Candidates not in race seen as figures of extraordinary & enduring strength & skill until in race they immediately become diminished, flawed & mortal.
Gerald Seib writes in The Wall Street Journal:
The longing of some Republicans for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to enter the 2012 presidential race reflects more than quiet dissatisfaction with the GOP's current field of contenders. It also reflects a dramatically changed feeling within the party that the best time to recapture the White House may not be 2016 after all.
That changed sentiment bears on the prospects for a whole crop of young potential Republican stars, Mr. Christie included. Not so long ago, there was a palpable if unspoken feeling among Republicans that President Barack Obama was more likely than not to win a second term in 2012, but that this collection of young talent would be primed and ready to shine four years later.
Now the Republican nomination that's up for grabs looks a lot more valuable. Perhaps, many in the party are thinking, the future is now.
Such sentiments may represent a miscalculation of President Obama's vulnerability, and the ease with which any incumbent president can be dislodged. Mr. Obama's standing has slipped, but so have feelings toward Republicans and, in particular, toward the Congress they help run. The president remains fairly popular personally, and he'll still raise plenty of money.
Still, the political landscape has changed a lot in recent months. Mr. Obama himself said in an interview Monday with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News that he "absolutely" considers himself the underdog in next year's race. Consider the differences in some leading political indicators since the dawn of 2011:
President Obama's job-approval rating has dropped to 43% from 49% in Gallup tracking polls.
The University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment index, a leading reading of how the public feels about the state of the economy, has plunged to 59.4 from 74.2.
The share of those who say the country is headed in the right direction has fallen to 19% in the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, from 35% at the outset of the year.
The share of those who say they'll probably vote for the Republican in next year's presidential election has risen to 44% from 40% in the Journal/NBC News survey.
All this makes the president a much bigger target than seemed possible just months ago. One can only wonder what some Republicans who declined the honor of getting into the race, including Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, are thinking now.
There is, of course, a natural and well-documented tendency to belittle contenders who have actually entered a race, and to assume magical qualities among those who haven't. As Republican analyst Pete Wehner has noted, candidates who aren't in a race tend to be seen as "figures of extraordinary and enduring strength and skill" right up to the moment they become candidates, "at which point they immediately become diminished, flawed and mortal."
That's pretty much the story of Texas Gov. Rick Perry in the last couple of weeks. And former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is the perpetual victim of this tendency to yearn for the unavailable.
What's less obvious is how this altered political landscape could affect the party's collection of potential stars-in-the-making. The feeling has been that, whatever Republicans' fate this year, a promising group of younger politicians would be ready to roll for 2016.
The elder statesman of this younger generation is former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, age 58. Alongside him stands Mr. Christie, 49, who's been governor of New Jersey for less than two years. Then there is Rep. Paul Ryan, 41, chairman of the House Budget Committee and inheritor of the Jack Kemp mantle of upbeat fiscal conservatism. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is just 40, as is Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, the man already on every Republican vice presidential list. And South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who burst onto the national scene in winning the governor's seat last year, is 39.
Like a baseball team with a promising crop of young pitchers in the minor leagues, Republicans have long thought this group would leave them in prime position for 2016 if things didn't go so well in unseating Mr. Obama this time around. The premise, largely unspoken, was that 2012 would be crucial for solidifying the GOP hold on the House and taking control of the Senate, setting up the capture of it all in 2016 on the back of one of the young hopefuls.
"One can only imagine that Christie, like many other budding Republican superstars, figured he could ripen on the vine before jumping into the fray four years from now," one-time Republican strategist Mark McKinnon wrote over the weekendin a blog post for the Daily Beast. "That's what they were all thinking a year ago. And a year ago, despite the economy, President Obama's chances of being re-elected still looked like a pretty good bet."
That was then. Now looks a little different.
The longing of some Republicans for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to enter the 2012 presidential race reflects more than quiet dissatisfaction with the GOP's current field of contenders. It also reflects a dramatically changed feeling within the party that the best time to recapture the White House may not be 2016 after all.
That changed sentiment bears on the prospects for a whole crop of young potential Republican stars, Mr. Christie included. Not so long ago, there was a palpable if unspoken feeling among Republicans that President Barack Obama was more likely than not to win a second term in 2012, but that this collection of young talent would be primed and ready to shine four years later.
Now the Republican nomination that's up for grabs looks a lot more valuable. Perhaps, many in the party are thinking, the future is now.
Such sentiments may represent a miscalculation of President Obama's vulnerability, and the ease with which any incumbent president can be dislodged. Mr. Obama's standing has slipped, but so have feelings toward Republicans and, in particular, toward the Congress they help run. The president remains fairly popular personally, and he'll still raise plenty of money.
Still, the political landscape has changed a lot in recent months. Mr. Obama himself said in an interview Monday with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News that he "absolutely" considers himself the underdog in next year's race. Consider the differences in some leading political indicators since the dawn of 2011:
President Obama's job-approval rating has dropped to 43% from 49% in Gallup tracking polls.
The University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment index, a leading reading of how the public feels about the state of the economy, has plunged to 59.4 from 74.2.
The share of those who say the country is headed in the right direction has fallen to 19% in the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, from 35% at the outset of the year.
The share of those who say they'll probably vote for the Republican in next year's presidential election has risen to 44% from 40% in the Journal/NBC News survey.
All this makes the president a much bigger target than seemed possible just months ago. One can only wonder what some Republicans who declined the honor of getting into the race, including Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, are thinking now.
There is, of course, a natural and well-documented tendency to belittle contenders who have actually entered a race, and to assume magical qualities among those who haven't. As Republican analyst Pete Wehner has noted, candidates who aren't in a race tend to be seen as "figures of extraordinary and enduring strength and skill" right up to the moment they become candidates, "at which point they immediately become diminished, flawed and mortal."
That's pretty much the story of Texas Gov. Rick Perry in the last couple of weeks. And former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is the perpetual victim of this tendency to yearn for the unavailable.
What's less obvious is how this altered political landscape could affect the party's collection of potential stars-in-the-making. The feeling has been that, whatever Republicans' fate this year, a promising group of younger politicians would be ready to roll for 2016.
The elder statesman of this younger generation is former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, age 58. Alongside him stands Mr. Christie, 49, who's been governor of New Jersey for less than two years. Then there is Rep. Paul Ryan, 41, chairman of the House Budget Committee and inheritor of the Jack Kemp mantle of upbeat fiscal conservatism. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is just 40, as is Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, the man already on every Republican vice presidential list. And South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who burst onto the national scene in winning the governor's seat last year, is 39.
Like a baseball team with a promising crop of young pitchers in the minor leagues, Republicans have long thought this group would leave them in prime position for 2016 if things didn't go so well in unseating Mr. Obama this time around. The premise, largely unspoken, was that 2012 would be crucial for solidifying the GOP hold on the House and taking control of the Senate, setting up the capture of it all in 2016 on the back of one of the young hopefuls.
"One can only imagine that Christie, like many other budding Republican superstars, figured he could ripen on the vine before jumping into the fray four years from now," one-time Republican strategist Mark McKinnon wrote over the weekendin a blog post for the Daily Beast. "That's what they were all thinking a year ago. And a year ago, despite the economy, President Obama's chances of being re-elected still looked like a pretty good bet."
That was then. Now looks a little different.
posted by Sid Cottingham | 7:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home