2012: Are the decks clear yet?
posted at 5:39 pm on August 14, 2011 by J.E. Dyer
[ Elections ]
My colleague Karl writes today about the retirement from the GOP horse race of Tim Pawlenty, and the settling of the race into a “Romney vs. Not Romney” dynamic. Pawlenty didn’t succeed in being crowned Not Romney in the Iowa straw poll yesterday, but how secure is the tiara on Michelle Bachmann’s head? Is Rick Perry destined to step into a phone booth and turn into Not Romney? What will the voters’ judgments be in the bellwether states of South Carolina and Florida?
The whole question is interesting, and begs in turn the question whether the 2012 campaign will be the clear-the-decks, all-bets-off political turning point that many are hoping for. I think, to begin with, that a lot of people would find the “Not Romney” category an incomplete formulation. It’s not so much “Not Romney” as “the category voters are looking for that Romney doesn’t fit into.” Which, granted, has no future as a bumper sticker – but the point is that the thinking of non-Romney voters isn’t “anyone but Romney,” it’s “where’s the candidate who reflects what I want and believe in?”
Rick Perry may fill that bill for an electorally useful number of voters. I don’t think he’ll have much trouble with Romney in South Carolina, and I’d call it even-Steven for the two candidates in Florida. There are a lot of retired Northeasterners there to whom Romney appeals, but Perry can expect to do well with Florida’s Cuban-American Republicans, small business owners, and military. Jeb Bush’s and Marco Rubio’s endorsements will carry weight. I think I know which way Rubio will go, but I’m not sure what Bush will do.
I’m also not sure Florida will be a make-or-break state. Assuming its primary is in January (as proposed), the early vote and the likelihood of a close split will mitigate the impact of a loss for either Romney or Perry. Other states are likely to be more significant tests of the dynamic Karl outlines; the primary schedule has Missouri probably voting in early February, and the very interesting states of Illinois, Tennessee, and Virginia voting in March, along with the Colorado precinct caucuses. Those states may well be a better test of the electorate’s mood. Will Romney win where we would expect him to?
The campaign may well come down to the convention vote, as it did in 1976. It’s very possible Romney and Perry will both have good reason to consider themselves “still alive” when Pennsylvania votes in April, and Indiana and Ohio in May. (I’m using the proposed primary schedule; not all dates may come off as currently envisioned by the states.) If Bachmann stays in the race, racking up strong third-place finishes, the likelihood of the decision being delayed to the convention goes up.
It’s tempting to say that the question in 2012 is whether there will be a single Republican brand the voters will line up behind. I think a more basic question is whether we have reached a tipping point in the popular sentiment that things not only have got to change, but that they already have. We saw some evidence of that in the primary nod to Christine O’Donnell in Delaware last year, as well as in Florida’s revolt against the national GOP establishment in picking Marco Rubio over Charlie Crist, Nevada’s choice of Sharron Angle to face off against Harry Reid, etc. There are multiple factors at work in the ongoing saga of Wisconsin, but one of them is the major shift in voter sentiment: voters are willing to endure civil unrest, and the unhappiness of taxpayer-dependent constituencies, and continue to endorse the political leaders who are standing against those eruptions and doing what the voters asked them to do.
Have we reached the tipping point? Are voters ready to buck conventional expectations and do things differently? If they aren’t, and they hand the nomination to Romney, even a GOP win in 2012 will be taken as evidence that politics as usual is what people really want. Opinions will differ on whether endorsing Rick Perry instead is a signal that voters seek real change. It’s possible that he will function as a sort of operational pause for GOP voters and the republic: conservative enough that he’ll get a lot of Bachmann and Palin supporters, but with a standard political resume of reassuring length and girth. A Perry candidacy could well serve to postpone the kind of transformative reckoning the GOP had between 1976 and 1980.
The coming primary season is likely to be the most significant, informative one the GOP has had in decades. We will know some things at the end of it that we don’t know today. The biggest thing, I think, will be whether voters are still hoping to identify a standard-bearer for the “Reagan consensus,” or whether they see a need to rewrite the consensus. If it’s the latter, my money is on an updated “Coolidge consensus”: something starker, simpler, and purer than the Reagan consensus.
Are we ready for that consensus to emerge yet? That is the question. We’re closer than we were four years ago. Because words matter, I don’t even want to hazard a guess about 2012. But I do think there will be a sign one way or the other: whether Sarah Palin gets into the race, and what happens if she does.
J.E. Dyer’s articles have appeared at The Green Room, Commentary’s “contentions,” Patheos, The Weekly Standard online, and her own blog, The Optimistic Conservative.









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
A lot of us are still waiting for Palin to enter before we start to tune in or get active. If she enters, things change, but even if she doesn’t, things will change as we-who-are-waiting start working for other candidates. Bachmann could do REALLY well if Sarah declines to enter.
joe_doufu on August 14, 2011 at 5:57 PM
Perry is my second choice, still waiting on Sarah!
tinkerthinker on August 14, 2011 at 11:14 PM
Spot on. It’s not just about getting a conservative in there – it’s WHICH conservative we get in there. Looking past the election – with all the talk about electability and courting the squishy center – I think everyone can agree, though they might not be willing to admit it, if Perry ends up in the White House he would do a lot of very good things for the country. If Palin ends up in the White House she would change how Washington works, which is what we really need.
miConsevative on August 14, 2011 at 11:18 PM
Hmmm… good food for thought.
I watched the video of Perry in Waterloo and I was impressed. But I wonder if I was impressed by genuine conservatism or if he is just a really good politician. Either way, it was refreshing as hell after seeing Obama these last few years. Whether he’ll govern as a truly transformative conservative like Bachmann or Paul would is a question I haven’t decided the answer to yet. He will up the quality of debates though from here on out.
Nelsen on August 14, 2011 at 11:20 PM
Regarding Palin, does the left have any more cards to play here? They’re so completely unhinged at the mere mention of her name that one would have to believe if they had any ammo they would have used it by now. That seems to me to be a huge advantage over any other candidate – she could be as close to being “October surprise” proof as any candidate I can recall.
mpk on August 14, 2011 at 11:25 PM
I am still puzzled by how anyone claiming to be a conservative can support Romney.
ButterflyDragon on August 14, 2011 at 11:26 PM
This whole concept that indies and libertarians are ready for four more Obama Years because of Rep infighting is hilarious. By the time November 12 hits malaise may be the newspeak for PO’d.
Limerick on August 14, 2011 at 11:40 PM
That transformation from 1976 to 1980 was led by the two-term governor of a large state with a fast growing economy if I remember correctly….
cpaulus on August 14, 2011 at 11:42 PM
Not quite. The race has always been… Tea Party vs. Not Tea Party.
It remains to be seen which group Rick Perry fits in.
faraway on August 14, 2011 at 11:42 PM
Yep. it sure was. Now that you mention it, Rick Perry’s state has been growing so much over his term, that they just added 4 more congressional districts, most in all of the 50 states.
ted c on August 14, 2011 at 11:46 PM
here’s a couple of cites from the St. Louis Fed.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/es/11/ES1120.pdf
http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/es/11/ES1121.pdf
IMHO all Rs should be required to read these, and carry copies with them when they go on tv shows. Give these copies to the anchors. And ask what kind of country do we want? The anchors will say like Sweden…but yeah, what about the non-DC crowd?
r keller on August 14, 2011 at 11:55 PM
Ron Paul
…duh
Spathi on August 15, 2011 at 1:33 AM
Please read this before declaring Rick Perry a valid conservative option: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61076.html
Reasonable minds can differ on various individual aspects of the illegal immigration debate. But the man opposed E-Verify for state employees. Employees that are paid directly by taxpayers. I do not want this man as my president. He is a Bush/McCain-ite.
athenanyc on August 15, 2011 at 1:38 AM
Put the chicken down, pull your pants up, and back away slowly.
gryphon202 on August 15, 2011 at 2:23 AM
Is not Romney doesn’t sell.
And so far for me “Is Perry” sells very well. It’s not about Perry’s not being Romney that matters. What matters is what Perry is, warts and all. Fortunately his pattern of warts as I see it is safe when ensconced in the office called “POTUS.” I’d be less sanguine about Senataor Perry or Representative Perry. The Congress MAKES laws, a process in which the POTUS holds no more power than you or me except that he can say no with his veto pen.
He can’t “make a law” that will outlaw gay marriage, for example. As POTUS he is not even a part of the amendment process. Is power in this regard is no more than that of all the other people in the United States of America except the 535 in our legislature and those in the state legislatures that in turn ratify it.
He does have a bully pulpit for selling ideas. But, when it comes to push and shove he has one vote the same as I do.
So to me, so far, President Perry sounds perfectly fine to me. I’d be glad if he could sell a more religious, in a Judeo-Christian sense, America. I leave it to Congress to keep us a basically secular nation built on top of a firm tolerant Christian core.
{^_^}
herself on August 15, 2011 at 6:11 AM
We have heard the songs and promises before and the only thing that changes is the singer. Look at the last Presidential election, when will we ever learn. Congress makes the problems and then claims to solve the problems and blames the problems on something else. When will we ever learn. End of rant, thank you.
mixplix on August 15, 2011 at 8:35 AM
How can we stop them from trying to solve all our problems for us?
Fallon on August 15, 2011 at 9:00 AM
We do need a new coalition. One that is based on leaving social issues up to the states and truly responsible governing on fiscal and security issues. Large swaths of the electorate are inaccessible to the conservative cause because of the influence of the religious elements in their platform. Drop that barrier and we have a great shot at moving the entire body politic in this nation to the right. Whether it’s those who support gays or women’s rights, we share so much in common. It’s time to bring them over to our side!
MJBrutus on August 15, 2011 at 9:07 AM
I’m skeptical that the US will adopt Coolidge-ism just because our debt problems are worse than they were a generation ago. The electorate is more polarized today as well, but that only ensures that it will oscillate more between extremes without achieving a lasting consensus. After all, how long did the Reagan consensus last once the Great Communicator left office? That does not mean the country’s financial problems won’t be addressed adequately to stave off decline, but there won’t be any collective epiphany, and a mass conversion is unlikely. Rather we are in for an extended period of European style fractiousness. And allegedly independent voters won’t help any more than they did in the era of Ross Perot: Their feverish though waning dalliance with Obama demonstrates that the country’s center of
political gravity is decidedly gaseous.
Seth Halpern on August 15, 2011 at 9:15 AM
Palin/Perry 2012, accept no substitutes.
ChuckTX on August 15, 2011 at 10:31 AM
Pretty good take on this overall, J.E. I’d add that a “Not BarryO” vote is more of what a significant bloc of conservative and middlers are looking for. And certainly “not a RINO” would be ideal.
But, and this is a galactic size BUT, a lot of water will pass the bow before the spring of 2012. In our national body politic, international evernts, financial events, you name it, it will all effect the mood of the electorate.
“Not BarryO” will still most likely be the primary theme whatever else occurs from everything my gut tells me.
Robert17 on August 15, 2011 at 7:20 PM
You may be right that a Coolidge consensus is not in the offing, Seth. I’d offer the following thoughts, though, in no particular order:
1. The Reagan consensus is indeed still with us. The GOP has been going by it without examining its unsustainable consequences. I admire Reagan greatly, and I don’t think anyone else could have done a better job than he did with what he had. But there’s no question that the Reagan consensus means accepting spending as the trade-off for a freer economy, primarily in the form of lower taxes.
The difference between Coolidge and Reagan comes down to one word: spending. Reagan had a different America, one that had been buying into spending for a good 5 decades (some would say 7) by the time he took office. The American public that Coolidge had would have been horrified by the kind of spending that earlier presidents and Congresses had made routine before 1981. But a key aspect of the Reagan consensus is that the “new normal” of that spending was not questioned. Reagan didn’t deliberately expand the basis of spending, but the important point is that he didn’t consider it central to stake everything on preventing it.
The GOP has continued on that basis since he left office. The Tea Party movement is the liveliest, most enduring, and most politically important counter to the current legacy of the Reagan consensus.
2. People thought a lot of things were impossible 2, 5, or 10 years ago that look less impossible today. I think there is a shift going on. I’m not sure it will produce a real result in 2012; I think voters may well opt for the safety of a familiar-seeming choice like Perry, and I don’t blame them as much as I would have when I was young and knew everything.
But one of the chief things I learned in a career in Naval intelligence was that people reflexively resist all new ideas and new interpretations, but then come to embrace them. America has always beaten the odds; betting against a critical mass of the citizenry wising up isn’t the sure thing it might be if we looked solely at the history of the rest of the world. The streak of revivalist puritanism in us that the Europeans make fun of is the advantage we have over that tired old continent. If there is any nation on earth that can buck the prescriptions of the incoherent post-modern left, and turn back to Coolidge-ism – small government, humble government, government that shuts up when it’s told to, government that stops getting further into debt and instead pays it down — it’s the USA.
J.E. Dyer on August 15, 2011 at 10:26 PM
Totally agree with you, Robert17. The world is already too much with us, and soon will be more so. We have no idea what the political landscape is going to look like by November 2012. But a constant will be the growing clarity on the fact that Obama is not the guy to deal with any of it.
I’m thinking public sentiment will have reached an effective asymptote on that topic by the time we mark our ballots next fall.
J.E. Dyer on August 15, 2011 at 10:31 PM