Blogs and Stories

The Next Republican President

by Mark McKinnon Info

Mark McKinnon
 
  • Share

BS Top - McKinnon 2012 cattle call AP Photo (2); Newscom; Reuters In the first in a series of posts on the 2012 landscape, former Bush and McCain strategist Mark McKinnon handicaps 11 Republicans—and explains why Obama might not be a lock for two terms.

Political crackheads, fire up your pipes.

Let the 2012 political games begin. Hell, they’ve already begun. Only 1,251 days to go until the first primary. Observe as some of the usual and not so usual suspects start firing up their engines.

I’m surprised by how many people I talk to in the media and politics, including many Republicans, already presume Obama will be a two-term president.

If you had any doubt, just look at the political news this week: Governor Tim Pawlenty announces he is not going to seek re-election, Mitt Romney gives a foreign-policy speech at the Heritage Foundation and appears on the Today show, Senator John Ensign lectures in Iowa on ways to retool the Republican Party, and Newt Gingrich reels in his intemperate accusation that Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor is a racist.

And we have one of the first credible horse-race polls from CNN, which shows that of those candidates polled, we have a dead heat among Mike Huckabee (22 percent), Sarah Palin (21 percent), and Romney (21 percent). These three alone will probably raise the Iowa GDP by a point or two over the next few years.

Given the kind of resources and organization required to run a presidential campaign these days, it’s rarely too early to run. It’s often too late.

Knock, knock, Fred Thompson.

I’m surprised by how many people I talk to in the media and politics, including many Republicans, already presume Obama will be a two-term president. That’s a perfectly reasonable assumption if you also assume nothing much will happen of any great significance or importance in the next few years. And that there will be no external surprises or crises.

The fun thing about politics is how often conventional wisdom gets thrown out the window (African-American president, never!) and how often we are surprised at the turn of events.

Mid-term in the presidency of George H.W. Bush, he looked unbeatable. Favorability ratings after the liberation of Kuwait in the high 80s. Everyone thought he would be a two-term president, including heavyweight potential opponents like Lloyd Bentsen and Dick Gephardt, who never suited up. But, as Woody Allen said, 90 percent of the game is just showing up, and Bill Clinton did.

Think about all the people who told Barack Obama to wait.

Whatever the political dynamics may be two years from now, it is my view that any Republican who wants to run for president in 2012 or 2016 would be wise to start cranking up the machine now.

First we’ll assume that most of the candidates who ran in 2008 will run again. It’s like sex—once you do it, it’s pretty hard to stop.

Handicapper Corner’s Top 10, Plus One Longshot:

1. Mitt Romney. Republicans like orderly succession, and he’s got the $$.

2. Tim Pawlenty. Reformer, populist elected in a blue state.

3. John Thune. Central casting and liked by all factions.

4. Mike Huckabee. A national show and evangelical base.

5. Sarah Palin. The juice and interest level of an American Idol finalist.

6. Mark Sanford. Pork-busting fiscal conservative from key state (South Carolina).

7. Bobby Jindal. He seems to be saying, “Wait,” and may be one of the few who can.

8. Newt Gingrich. No one understands better how to start a revolution.

9. Jon Huntsman. Brilliant move by Obama keeping his friends close and his enemies in China. But if he solves an early crisis and comes home, look out.

10. John Ensign. A U.S senator spending time in Iowa. ’Nuff said.

Longshot: Jeb Bush. Never count out a Bush out of GOP politics (George P.’s nickname is “47”).

Xtra Insight: Read Benjamin Sarlin on the leveling of the 2012 field.

As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, causes, and individuals, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono. McKinnon is co-chair of Arts & Labs, a collaboration between technology and creative communities that have embraced today’s rich Internet environment to deliver innovative and creative digital products to consumers.


June 3, 2009 | 11:45pm
  • Share
Comments ()

quick2no

You're creepin' me out...

|
|
Reply
|
7:30 am, Jun 4, 2009

mikefromArlington

Palin/bin Laden

Since both their goal is to undermine confidence in Obama's administration they mind as well share their strategists, etc. and save some $$$'s.

|
|
Reply
2:37 pm, Jun 4, 2009

Blackknight73

Obama at 65% approval, he is expanded the dem base, and Hispanics, African- Americans and Asians are all voting for dems in increasing numbers. It's a long ways to 2010, however the President has a strong hand. The appointment of the hispanic judge will strengthen support among Hispanics.

|
|
Reply
5:40 pm, Jun 4, 2009

openhand

ROTFLMFAO

|
|
Reply
9:18 pm, Jun 4, 2009

openhand

Sarah Palin POTUS
Liz Cheney Vice POTUS

|
|
Reply
|
10:02 pm, Jun 4, 2009

pastaguy

You have got to be kidding me. Do you collect a paycheck from the DNC? This is a surefire way of re-electing Obama.

|
8:43 am, Sep 15, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
|
Reply
|
7:30 am, Jun 4, 2009

dm10003

and the gays should be blamed for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:2 )

|
|
Reply
11:23 am, Jun 4, 2009

GM2009

'As for Jeb, his brother poisoned the well for good and his father was no great shakes, either. America has had it with the Bush clan'

To put it mildy. GHW Bush is some evil bastard who got away with much because the innernets came along just a few years too late. The obvious plus, In the book Thom Hartmann wrote about the Kennedy assassination, its suggested that Bush was involved, he was a CIA contracto at the time who inexplicably eventually became Director. Go figure. But that's not the good part. Apparently, Bush was not only the only person in america but probably the world, who couldn't remember where he was on Feb. 22 1963. I was but a little kid but I certainly do. Anyhoo, turns out he was in Dallas. What a coincidence.

|
|
Reply
|
5:00 pm, Jun 4, 2009

bcaldwell

Once again you show the American penchant for ignorance. Are you sure you know where you were on February 22 , 1963? It's pretty much an innocuous date unless it was a Tuesday and you were in New Orleans - then it could've been Mardi Gras. Or if it was Monday - maybe G. Washington's birthday. I'm sure George H.W. Bush does not remember where he was 45 years ago on that particular day. It was otherwise uneventful.

Now ....if you are talking Novemeber 22, 1963 then maybe you have a point. Look, stop blaming the Bush family for all of the ills of this world and certainly DO NOT pin the JFK assassination on him. Please this stuff wears thin. But, nonetheless , I'm glad you can remember where you were on that late winter's day in 1963 when NOTHING important happened. geeeesh Americans and History , two things that tend NOT to go together.

|
10:43 pm, Jun 4, 2009

JohnHedtke

I don't attach any significance to George HW's being in Dallas then--that's pretty tenuous stuff--but I do think that the things that we do know about him for sure are pretty bad: strafing survivors when he was a pilot, keeping the Republican party alive during the Watergate years by spinning information enough that the public outrage didn't kill the party, or financing his first senatorial run with the proceeds from money laundering for the Third Reich by his father: all of these are facts on record.

But as much as I find the Bushes individually and collectively loathsome for their many, many misdeeds in and out of office, I can't say we should count Jeb or George P. out. Benito Mussolini's granddaughter is in politics, for the Fascists in Italy. You'd think people would learn, wouldn't you?

|
11:29 am, Jun 5, 2009

piktor

Palin/Hasselbeck 2012! YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

|
|
Reply
|
7:47 am, Jun 4, 2009

quick2no

You're creepin' me out...

|
|
Reply
8:13 am, Jun 4, 2009

tomthumb

I call for Palin/Prejean 2012!!!!!! ha ha

|
|
Reply
|
11:11 am, Jun 4, 2009

politico83

I'm not so sure it shouldn't be Prejean/Palin.

Prejean seems like the more qualified wing nut beauty pageant candidate. After all Prejean's fancy pageant walking is significantly better and she'd probably look better winking at conservatives in a skirt suit.

As far as Palin's knowledge of government and policy vs Prejean's it would probably be a wash, after all knowing nothing is pretty easy to emulate.

|
11:50 am, Jun 4, 2009

Ritarita

I'm thinking
Tancredo/Dobbs for a real
Serving of red meat.



|
12:24 pm, Jun 4, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
1:59 pm, Jun 5, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
1:59 pm, Jun 5, 2009

axoaxo

Palin/Bachmann 2012!!! would be the ultimate wing-nut ticket

|
|
Reply
1:47 pm, Jun 4, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
|
Reply
1:59 pm, Jun 5, 2009

SandySanders

For more on Gov. Jindal, come to the improved jindal2012blog.com.

I do think Gov. Jindal may well wait but he also has a re-election coming up in 2011 for Governor of Louisiana.

Sandy Sanders

|
|
Reply
8:12 am, Jun 4, 2009

Ritarita

Not one of these candidates
Has any Elvis
Except for Palin-
And even the GOP in it's current state
Wouldn't gift wrap an election
By making it that easy.


|
|
Reply
|
8:22 am, Jun 4, 2009

oliverckerr

She can't carry a tune

|
|
Reply
|
10:41 am, Jun 4, 2009

dm10003

toon?

|
11:23 am, Jun 4, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
|
Reply
|
10:10 pm, Jun 4, 2009

Hawnzz

lol...that was good.

|
12:01 pm, Jun 5, 2009

allonfla

NO ONE is a lock for two terms so nothing original about that thought. But if you think the Left will give an inch to these whackadoos that you listed here, you have another thing coming. Any of these will bring in tons of money for Obama.

|
|
Reply
|
8:33 am, Jun 4, 2009

janet1003mn

Agreed...with the exception of Jon Huntsman. Obama isn't sending a "whackadoo" to China. No worries, though. As he's not a typical right wing nutjob, there's absolutely NO WAY the 'thugs would actually nominate him. The rabid fundy base would eat him alive.

|
|
Reply
|
1:25 pm, Jun 4, 2009

whipmawhopma

He sent Hillary Clinton to China.

|
7:40 pm, Jun 4, 2009

melissamsouza

You give new meaning to the term "wishful thinking". None of these crackpots--and I mean NONE of them--can hold a match up to Obama. Each and every one of them is severely flawed--either through complete ineptness at communication (Romney, Jindal) or complete ignorance and lack of minimal qualifications (Palin) or all of the above multiplied by 2012. Mark Sanford? I guess this is what the Republicans really need right now to show that they are not a narrow-minded, supply-side, white male Southern Party. Gingrich, a hopeless, heavily-bagagged has-been beside Obama is like the Grinch beside Elvis. I'm afraid, Mr. McKinnon, if this is the best you can up with for your Party, Obama will not only win a second term, but will shred the Republicans into finality.

|
|
Reply
|
8:34 am, Jun 4, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
|
Reply
|
10:02 am, Jun 4, 2009

Issywise

I laughed at that. You Do have redeeming qualities.

|
1:16 pm, Jun 4, 2009

JohnHedtke

Very funny!

|
11:30 am, Jun 5, 2009

Hawnzz

Banjo is on a roll!

|
12:03 pm, Jun 5, 2009

spincycle

melissamsouza, you nailed it. He started off with "Political crackheads, fire up your pipes". He obviously has been doing a lot of that lately if he thinks any of these idiots has a chance against Obama in 2012.

|
|
Reply
5:39 pm, Jun 5, 2009

Progressive2

Dick Cheney/Michelle Bachman 2012 (landslide)

|
|
Reply
8:49 am, Jun 4, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
|
Reply
|
9:01 am, Jun 4, 2009

Carole65

Exactly. The spending of billions of dollars that are not there to spend will bankrupt the country. That won't bode well for the Prez or the Democratic Congress.

|
|
Reply
|
9:29 am, Jun 4, 2009

GM2009

Bush spent the money in advance. The Democratic Congress simply signed the cheque.

|
6:33 pm, Jun 4, 2009

JackJack

GM.. nope. You're wrong. Obama has spent more than 11 trillion dollars in 6 months. This is more government spending than the last 30 years of Presidents.

Stop Obama's spending! Get your wallet out for inflation to spin.

|
6:47 pm, Jun 4, 2009

xlntcat

In response to the 11 trillion dollars in 6 months. Itemize it! Fact: Bush left office with an 11 trillion dollar debt. He doubled the national debt,more debt than we had incurred in our history. Under the Bush administration the GOP set the collapse of the economy in place. The TARP was requested and allotted under Bush to prevent a complete collapse of the economy. AIG, GM, The Banks, Freddie/Fannie all under Bush/Paulsen. The stimulus was signed under Obama and was in the amount of $747 billion. Only a portion of it has been paid out and approximate $100 billion of the Tarp remains. The deficit when Obama took office was 1.7 trillion dollars. Fact: We are broke and we were sold to China under Bush. Fact: Economics 101 - when the banks are broke and the consumers are broke the only way to save an economy is the government. Fact: We have to reduce our debt and our deficit using sound rules of economics not right wing whining and lying.

|
4:24 am, Jun 5, 2009

nagor76

Please....this space is reserved for hilariously sarcastic liberals to mock anything that suggests the 2 party system isn't over. If you can't come with a highly original Palin putdown you deserve to lose your internet priveleges.

|
|
Reply
10:07 am, Jun 4, 2009

MOswingvoter

That and the state-sponsored demolishment of GM. I know plenty of Democrats furious with Obama's intervention in the auto industry. When it goes poorly, and when there is no exit strategy, well, you know the rest.

|
|
Reply
10:13 am, Jun 4, 2009

gregthink

I think you may be too hung up, just like every other republican and democrat who thinks too belligerently on whom is in the house. It is true the democrats have a supreme dominance in both the executive and congressional branches, however, seldom does a president such as Obama bend over backwards to actually listen, let alone WORK with the other side, who was repeatedly refused to acknowledge any sort of legislation Obama has put forth. This only seems to be a measure of the republican party's desperate theatrics in order to cling to their dying party, a party that has seem to have lost touch with the rest of the progressive world.

|
|
Reply
11:18 am, Jun 4, 2009

politico83

Have you not noticed the uptick in the economy lately? If the stiumulus actually works, and by 2012 things are turning around, all the winking, fancy pagent walking and ignorant statements in the world aren't going to land a lightweight like Palin the presidency.

Ditto for religious wing nuts like Hickabee. The next generation is pro gay marriage and pretty light on church attendance, especially the old timey bible beating kind of church.

The only one with any kind of chance is a smart moderate like Huntsman, that the GOP will never ever pick in the primaries given the huge amount of crazies that will push can't win candidates like Hickabee to the top of the pile.

|
|
Reply
|
11:54 am, Jun 4, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
5:29 pm, Jun 4, 2009

IAmAlwaysRight

I've been out of work for an eternity now and I don't even get calls back for interviews. YAAAY Obama!!! He is the disaster that keeps on giving. I don't know where YOU live, but it can't be here. The economy isn't ticking at all! Really, the only thing ticking is the Obama bomb that's going to destroy this great country. My theory is that people like Palin and Gingrich can win easily simply because your ilk detest them so much. And thanks for your suggestion to put up a "moderate" Republican. We fell for that crap with McCain. LOL, and Colin Powell didn't even vote for THAT candidate! Screw the moderates! What you libs fear is a principled Republican.

|
12:15 am, Jun 5, 2009

JohnHedtke

In fact, I think there is an improvement in the overall economy, Banjo1. My investments are showing lovely returns all of a suddn and there are a lot of jobs at a number of levels. The problem is that this is going to take a good 6-12 months to filter through all levels and sectors of the economy and there are a lot of points where it could still fall apart. What happens, for example, if we have an H1N1 pandemic, even at the level the disease is now (not very dangerous). My co-author on our latest book on disaster preparedness says that we should hit a rate of 1 out of 3 Americans infected and 40% of the workforce off work by January at the current infection rate. This'll crimp any recovery. We ain't out of the woods yet... but I am seeing a lot of signs for hope.

|
11:35 am, Jun 5, 2009

cassandravert

"uptick in the economy" = the market has increased substantially since March. Is this temporary or the beginning of a recovery? Too early to tell. In recoveries, however, the market is usually the first economic indicator to catch on. Unfortunately, unemployment takes another seven months or so to join in (based on past downturns).

|
4:02 pm, Jun 10, 2009

omgron

You're right. The stimulus package is really going to haunt them. Especially since they all voted for it without reading it. They are following the messiah over the cliff.

Also, the two speeches on Enhanced Interrorgation. After Obama delivered his teleprompter message, Mr. Cheney delivered his speech. It appeared as though Dad (Cheney) took the Brat (BO) to the wood shed.

While Obama's experience was always an unanswered question, he has shown he had and has none. We should of known when his first big decision produced Joe Biden as VP.

Come on 2010 and 2012. He is definitely a one-termer.

|
|
Reply
5:34 pm, Jun 4, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
|
Reply
2:00 pm, Jun 5, 2009

lizmichael

If Ron Paul is not on the list, it's not a very good list. Jimminy Christ, you have Thune, Huntsman, and Ensign on the list and you didn't include Ron? What's wrong with you people? Scared he might actually WIN?

|
|
Reply
9:16 am, Jun 4, 2009

muddog

The Dem's need to focus on the NOW, there is alot to clean up, thats the problem with the G.O.P. they are only worried about the next election and not the NOW, thats what got them screwed ( alot of other things like war and lying did to but thats another story ).

The fact that Palin is even mentioned screams desperation, Newt, theres enough baggage on this guy that the Dem's would be thrilled that he ran, Huckabee , not, Jeb, maybe...

The next election is a lifetime away and numerous scandals ( left and right ) will take place, economy good bad, war etc....

|
|
Reply
|
9:40 am, Jun 4, 2009

MOswingvoter

Palin get's a mention because (shockingly!) there are a number of people who like her. Try to take off your blinders and look at what she is actually doing in Alaska. See conservatives4palin.com for real information on her activities.

|
|
Reply
10:15 am, Jun 4, 2009

Sparky906

You would think the republicans could come up with someone worth running. All these people listed are just the same pile of refuge with differant names.

|
|
Reply
9:41 am, Jun 4, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
|
Reply
|
9:51 am, Jun 4, 2009

This user is no longer registered.

|
|
Reply
11:42 pm, Jun 5, 2009

Barbara416

progressive;I love a joke with my morning coffee!

|
|
Reply
|
10:04 am, Jun 4, 2009

Progressive2

:)

|
|
Reply
12:39 pm, Jun 4, 2009

grlfromks


Is the key to elections still voters? Uh huh. The Republican Party better get moving so they can find a message, find a plan, find the leader able to effectively motivate and inspire beyond the base. They'll need to convince us they have more than empty words. And if such a person exists, why is s/he not sharing these ideas with the Republican Party NOW? How much of a leader can any person be that wants to save badly needed ideas for a campaign?

If anyone thinks the Democratic Party is resting on its laurels, they're wrong.

|
|
Reply
10:04 am, Jun 4, 2009
Leave a comment

Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.

View Comments

YOUR FRIENDS