Under the radar - Draft Daniels for President campaign heating up.

In April I predicted here that Mitch Daniels would be the nominee for President on the Republican ticket.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/grantcart/288

He is a popular governor who was OMB director fitting the likely Republican strategy of trying to run on the deficit and better budget stewardhsip. All of the circus acts now going on are a diversion. The Republican establishment is looking at Republican Governor Daniels. He will continue to profess no interest and the "Draft Daniels" campaign which has already started will get a huge infusion of cash and swamp the other candidates.

The reasons are:

1) All other Republicans have high negatives, Daniels has no negaties
2) Most Presidential candidates are governors. When was the last time a governor was defeated by a non governor in an an open election (meaning no incumbant President or VP).
3) Republicans who lose in open primaries do not come back and win the nomination the next time (Reagan was running against an incumbant President an almost won. Bush Sr returned as an incumbant)
4) Republican nominations are even more front loaded than the Democrats where IA/NH/SC usually decide the nominee. Daniels matches up very well in IA and NH.
5) Daniels is polling very well in IN. With very low neagives Daniels will attract a lot of money from establishment donors.

It showed President Obama’s approval rating at 44 percent, with 50 percent disapproving. The number were the opposite for Daniels, 65 percent approving, and 28 percent disapproving.
http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2010/08/14/news/opinion/local_guest_editorials/doc4c5c637eb6f07580292256.txt


6) Daniels can make the social conservatives comfortable but is the best possible candidate to run on budget issues because of his experience as OMB director and Governor.








David Brooks is constantly talking about him and Richard Lugar is his close friend and mentor.

Never heard of him? Had you heard of Palin 2 1/2 years ago?

For Daniels its a no lose situation. By running in 2012 he gets a lot of credit from Republicans for giving a good fight. Outside chance he wins but if he loses he will have a lock on the nomination for 2016 and a much better liklihood of winning.

A draft campaign is already underway underneath the radar:


http://formitch.com/

http://volokh.com/2010/07/06/mitch-daniels-for-president/

http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-lugar-backs-daniels-for-pres-081310,0,399136.story

http://www.discoverynews.org/2010/06/mitch_daniels_for_president035631.php

http://www.draftdaniels.com/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/asher-smith/meet-mitch-daniels-2012s-_b_695102.html

edited to correct link

is not total right wing hack job. But there is no way
he will be anointed. Huckster & Mittens will see to that.

inside circle.

Huckster has obvious limitations


In May Romney made a very high profile trip to Utah where his Mormon credentials were thought to be so strong. He came to support the Renomination of Sen. Bennett. Bennett came in third and Romney was roundly booed from the floor.


The anti Romney Republicans are already making sure that every Republican is well versed in "this horrible defeat".

http://mittromney2012potus.blogspot.com/2010/05/sen-bob-bennett-was-thrown-out-of.html

Romney cannot win either IA or SC (where fundamentalists are well organized against him). Should he win in NH he will be discounted because he has now moved there. If he doesn't win NH by a sizeable margin it will be seen as a set back in his own home. Last time around MI helped Romney but since he came out against the auto bail out his chances there are non existent.

More details on why Romney can't win here:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/grantcart/294

but he certainly wouldn't help the poor and working class. He's big on privatization, which just funnels tax dollars to the elite. He privatized social services and it turned into a horrible mess. In the end, the contract was canceled but not until thousands of families suffered. He also "sold" the toll road to an Australian company.

http://news.uns.purdue.edu/images/+2006/daniels-mitch.jpg
to get to be President in this day and age.

All the nominees for the past few decades have big names who didn't need to build any name ID, I don't see that changing in 2012.

The person most qualified to be President I would have to say would be Senator Lugar. But he is too old and when he did run it was at the wrong time. Thank goodness.

Daniels is way down on the totem pole just as Evan Bayh in being qualified.


As for the statement that Daniels does not have negatives. ALL politicians have negatives.

The reason for those campaigns operating under the radar is to keep the truth about Daniels out of the public eye.

OMB Director is a positive for Daniels? Not when the DNC gets done with him on that. Daniels was a total idiot as director.

As for the approval ratings? I have been unable to find any polling on Daniels since 2008 and most important for 2010. Every article I have read mentions some poll but never the poll by name. Which leads me to believe someone is creating it to make him look good. And for them to compare his supposed polling with the President is idiotic. Now show me a poll that includes Daniels on the national level especially one when they know who is the scumbag.

2008 Daniels (R) won 57.8% - 40.1%
2004 Daniels (R) won 53.2% - 45.5%
2000 O'Bannon (D) won 57% - 42%
1996 O'Bannon (D) won 52% - 47%
1992 Bayh (D) won 62% - 36.9%
1988 Bayh (D) won 53.2% - 46.8%

Bayh won by a bigger margin than Daniels in their 2nd election.

For Daniels or anyone to claim that Daniels has not raised taxes will lose that battle. Sure he cut property taxes by transferring the school portion to the state budget. In the process, many property owners found their taxes go up and the state sales tax went up from 6 to 7%. Schools are now suffering because of the economy as they have to rely on that state sales tax. This year Daniels cut the school budget by $300 million. Besides raising that state sales tax they also provided additional methods for counties to increase local income taxes. Another tax that Daniels effectively raised were our federal taxes. When we file our return the amount of property taxes that we can use to reduce our federal tax liability went down for itemized deductions. You can deduct state sales tax but only if you don't deduct property taxes. It's either one or the other.

The jobs issue is all hype. The television station in Indy have been doing investigative reports on those jobs and why Daniels won't provide the data too. How about all the jobs that he exported?

The toll road lease is going to bomb on Daniels.

There is so much more and both the state and national party will have a party if he runs.

When it comes to polling forget the postives, they are meaningless this far out.


What counts the most is low negatives. All of the other Republican candidates have extremely high negatives. It is possible to move a positive but negatives almost always accumulate upward, it is very difficult to get a negative to go down. Daniels negatives were in the low twenties in Indiana but in Iowa they don't know anything about him so his negatives, and positives are at ground level. All of the previous candidates have negatives in the forties.

It has nothing to do about who is qualified to be President it is a question of who can get the nomination. Your comment about OMB is the same. It is irrelevent that the Democrats can tear him apart as OMB, Democrats don't run in the Republican primary. Indiana faced cuts but in comparison to other states IN 9% shortfall was among the lowest.


Your comment about Daniels versus Bayh numbers misses the point. Its not a question of how Daniels can do versus Bayh its a question of who in the Republican Party can do better than Daniels. Your figures are the ones that they point to. After 4 straight elections that was dominated heavily by Democrats Daniels win and when he ran for re-election he increased his numbers. From their perspective Daniels is a guy who can do well with independents in blue and purple states, as your numbers suggest. That Bayh and O'Bannon did well actually makes Daniel look like a more formidable candidate.

The other factor is that they are going to want a candidate who is not going to look stupid in a debate with Obama. From what I have read Daniels fits that. Any Republican who can look Presidential and sit across the table will be welcomed, even if he loses because he will establish himself as a strong candidate for 2016. The fact is that it is difficult to defeat an incumbant President. If the Republicans win the House then I doubt that the country will have much enthusiasm to turn both branches to the Republicans 2012 and you will see more split voting among independents.

Texas? Georgia?

Outside of people who live in Indiana's media markets, and political junkies, I doubt many have heard of Daniels. Why, because he hasn't done anything to be recognized nationally.

Also yes while most had never heard of Palin two and a half years ago, Palin got national name recognition by being chosen as the Vice President candidate for a major party. Who's going to make Mitch Daniel their VP candidate before the 2012 primaries to give him national name recognition?

2016 on the other hand, yeah, a lot can happen between then and now to let him win the party's nomination. I can see a lot of dark horses in the GOP today being able to build up the support they'd need by 2016 to carry them to the GOP nomination.

Oh and you're wrong on point number 3, John McCain lost in 2000 to Bush, and came back to win the nomination in 2008. McCain also didn't have the benefit of being vice president within that gap (unlike other republicans who have lost the nomination then won after being VP, like the elder Bush who lost to Reagan before being his VP).

Election next time.


But McCain if you accept McCain was not a strong candidate, as most Republican strategists do, what does that say about all of the people who defeated him, including and especially Romney. Romney is fatally wounded.

:rofl:

Like Evan Bayh, the farther one travels away from Indiana, the bigger the legend!

how meaningful is a contrast between approval ratings for Obama and Daniels? How can we realistically compare a NATIONAL approval rating poll for Obama with an INDIANA approval rating poll for Daniels. While Obama DID win Indiana in 2008, it was by the slimmest of margins and it's doubtful that he will win Indiana again in 2012. Being a lifelong Indiana resident in of Indiana, a state (mostly) controlled by Republicans and/or "Blue Dogs", I'm not surprised that his approval rating- in Indiana-is lower than Daniels.

To be sure, Daniels is probably one of the *saner* Republicans out there and is (to his credit) fairly moderate on social issues for a Republican but, like all politicians, he's got liabilities and "fault lines" that will undoubtedly be unearthed in a heated primary and/or general election and, unless Obama sinks to Bushian/Cheneyian lows by 2012, I think that he will be very difficult for the Republicans to beat him no matter who they run against him. Unless cutting the deficit/national debt is the highest priority on the voters' agenda in 2012, I don't know what else Daniels has to offer that would resonate with the public. Economically, he is pretty much offering the same old bromides for cutting taxes, regulations, yadda, yadda, yadda.......:nopity:

He recently made the crazy IMHO statement that the national debt=child abuse (literally). :wtf: His more moderate stance on social issues would probably also make it harder for him to get through the primaries. He signed an executive order as soon as he came into office allowing for GLBT individuals to be protected from discrimination in state government. It had the fundie freakazoids in a tizzy and reduced to writing alarmist screeds over crossdressers invading women's bathrooms!!!! :crazy: When the Republicans were heavily pushing a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, he refused to support it (he didn't really take a position on it and didn't talk it about it much at all).


I suspect that many of the higher-ups in the Republican Party have quietly written off winning the WH in 2012. If they fail to win big in November, they will be even less likely to be successful in 2012, Daniels or no Daniels. Daniels, for his part seems to be playing it *coy*, alleging that he has no interest in running, which is probably a lie but he may be wanting to hold his fire for 2016.....maybe. It will certainly be interesting to see what happens but I don't know that he is the threat that some people think he might be for Obama.

I don't think any Republican will win in 2012, this is purely about the nomination.

The key about Daniels numbers is that he was able to improve on other Republicans in Indiana.

The important thing about poll numbers at this stage is only one thing - the negatives, and Daniels is in a substantial lead with the lowest compared to other Republicans.

Daniels numbers vis a vis Obama is irrelevent for the nomination as they are only looking at the nomination not the general election.


That the Republicans have written off 2012 would be the number one reason Daniels should be interested. If he runs and keeps it close he would be a shoo in and have a much better chance of winning. Also he would have learned a lot in the effort. The Republicans will want to find someone that isn't too crazy in order to keep their people interested enough to vote for other Republicans. Again I think Daniels gives them enough credibility compared to the other clowns that are running.

I imagine, though, if he harbors ambitions to run for POTUS, he may ultimately decide to hold off until 2016 when the race is wide open and he has had some more time to burnish his credentials and become better known. I agree that he would be one of the *saner* candidates the GOP could potentially run but with Beck, Palin and the "teabagger" cult at the height of their delusions, Daniels would probably be a pretty hard sell as he is (to his credit) fairly sensible for a GOPer and for him to have a serious shot at the nomination, at least in 2012, the *establishment* GOP would have to be able to heavily influence the primary so as to allow somebody like him to slip past the "teabagger" crowd. Could it happen? Maybe. Is it likely? Probably not. Thanks for helping keep Daniels "on the radar"!
:hi:

He will continue to declare he is not interested but will eventually, very reluctantly agree that others can go ahead with a draft and put his name up in Iowa but he won't campaign.

His continued reluctance will make him even more appealing in comparison to the other high egos of the GOP

According to PPP poll, Jindal of Louisiana has the highest approval rating
of all governors in the country. He declared today he is running for re-election
as governor of LA and took himself out of the 2012 run for president.

which surprised a few folks since he'd given the usual "I'm weighing all the options" bullshit answer. Of course he could change his mind or be convinced to change his mind...

But I'm not totally convinced he means it.

I think he would have some appeal to those centrist Republicans (however few there are left) who don't want to see the party hijacked by Palin et.al. But the machinery will make sure his name will never see a nominating ballot.

http://indianapolistimesblog.blogspot.com/2010/08/once-again-daniels-wants-it-both-ways.html

Gov. Mitch Daniels likes to have it both ways, but this week he took hypocrisy to a new level.
So much for aiming higher.

This from the Louisville Courier Journal:

CORYDON – Gov. Mitch Daniels said Tuesday he’ll request that federal officials send Indiana more than $434 million in newly approved stimulus funds for schools and Medicaid, even though he opposed the legislation.

Federal officials said last week that governors must request the money, a move that put Daniels and other Republican governors in a tough spot because they had publicly criticized the $26 billion state aid package.

But on Tuesday during a visit to O’Bannon Woods State Park, the governor said he would make the request.

http://indianapolistimesblog.blogspot.com/2010/08/once-again-daniels-wants-it-both-ways.html


and THIS:

http://indianapolistimesblog.blogspot.com/2010/08/is-daniels-aiming-lower.html

This from Norm Heikens at the IBJ:

Business Facilities, a trade publication that tracks corporate real estate and site-selection news, has released its annual rankings of top states, and Indiana doesn’t look so hot.

The list, which the magazine says focuses on states “poised to dominate the emerging New Economy,” has 14 overall top-10 lists and Indiana made only one—a seventh rank in automotive manufacturing strength.

Here are the other 13 lists where Indiana failed to crack the top 10:
—alternative energy industry
—best business climate
—best business tax climate
—best education climate
—best transportation infrastructure
—biofuels manufacturing research
—biotechnology strength
—cost of labor
—economic growth potential
—employment leaders
—quality of life
—work force health and safety
—work force training leaders

http://indianapolistimesblog.blogspot.com/2010/08/once-again-daniels-wants-it-both-ways.html

===================


And don't forget he spent THREE days in jail at Princeton in the 60's for dealing pharmaceuticals out of his dorm room.
I'm sure we can count on the 'liberal media' to bring that one up.

He was convicted on a reduced count of 'use' after Daddy hired top shelf lawyers.

in the bush administration.

His chickens are coming home to roost right now in Indiana. He's been shifting deficits around in an attempt to appear "responsible" and now the bleeding is about to become apparent. More and more people are not buying his bullshit. Starting with the teachers.

He's also known for being such a Bush crony that he squashes legislation that would harm a Bush family business. He's turned off a lot of business people in the process. -Just another "under the radar" tidbit. He's singlehandedly held up the economy in Indiana to enrich his Bush-family connections.

He gave approval to BP to dump millions of tons of toxins, including mercury, into Lake Michigan from its Indiana oil refinery. (The Bush EPA then seconded the motion.)

He's was GW Bush's director of the Office of Management and Budget. We know how well he balanced the budget. The Clinton surpluses disappeared and turned into massive deficits within the first few years.

He sold off the Indiana Toll Road for billions to a private company for short-term profits (nice way to balance a budget, Mitch). In fact, he'd privatize the entire infrastructure of the state if he could.

He's a rightwing asshat with better name recognition.

Can you imagine a relative moderate who says that abortion and religion should be deemphasized winning Republican primaries in the South?

n/t

Just ask Carter, Clinton, and Obama.

the NYT analyzed that this weekend - but if the GOP wants to get steamrolled by the tall, athletic, handsome, intelligent, articulate, EXPERIENCED sitting president, by all means, nominate the guy who's 7" shorter than Obama.

i guess they gotta nominate SOMEONE.

There is no chance he will be the GOP nominee for 2012. It's just not going to happen.