I'm looking for two chief things in a candidate for 2012:
The temperament, judgment, deftness and largeness of spirit required in the presidential office; and the creativity and intellect to respond to the global economic crisis -- a crisis threatening to actually get worse if (or when) the euro implodes.
Those conditions obviously and categorically exclude the clownish Herman Cain, the daffy Ron Paul, the dim Rick Perry and the firebrand congresswoman Michele Bachmann.
A step up from those four is former U.S. senator Rick Santorum. Santorum, who is the only candidate in the race to talk about the stagnation of wages and the slowing of upward mobility in the United States. Unfortunately, Santorum -- a fierce social conservative -- speaks for too narrow a slice of modern America. Santorum has also never held any administrative responsibility. It's not enough for a president to say "do this" or "do that." Issuing the orders is the easy part. The president must ensure that "this" and "that" actually happen. If you have never had such a responsibility before, the White House is a bad place to learn -- as President Obama (who also lacked any prior administrative experience) proves on a daily basis.
The Republican flavour of the month, Newt Gingrich, likewise flunks condition one. As Speaker of the House, Gingrich was notorious for his indiscipline. Where he does excel is in the use of rhetoric to divide and provoke. Take, for example, his musing last September in front of reporters: "What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behaviour, can you begin to piece together [his actions]? ... That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behaviour."
Back in the 1990s, Gingrich made himself one of the most disliked figures in the recent history of American politics. As American political commentator Jay Cost reminds us, within 24 months of becoming Speaker, Gingrich had forced a shutdown of the federal government and sunk to an approve/disapprove rating of negative 25. There Gingrich languished through ethics challenges, impeachment and the revelation that he'd been carrying on an extra-marital affair while attacking Bill Clinton's own sexual misconduct.
A Gingrich presidency, if such a thing can even be imagined, would be a chaotic catastrophe. A Gingrich nomination would yield an Obama landslide.
So that leaves us with the two governors, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman. Romney has the better record as an administrator. I still think that his Massachusetts health-care plan showed creative leadership on an important problem -- even if he himself now declines to defend his own accomplishment.
Romney has spoken well and firmly about the need to stop Iran's nuclear weapons program. He has a keen understanding of the debt and financial problems of the U.S. and Europe.
This blog originally appeared on the National Post.
Follow David Frum on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@davidfrum
Dylan Ratigan: Hot-Spotting: It's How, Not How Much
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
Ron Paul is the only candidate that would wipe the floor with Obama in 2012.
Don't waste your vote.
Learn about Ron Paul.
The Palins and Perry's and Bachman's and Cain's have been a great way to ensure Obama stays in power, and therefore takes all the blame, removing any solutions-oriented plans from the GOP. This is all scripted.
Huntsman s currently running for the 2016 nomination, not the 2012 one.
I'd argue we're looking at a potentially historic transformative presidency. Western civilization could use one of these right about now.
But I'll save a your quote so I can rub-a-dub-dub them around in your nose in about 6 years... after the bulk of the Newtonian legislative agenda has been implemented.
The Democrats are heading into a historic shellacking. Americans don't understand all the fine points of policy between the Dems and Repubs, but they know this: The economy is in shambles, and Obama and the Democrats have been in charge. Obama, Reid and Pelosi don't have a clue what to do, and the result is record poverty, record foodstamps, record foreclosures, record deficits, out-of-control spending, wacko environmental enforcement, failure to develop new domestic energy, a biased/pro-union NLRB, and incessant, never-ending, class-dividing talk of higher taxes.
It hasn't worked for Obama and won't work in the future.
On election day there will be the second or third biggest swing of unaffiliated voters (and many nominal Democrats) in history. Obama's policy of writing-off the white middle class and appealing to every recipient of federal largesse will fail. Even American who receive federal assistance still care about the future of the country, not just about themselves.
After 2012 Obama will be able to practice golf everyday in some new resort home. And Harry Reid will ooze out of the majority leader's office in the Senate for the last time.
None of those five seem to include 'honesty' as one of those 'things' you are looking for in a candidate. It should. But I guess that would mean Romney would have to get the boot. His blatant false advertising is outrageous.
This is the era of Tea Party and we the Tea Partiers want Gov. Perry and Speaker Gingrich!
Perry-Gingrich '12
You had your chance. Your candidates are shameful when they're not laughable and those you helped elect are worse.
Character counts. Look up the Leadership Traits and Principles that are taught to the US Marines. If you are intellectually honest, and use the actual records of each potential CIC, there can be only one choice. Hint: t'aint Romney.
The Commander in Chief should at least aspire to the standard (in the leadership realm) his or her subordinates are held to. Hint: t'aint Obama, Dang sure not Newt, or Perry
Perry, Perry, Perry, Perry, Perry, Perry,
The Russian President threatens to point it's missiles at those sites, if the US does so.
Mitt has never expressed an understanding of the complicated issue created by the alliances Iran has formed with other countries.
Besides, Mitt failed to benefit from his father's stand on Civil Rights because he has no core convictions.
His lack of conviction and flip-flopping on Key GOP issues makes him the antithesis of the conservative wing of the GOP.
Mitt flip-flops because, in the end, his wealth and religion provide him everything he needs, thus insulating him from the repercussions of any bad decision he makes...so he's indifferent and seemingly uncaring.
For Value, Experience, Vision and Faith: ------- Perry-Gingrich '12
The bumper stickers almost write themselves Vote Huntsman "He don't suck anywhere near as bad as Cain".
Ain't that the truth.