Quote:
Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon
Well, it's not the GOP's say. It's the voters'. If the DNC had had its way, Hillary would have been the nominee.
And Jindal, I don't know what to think. He's what the party desperately needs, but I just don't see America supporting two racial-minority nominees in a row. The white guys get freaked out.
|
I basically meant the GOP primary voters anyway (yeah, I know people can't read my mind).
But there are also some kingmakers within the GOP and they went for McCain in a big way at a decisive point when Romney could have still made a comeback. I'm talking guys like Phil Gramm here. It may not mean much to the Democrats, but for the GOP, the establishment candidate usually gets the nomination.
I see absolutely no problem with America supporting another racial minority candidate. Racism played no adverse role for Obama and I don't see it playing a role in the event of Jindal entering the 2012 race. Sure West Virginia might be pissed off but that's about it.
Romney could be the establishment guy in 2012, it certainly won't be Huckabee or Palin. Jindal, if he enters, would be the young upstart.
Romney certainly made some big mistakes in the 2008 primaries, mostly by trying to be all things to the various groups of GOP primary voters in the different states. Simply put, you can't appeal to the Iowa voters and the New Hampshire voters at the same time. McCain understood this and staked his candidacy on New Hampshire. Romney appeared weak by losing both contests after pouring in a ton of money. He tried to cover all of his bases within the GOP interest groups (social conservatives, gun nuts, fiscal conservatives, etc). But the thing about Romney was that he was consistently running 2nd in the early primaries and actually won a few. Huckabee didn't have as broad of an appeal. Romney's set for 2012 to be the establishment candidate and possibly the frontrunner.
If Huckabee ends up in the frontrunner position then the GOP will have effectively jumped the shark. The GOP won two presidential elections while being married to the religious right and they were both by extremely thin margins (and in fact lost the popular vote in 2000). The GOP then got soundly beat last week. The social conservatism angle needs to change to a states rights angle and then a reputation for fiscal conservatism, competant gov't management, emphasis on the power of the individual and limited gov't needs to be reestablished in a big way if the GOP hopes to ever make any headway on the West Coast, Northeast, or Upper Midwest.
George Bush's "compassionate conservatism" is a loser in the long run. Any effort to outdemocrat the democrats with spending and entitlements will just relegate the party to minority status on a permanent basis.