of the false charicature the media has unfairly made of her. And, honestly, I know her voice gets on some people’s nerves. (not me)

But seriously, all is forgiven of every other candidate but her. This world is crazy.

Like I said before, if I could just snap my fingers to elect a President, I’d pick her. But unfortunately me snapping my fingers isn’t how Presidents are elected in this country. So we have a huge battle before us.

Herman Cain is looking better and better.

Elisa on May 9, 2011 at 8:42 PM

Daniels is a milquetoast who will get pummeled in a debate with any decent conservative.

I’m saving this one…forgive me when I shove that statement back at ya after the first real debate.

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:42 PM

What if it boils down to Daniels versus Huckabee?

I could vote for Daniels if he stops slamming our core beliefs.

Valiant on May 9, 2011 at 8:43 PM

People are really going overboard about this. The amount a president can do about social issues is very minimal anyway.

Mitch is a fiscal and social conservative.

therightwinger on May 9, 2011 at 8:42 PM

Not to mention, Daniels only suggested this “truce” on social issues. Yet the Daniels-deranged like to think it’s a rock-solid point of his platform.

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:44 PM

Oh, sure. When all else fails, play the Crist card.

:P

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:36 PM

Did you ever see “A Bronx Tale” with DiNiro? The racetrack scene with the jinx?

katy the mean old lady on May 9, 2011 at 8:45 PM

I’m saving this one…forgive me when I shove that statement back at ya after the first real debate.

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:42 PM

Bring it.

MadisonConservative on May 9, 2011 at 8:50 PM

bw222 on May 9, 2011 at 8:21 PM

Swell.

Cindy Munford on May 9, 2011 at 8:52 PM

If every GOP primary could make this one vow, the GOP would then get the best candidate possible.

And the vow is: VOTE YOUR VALUES

If you are a conservative, vote for a legitimate and not faux conservative

If you are a moderate, vote for a moderate.

And if you are a liberal Republican vote for a liberal.

And if you are a libertarian, vote the candidate that most resembles a libertarian.

Where the GOP gets into trouble is when conservatives act like PROXY VOTERS and feel compelled to vote against their own values because they have been told to by the GOP establishment, the media, interest groups, minorities or the new world order to do so.

technopeasant on May 9, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Well, I hope he jumps in. I want to see what he’s got. And unlike some folks, who are apparently voting for people who aren’t yet running… my vote is still up for grabs.

I’m not terribly excited about warmed-over 2008 candidates. And frankly, if the guy is a common sense fiscal conservative who will obey the U.S. Constitution… he’s got a pretty good shot at landing me.

Murf76 on May 9, 2011 at 8:59 PM

iirc his wife had an affair, they divorced, but then reconciled and remarried. That’s probably why she’s hesitant.

Also from wikipedia:

In 1970, while an undergraduate student at Princeton, he and two roommates were arrested for possession of marijuana, LSD, and illicit prescription drugs.[10] He spent two nights in jail.[11] In a plea bargain, he pled guilty to “maintaining a common nuisance” and was fined $350.[10] Daniels told The Daily Princetonian in 2011 that “justice was served,”[12] and has disclosed the arrest on job applications, and spoke about the incident in columns in the Indianapolis Star[13] and the Washington Post,[14]

YehuditTX on May 9, 2011 at 9:00 PM

Did you ever see “A Bronx Tale” with DiNiro? The racetrack scene with the jinx?

katy the mean old lady on May 9, 2011 at 8:45 PM

I love that flick! Now you’se can’t leave…

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 9:01 PM

wouldn’t Mitch have to be polling more than 3% in the polls to be taken seriously?

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:01 PM

technopeasant on May 9, 2011 at 8:57 PM

This.

DeathB4Tyranny on May 9, 2011 at 9:04 PM

Murf76 on May 9, 2011 at 8:59 PM

Everyone is pretty much in the same boat but it’s fun to grouse.

Cindy Munford on May 9, 2011 at 9:04 PM

A “metro-sexual” RINO? JHC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

chickasaw42 on May 9, 2011 at 9:04 PM

I’m praying for Mitch to get in the race. spliting the RINO vote between Mitch, Mitt, Huntsman, NEWt and Tpaw means we get a true conservative as the nominee this time around. Esp since bachmann and trump have dropped off the face of the earth…

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Daniels only suggested this “truce” on social issues. Yet the Daniels-deranged like to think it’s a rock-solid point of his platform.

JetBoy on May 9, 2011 at 8:44 PM

I don’t recall the libs suggesting a truce on the social issues or any other, for that matter.

wouldn’t Mitch have to be polling more than 3% in the polls to be taken seriously?

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Yeah, it’s weird. The establishment is going to have to lean on one or more of these moderates to get lost. It’ll dilute the vote and one of those dreaded conservative wackos might get the nod.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM

I’m praying for Mitch to get in the race. spliting the RINO vote between Mitch, Mitt, Huntsman, NEWt and Tpaw means we get a true conservative as the nominee this time around.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Yep. An awful lot of moderates in there.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 9:10 PM

you got to love it. The ABP people have a new savior Mitch….polling less than 3% in the polls with Riove and Bush behind him and the WaPo and the NYT. How can he not win. Esp with huntsman another Bush friend spliting the morman vote with Mitt and a possible Rudy getting in to help take some of those NH voters from Mitt.

It’s a perfect plan if only a true conservative stays out of the race. So now we really see why the push over the last 5 months to STOP PALIN. She messes up the equation for the Bushies.

the one wildcard I can’t figure out is Huck but wiht his meetings with Trump, huntsman and barbour I think he is seen as a perfect person to stop both Mitt andPalin in the south.

the pieces are being moved and the game starts to take shape…..

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:12 PM

What if we ended up in a two-man race between this guy and Romney?

We can start wondering how we’re going to get through another Obama term. That’s what.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 9:15 PM

Yeah, it’s weird. The establishment is going to have to lean on one or more of these moderates to get lost. It’ll dilute the vote and one of those dreaded conservative wackos might get the nod.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM

see my 9:12 post. Basically I think most of the Bush moves is to get Mitt out of the race. I think they feel Palin has been damaged to the point that she isn’t going to get in. I also think they are wrong. It’s weird I agree but I see Rove and Bush behind these moves. Mitch has said as much in the NPR interview where he says he talked to Pres bush about getting into the race. We might not have all the players and all the moves down but make no mistake the Bush wing of the GOP is very active in this pre-primary phase. They will not give up power easily even if they made a complete and utter hash of things when they sat in the POTUS chairs for 12 years.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:17 PM

Exit question: What if it boils down to Daniels versus Huckabee?

Demoralization.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 9:17 PM

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:17 PM

Could be that they’re just trying to set Jeb up for 2016. I wouldn’t be surprised.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 9:19 PM

Cindy Munford on May 9, 2011 at 9:04 PM

Well, fortunately for the candidates, they aren’t going to going by what they see printed in the comments section at HA. lolol

Murf76 on May 9, 2011 at 9:22 PM

wouldn’t Mitch have to be polling more than 3% in the polls to be taken seriously?

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:01 PM

The 3% are our “betters” – the Charles Krathammers, George Wills, Karl Roves, National Review writers, GOP strategists and the party leadership.

Don’t you just love it when our “betters” make the decisions and just depend on us to donate our money and our votes.

bw222 on May 9, 2011 at 9:27 PM

Could be that they’re just trying to set Jeb up for 2016. I wouldn’t be surprised.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 9:19 PM

Yeah there is that. they want to either run a bush stooge like Mitch win or lose the bush retain the pasrty levers. If they lose 2012 they hav ejeb in 2016. If Mitch wins they have Mitch for one term possibly 2 with a jeb VP in 2016.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:30 PM

Don’t you just love it when our “betters” make the decisions and just depend on us to donate our money and our votes.

bw222 on May 9, 2011 at 9:27 PM

you know if “our betters” showed the smallest ability to run this country I would even care. But because our betters have destroyed our economy, indebted our great grandchildren, taken away our freedoms, gotten us into 3 wars with no end in sight and basically just screwed everything else I do care.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:32 PM

Let him run. He’ll be gone by the second primary.

J.E. Dyer on May 9, 2011 at 9:34 PM

I actually feel kind of sorry for the guy now. He seems so, damn nice. Is it too mean to call him a “pity date”? I’d almost give him a “pity vote” … almost.

Firefly_76 on May 9, 2011 at 9:40 PM

hor 2012!!!

PappyD61 on May 9, 2011 at 8:30 PM

Palin/Thor ’12!!!

Kensington on May 9, 2011 at 9:44 PM

This whining about Mitch being a “moderate” is a little more than I can take. As a proud Hoosier, here are some of Mitch’s accomplishments:

1) Mitch has actually cut state spending, and the state budget that he just got passed is projected to have a $1 billion surplus over the next two year (our bond rating is now AAA, which is a first for the state);

2) he leased the state’s money-losing toll road to a private company for almost $4 billion (despite significant opposition), which has allowed the state to fully fund all of its highway projects for a decade;

3) he got a constitutional amendment passed that caps our state’s property tax rates (I live on 1.5 wooded acres, in a 2,500+ sq. foot house, in one of the state’s best school districts, and pay less than $2,000 a year in property taxes; my friends who live in similarly-sized houses in NJ and around Chicago are lucky if their property taxes are $2,000 a month);

4) he just signed into law the most comprehensive school reform bill in the country that offers vouchers to all who need them, has made creating new charter schools easier, erased boundaries between districts, delinked teacher pay from seniority, limited collective bargaining, and made student achievement a central measure of teacher evaluation (with absolutely zero fanfare or protest); and

5) he just signed a bill that prohibits any entity providing abortions (i.e., Planned Parenthood) from receiving any state funding, including any Medicaid funding that comes from the feds (social truce, what social truce?).

Is he flashy? No, but so what. We don’t need flash. We need someone with accomplishments.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 9:56 PM

Beta male.

wheelgun on May 9, 2011 at 7:22 PM

Daniels is a fool. Even if he was 100% conservative on every issue, he can’t stop putting his foot in his mouth. He’s like a GOP Biden with a bad combover instead of plugs.

fiatboomer on May 9, 2011 at 7:23 PM

Right you both are.

And it’s too bad Daniels didn’t wait on the unborn before he funded their abortions.

Lourdes on May 9, 2011 at 10:00 PM

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 9:56 PM

So the gop establishment’s answer to Obama’s charisma is a boring white guy?

gotcha.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 10:01 PM

5) he just signed a bill that prohibits any entity providing abortions (i.e., Planned Parenthood) from receiving any state funding, including any Medicaid funding that comes from the feds (social truce, what social truce?).

Is he flashy? No, but so what. We don’t need flash. We need someone with accomplishments.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 9:56 PM

Not exactly what I heard, however. He supports increased funding to provide abortions, what I read. I’m willing to admit a mistake if so.

Lourdes on May 9, 2011 at 10:02 PM

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 9:56 PM
So the gop establishment’s answer to Obama’s charisma is a boring white guy?

gotcha.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 10:01 PM

If your paternal grandparents are Syrian are you really a “white guy?”

But in answer to your question, when it comes to the economy, which will be the main driver in next year’s election, the answer is yes. Obama’s charisma won’t be enough.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 10:08 PM

Don’t you just love it when our “betters” make the decisions and just depend on us to donate our money and our votes.

bw222 on May 9, 2011 at 9:27 PM

you know if “our betters” showed the smallest ability to run this country I would even care. But because our betters have destroyed our economy, indebted our great grandchildren, taken away our freedoms, gotten us into 3 wars with no end in sight and basically just screwed everything else I do care.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 9:32 PM

Clearly, it’s a case of the political class — and/or what I’d call career public employees — assuming they have some “rule” capacity over the American public and then using associates / peers to go about harassing the public to push them/us “into shape” that they want, which candidate they want, not us.

After the McCain nomination/2008 election, I really saw the raw underbelly of the errors of allowing the political class to chose/determine candidates. And then who hated-on the rest of us for “asking questions” they didn’t like or want asked.

Just saw the very same situation again today on FOX, political-class, career public employee (“politician”) going on about how it was that the nation has too many pressing problems to ‘leave them in the hands of someone who lacks experience working in the government’.

They’re already denigrating the idea of anyone for the Presidency who isn’t a career public employee, despite other abilities that this nation seems to need more than that.

Lourdes on May 9, 2011 at 10:08 PM

Bru, stop with all your facts, everyone here says Daniels is a RINO so it must be true.

commodore on May 9, 2011 at 10:09 PM

Palin/Thor ’12!!!

Kensington on May 9, 2011 at 9:44 PM

I like her and all, but that ticket would have to be Thor/Palin.

alwaysfiredup on May 9, 2011 at 10:10 PM

I can see the ads now:

Mitch Daniels, worth a second look. – Cheri Daniels

Fallon on May 9, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Mitch the knife versus the Huck…

That would be your traffic dream, eh AllahP?

RocketmanBob on May 9, 2011 at 10:12 PM

Not exactly what I heard, however. He supports increased funding to provide abortions, what I read. I’m willing to admit a mistake if so.

Lourdes on May 9, 2011 at 10:02 PM

Umm, yeah, you’re mistaken. Badly mistaken. Almost comically mistaken.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 10:15 PM

But in answer to your question, when it comes to the economy, which will be the main driver in next year’s election, the answer is yes. Obama’s charisma won’t be enough.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 10:08 PM

sure when Obama is pulling in the 200k crowds again and mitch is pulling ion the 200+ crowds those moderates will once again break for the winner. those that don’t think being seen as a winner is important don’t understand elections and how money is raised and votes are required.

McCain showed he could not raise money which meant he couldn’t buy ads to counter Obama’s talking points and attacks, he could out debate the Obama’s style over substance, he also could not generate any GOTV efforts nor fill out his campaign staff of volunteers. the phones were not being called, the doors not knocked on. MCain due to his inability to inspire was forced to cede battleground state after battleground state and ended up fighting in MO and Ga. Mitch will be the same.

Obama will have $1 billion to spend, hire campaign staff, buy ads, he will get great press by the entire MSM, his faults will be overlooked, the economic mess will be blamed on others and Mitch will not have the firepower to counter nor hold Obama’s feet to the fire.

Mitch loses by 10pts easily.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 10:21 PM

They’re already denigrating the idea of anyone for the Presidency who isn’t a career public employee, despite other abilities that this nation seems to need more than that.

Lourdes on May 9, 2011 at 10:08 PM

very true. we need some one to yell not only does the emperor have no clothes but the entire politcal class has none.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 10:24 PM

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 10:21 PM

McCain was able to out debate Obama? McCain was a flipping train wreck in the debates, and he still led in the polls until the markets melted down in October. What ultimately killed McCain was his reaction to that melt down when he suspended his campaign and put it at the mercy of the Democrats in the Senate. He looked erratic and unsteady, and his poll numbers dropped instantly.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 10:29 PM

Romneycare=DumbØcare

Daniels is no fiscal conservative.
It has frequently been said about Mitch Daniels that he “turned deficits into surpluses” as governor. The only problem with this claim is that it’s not true. According to the CNBC/Forbes.com, which annually ranks states according to business climate, Indiana has a $1.4-billion budget deficit as of FY2011.
That same CNBC/Forbes.com list ranked Indiana as barely 21st out of 50 states trailing Democrat-run states such as Massachusetts and Washington. Indiana is 42nd in terms of the quality of its workforce, 44th in quality of life, 26th in access to capital, and 22nd in technology and innovation.
This is how badly Indiana ranked in late 2010, more than five years after Daniels was sworn in as governor. A state that ranks 44th in terms of quality of life? No, thanks.
When Daniels was director of the OMB, he performed equally miserably: he turned budget surpluses (America’s first since FY1969) into deficits. He also oversaw the enactment and funding of the No Child Left Behind Act, the prescription drug entitlement, and increases of funding for the ED and the DOT, as well as the reinstatement of farm subsidies (which were largely abolished in 1996 under the Freedom to Farm Act) and the creation of ethanol subsidies (later increased by his successors). Daniels’ response to the OMB’s critics was that a balanced budget “is not the highest priority.” The deficit continued to grow during Daniels’ entire tenure, and it peaked in FY2004 at $400 billion under the last budget devised by Daniels. It was later reduced to $162 billion in FY2007 by his successors.
He also believes in anthropogenic global warming and that humanity needs to act urgently to stop it. Daniels also supports a tax on imported oil, which would only hike gasoline prices.
Mitch Daniels is not a conservative; he’s a liberal. He would be a bad nominee and an even worse president. Nominating him would be a betrayal of every conservative principle the GOP used to stand for.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/the_case_against_mitch_daniels.html

Jayrae on May 9, 2011 at 10:32 PM

What ultimately killed McCain was his reaction to that melt down when he suspended his campaign and put it at the mercy of the Democrats in the Senate. He looked erratic and unsteady, and his poll numbers dropped instantly.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 10:29 PM

So what really matters in an election is what happens in the weeks immediately prior, and not a year and a half earlier.

Huh.

alwaysfiredup on May 9, 2011 at 10:33 PM

the fiscal specialist

Who spoke the VAT word…

Gohawgs on May 9, 2011 at 10:35 PM

Is he flashy? No, but so what. We don’t need flash.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 9:56 PM

Yeah, we do. Sorry, but this isn’t 1924 anymore.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 10:42 PM

The more the merrier…

Huntsman vs. Mitt…Daniels vs. T-Paw…Huck vs. Newt…Paul vs. himself…Buddy vs. Johnson…

That leaves Cain and Palin…

Gohawgs on May 9, 2011 at 10:42 PM

McCain was able to out debate Obama? McCain was a flipping train wreck in the debates, and he still led in the polls until the markets melted down in October. What ultimately killed McCain was his reaction to that melt down when he suspended his campaign and put it at the mercy of the Democrats in the Senate. He looked erratic and unsteady, and his poll numbers dropped instantly.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 10:29 PM

opps meant to say he couldn’t out debate Obama in the debates.

However, McCain being ahead in the polls before the meltdown was a function of Palin nothing more nothing less. Until Palin’s pick McCain was losing and losing bad. Palin saved his campaign, got the funds coming in (around 8 million in one day, got volunteers out in the streets and maning the phones and got people to show up for campaign rallies. which basically proves my point. Before Palin McCain was sinking under the waves. McCain needed charisma to revive his campaign and it came in the form of Palin.

Mitch has no charisma and will suffer the same fate as McCain. I also don’t see Mitch picking a conservative like Palin as his VP to help save him. Mitch’s entire personility in his entire politcal career has been one of no risk taking. Mitch would never have rolled the dice like McCain with his VP selection. Mitch just isn’t that type of guy.

Mitch isn’t a maverick nor a stallion he is a betamale and will not take risks. Obama will bury him.

The MSM understands this, why don’t you?

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 10:44 PM

So what really matters in an election is what happens in the weeks immediately prior, and not a year and a half earlier.

Huh.

alwaysfiredup on May 9, 2011 at 10:33 PM

FWIW, that’s what Bill Clinton tells me. He said it also helps if you can get your opponent to throw up during a formal state dinner in Japan.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 10:44 PM

This whining about Mitch being a “moderate” is a little more than I can take.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 9:56 PM

If he weren’t a moderate, or at least someone who’s likely to be pummeled, he’d get nothing but contempt from WaPo. That’s a dead giveaway.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 10:49 PM

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 10:49 PM

Nor would Daniels get any establishment backing, let alone names on his letterhead…

Gohawgs on May 9, 2011 at 10:53 PM

Mitch would never have rolled the dice like McCain with his VP selection. Mitch just isn’t that type of guy.

Mitch isn’t a maverick nor a stallion he is a betamale and will not take risks. Obama will bury him.

The MSM understands this, why don’t you?

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 10:44 PM

McCain rolled the dice and lost. He was likely toast no matter what, but after the initial bump Palin gave his campaign her poll numbers declined going into the election.

You are right that Mitch seems capable of finishing at best a respectable 2nd in November 2012.

dedalus on May 9, 2011 at 10:53 PM

Mitch has no charisma and will suffer the same fate as McCain. I also don’t see Mitch picking a conservative like Palin as his VP to help save him. Mitch’s entire personility in his entire politcal career has been one of no risk taking. Mitch would never have rolled the dice like McCain with his VP selection. Mitch just isn’t that type of guy.

Mitch isn’t a maverick nor a stallion he is a betamale and will not take risks. Obama will bury him.

The MSM understands this, why don’t you?

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 10:44 PM

Uh, because I’ve actually lived with Mitch as my governor since January 2005 and seen the incredible political risks that he has taken to turn our state and its once dysfunctional government around. I have seen Mitch roll the dice numerous times and walk laps around his competition in doing so. And remember, he was polling in the low 40s two years into his first term, and he won reelection (in a state that Obama carried) by over 10 points.

And you’re right, Mitch would never pick a strong woman as his running mate.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 10:54 PM

Foreign policy is the most important job of the POTUS. Daniels is lacking and for me, already a -1.

Connie on May 9, 2011 at 10:55 PM

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 10:54 PM

I think he’s good veep material.

alwaysfiredup on May 9, 2011 at 10:57 PM

And you’re right, Mitch would never pick a strong woman as his running mate.

Bru on May 9, 2011 at 10:54 PM

hmmm that’s interesting I said a conservative not a strong woman….so I guess you don’t see a conservative when you see Palin you see a woman. very interesting.

As far has Mitch’s politcal background what I have seen over the course of the last year has been a truce seeker, placing his foot in his mouth on a daily basis unable or unwilling to defend conservatism.

I also see a candidate polling under 3% in every poll. unable to rally any type of base besides the DC establishment.

I also saw a guy that pleaded for the fleebaggers dems to return home, gave them everything they wanted so that his last session could be completed and his politcal chits checked off.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 11:01 PM

McCain rolled the dice and lost. He was likely toast no matter what, but after the initial bump Palin gave his campaign her poll numbers declined going into the election.

You are right that Mitch seems capable of finishing at best a respectable 2nd in November 2012.

dedalus on May 9, 2011 at 10:53 PM

Bru is right about McCain’s numbers going into the crapper during his suspension of his campaign. Hell at that point Reagan from the grave couldn’t have saved him. Exit polls showed that Palin was a net positive on McCain’s vote total but McCain stupidity during the economic mess was just a bridge too far. He returned to the pre-palin numbers at that time.

yes I agree Mitch does not have the fire to fight to win and do what is needed to tarnish Obama to obtain that victory.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 11:05 PM

Mitch is not a freakin moderate. Just because he’s measured in his statements does not make him a moderate. His record is clearly conservative.

The comparisons to McCain are laughable. McCain is a populist, with no real convictions.

Mitt clearly approaches things from a conservative to libertarian philosophical foundation.

therightwinger on May 9, 2011 at 11:15 PM

*Mitch.

Mitt Romney on the other hand, is clearly a moderate.

therightwinger on May 9, 2011 at 11:16 PM

Mitch is not a freakin moderate. Just because he’s measured in his statements does not make him a moderate. His record is clearly conservative.

The comparisons to McCain are laughable. McCain is a populist, with no real convictions.

therightwinger on May 9, 2011 at 11:15 PM

So, to take Limbaugh’s point, why aren’t the Obama sycophants in the media trying to tear Daniels down instead of building him up? Do you think Cillizza et al at WaPo REALLY want Obama to have some stiff competition? I don’t know if Daniels is moderate or moderate-conservative or conservative-moderate or whatever. One thing I know is that Obama would stomp him, and the media know it too. Daniels is a “profound threat”. Give me a break.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 11:22 PM

Still West/Ryan. :)

Connie on May 9, 2011 at 11:25 PM

McCain rolled the dice and lost. He was likely toast no matter what, but after the initial bump Palin gave his campaign her poll numbers declined going into the election.

dedalus on May 9, 2011 at 10:53 PM

Oh, bullcrap. McCain’s numbers went into the toilet after the collapse of Lehman Brothers and his idiotic suspension of his campaign — which was lame anyway. I think he’d have had a shot if he had come out against TARP.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 11:31 PM

yes I agree Mitch does not have the fire to fight to win and do what is needed to tarnish Obama to obtain that victory.

That’s what worries me about Daniels too. In my opinion, he has an impressive record of accomplishment, but questionable political instincts. But this is one of the functions of primaries– they serve as campaign auditions. If he gets in, I’ll reserve judgment on Daniels’ willingness to take the fight to Obama until we’ve seen how he campaigns.

Lawdawg86 on May 9, 2011 at 11:32 PM

Just saw the very same situation again today on FOX, political-class, career public employee (“politician”) going on about how it was that the nation has too many pressing problems to ‘leave them in the hands of someone who lacks experience working in the government’.

They’re already denigrating the idea of anyone for the Presidency who isn’t a career public employee, despite other abilities that this nation seems to need more than that.

Lourdes on May 9, 2011 at 10:08 PM

That’s why I stopped watching FNC – the same members of the political class – Krathammer, Morris, Perino and mostly Rove with occasional appearances by total lightweights like ditsy Nicole Wallace – night after night after night.

bw222 on May 9, 2011 at 11:34 PM

Remember, the media has not attacked Daniels yet (just as it didn’t attack McCain until he secured the nomination). But, you can bet it will if he gets the nomination and is running against their icon. I am not sure how Daniels will withstand the firestorm, but I have my doubts.

bw222 on May 9, 2011 at 11:38 PM

I don’t know if Daniels is moderate or moderate-conservative or conservative-moderate or whatever. One thing I know is that Obama would stomp him, and the media know it too. Daniels is a “profound threat”. Give me a break.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 11:22 PM

He is establishment conservative which means a bushite.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 11:42 PM

I don’t blame Mitch’s wife for not wanting to get in the race. The way Obama and his crew roll you know every detail of their marraige will be front page news.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 11:43 PM

I think we would do better to leave the character assassination of Republican Candidates to the MSM and the Democrats instead of taking it up with such gusto ourselves. I would rather talk up candidates I support and not feel I am losing face if I have to vote for someone I had trashed because the alternative is Obama. Reagan had the 11th commandment for good sound political reasons. If you trash one of your opponents in the primary, you’ll may see your quote being used against your party’s guy in the general election.

KW64 on May 9, 2011 at 11:47 PM

I think we would do better to leave the character assassination of Republican Candidates to the MSM and the Democrats instead of taking it up with such gusto ourselves. I would rather talk up candidates I support and not feel I am losing face if I have to vote for someone I had trashed because the alternative is Obama. Reagan had the 11th commandment for good sound political reasons. If you trash one of your opponents in the primary, you’ll may see your quote being used against your party’s guy in the general election.

KW64 on May 9, 2011 at 11:47 PM

Yeah I thought the same way before Aug 28th 2008. After the slime and smear done by the gop establishment on gov Palin all bets are off and all the gop candidates are fair game. They set the rules. I’m done with double standards.

unseen on May 9, 2011 at 11:51 PM

I think we would do better to leave the character assassination of Republican Candidates to the MSM and the Democrats instead of taking it up with such gusto ourselves. I would rather talk up candidates I support and not feel I am losing face if I have to vote for someone I had trashed because the alternative is Obama. Reagan had the 11th commandment for good sound political reasons. If you trash one of your opponents in the primary, you’ll may see your quote being used against your party’s guy in the general election.

KW64 on May 9, 2011 at 11:47 PM

Old and busted. See Palin, O’Donnell and Angle. Reagan’s 11th commandment is now invoked purely to tell conservatives to shut up and eat the dog food.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 11:57 PM

Old and busted. See Palin, O’Donnell and Angle. Reagan’s 11th commandment is now invoked purely to tell conservatives to shut up and eat the dog food.

pseudoforce on May 9, 2011 at 11:57 PM

True, but it is not like we didn’t see conservatives trashing Giuliani as a lefty in 2008 and for every imaginable personal sin under the sun. Sticking to issues and public record of performance works well enough to separate the wheat from the chaff and actually may educate others rather than just destroy people who agree with you a lot more often than Democrats do.

KW64 on May 10, 2011 at 12:10 AM

True, but it is not like we didn’t see conservatives trashing Giuliani as a lefty in 2008 and for every imaginable personal sin under the sun.

KW64 on May 10, 2011 at 12:10 AM

I didn’t see much of that. What I saw was Giuliani running a half-assed, half-baked campaign.

pseudoforce on May 10, 2011 at 12:17 AM

KW64 on May 10, 2011 at 12:10 AM

sorry you liberal republicans made your bed. You further went all in when you did not rise to defend Palin and the Tea party from the blood libel. I will go so far as to say the GOp party is broken and I don’t see the king’s men being able to put it back together. you all declared total war on Gov Palin. You all refused to support and vote for the GOp nominee in DE, you all maligned and caused both angle and Miller to lose close races that could have been won. you all have attacked and smeared conservatives since before Reagan. we allowed it. We tried it your way and you all threw it back in our faces when it was your turn to be team players. You all showed your true colors and I will never forget. If your liberal candidates want the conservatives behind you it will take a great deal to get the base back on your side.

unseen on May 10, 2011 at 12:34 AM

He worked in the Bush admin, and Bush was pretty solidly conservative on most issues- especially the most important ones.

Bush was a conservative? Compared to Obama maybe, but you think all the spending the Republicans did during the Bush adminstration was conservative?

Kjeil on May 10, 2011 at 12:37 AM

Have you noticed that AP is becoming more and more like a carnival barker?

In theory it’s a perfect match…

Every time this Indiana jerk has opened his mouth he’s put his foot in it. Truly the Perfect GOP Candidate!

rcl on May 10, 2011 at 12:55 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3