Has the GOP base become too conservative to choose an electable candidate?

[Jacobtm]

Well?

[ShamDam]

Nope.

[mondale84]

We'll find out

[Landslide Lyndon]

We'll find out

[Bull Moose Base]

Yes.  Obama has a better chance of losing the nomination than the general election.  I've been saying for a good while now: throw away precedent for presidential approvals and re-elections.  Obama if need be will break the record for lowest approval of a re-elected president.  I think he can win in the high or mid 30s.  He's already at his lowest approvals he's had in the 2 and a half years since he became president and yet he beats even the flawless imaginary candidate generic Republican.  He leads all real Republicans by double digits, except Romney and that's only because no one's paying any attention to the bonkers things Romney has promised the Tea Party in pursuit of the nomination.  And he's probably not even done yet.  The Tea Party is the Sarah Palin of the 10s- whatever you call this decade again, the one that has to end before a Republican can be elected president again.  Imagine what it'll look like if Obama can get his approvals back up to 50.  In the not likely but plausible event the economy turns down hard and Obama can't stop his approvals from free-falling, he'd bow out- even as late as a year from now- and Hillary would win the general easily.

[Simfan34]

We'll find out

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

We'll find out

Agreed and I'm afraid the ultimate answer will be, yes.

[anvi]

Fair question.  I think that, in the end, the GOP tends to choose nominees who have the best shot at being elected.  McCain did much better in '08 than any other GOP nominee would have done that year.  But, as above, we'll see. 

Still, I think an equally pivotal question is whether Obama has become too much of a "compromiser" for the liberal base to show up and vote for him next year.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Fair question.  I think that, in the end, the GOP tends to choose nominees who have the best shot at being elected.  McCain did much better in '08 than any other GOP nominee would have done that year.  But, as above, we'll see. 

Still, I think an equally pivotal question is whether Obama has become too much of a "compromiser" for the liberal base to show up and vote for him next year.

anvi, do you think the TP will have any effect on the selection of the pub candidate this time, since it was nothing more than a pipe dream back in 08?

[Yelnoc]

Probably.  Hopefully not, but probably.

[anvi]

anvi, do you think the TP will have any effect on the selection of the pub candidate this time, since it was nothing more than a pipe dream back in 08?

My prediction might not end up being worth much, Gramps, but here is my sense at the moment.  I'm sure they'll have an effect on the selection; they will be coming out to vote in the primaries for sure.  But Romney has sunk a lot of cash into GOP statewide campaigns in big primary states, and I tend to think that, by Super-Tuesday, Romney will only have one strongly TEA Party-backed challenger left.  At this point, absent huge stumbles or unforeseen scandals that would dislodge those investments and their organizational advantages, I think Romney still is the odds-on favorite.  He would, if he is nominated, have to placate the TEA Party and GOP conservatives generally by picking a big conservative as his running mate.  In any case, I think the GOP will nominate someone who the establishment thinks can win, and the Republican voters will come out in full force to support them next November.  The questions at that point will be whether or not Obama can convince liberals to come out for him and where swing voters are at next fall.  I think it will be a close one.  But, of course, a year and a half is forever, so who knows?

[California8429]

Romney is the frontrunner right now, the obvious answer is no

[TheGlobalizer]

No.  Republicans have one-night stands with the crazies and then propose to a good one.

Just as it should be.

[Kevin]

Yes and No,

The trends seen in the GOP base are disturbing for 2012.

However, the GOP establishment and influential conservatives who actually want to win in 2012, will ensure that that Bachmann or Palin(if she enters) comes nowhere near getting the nomination for President.

[Bull Moose Base]

anvi, do you think the TP will have any effect on the selection of the pub candidate this time, since it was nothing more than a pipe dream back in 08?

My prediction might not end up being worth much, Gramps, but here is my sense at the moment.  I'm sure they'll have an effect on the selection; they will be coming out to vote in the primaries for sure.  But Romney has sunk a lot of cash into GOP statewide campaigns in big primary states, and I tend to think that, by Super-Tuesday, Romney will only have one strongly TEA Party-backed challenger left.  At this point, absent huge stumbles or unforeseen scandals that would dislodge those investments and their organizational advantages, I think Romney still is the odds-on favorite.  He would, if he is nominated, have to placate the TEA Party and GOP conservatives generally by picking a big conservative as his running mate.  In any case, I think the GOP will nominate someone who the establishment thinks can win, and the Republican voters will come out in full force to support them next November.  The questions at that point will be whether or not Obama can convince liberals to come out for him and where swing voters are at next fall.  I think it will be a close one.  But, of course, a year and a half is forever, so who knows?

I think once the field gets whittled down to one conservative alternative to Romney, he's in trouble.  It could even happen as soon as a few weeks from now, if perhaps substantial chunk of Bachmann's support deserts her for Perry.  McCain had at least two more conservative options appealing to two specific demos (Huckabee for so-cons, Romney for fiscal-cons) and the endorsement of the other popular establishment candidate (Giuliani) until he effectively wrapped up the nomination.  I think Romney has a harder path than that.  It's true Perry and Bachmann could be divided and conquered, especially if they win IA and SC respectively, but unlike with Huckabee and Romney, they appeal to a similar base of support (not competing ones) much more likely to consolidate around whoever has the most momentum at a critical juncture.  So Romney is a bit likely to fall into a one-on-one against Perry, who'd appeal across the board in the party, and probably have Giuliani and Palin endorsing Perry if they don't run themselves.  Unless Bachmann proves herself to have the dynamic appeal Obama had in 2008 or Perry proves a completely inept candidate, I think he is the favorite to be the nominee.

As for liberals supporting Obama, you have a point.  Plumline links to a new poll showing liberals disaffected with Obama.  But they'll come home, even if Romney is the nominee.  As I've said, Romney would have gotten there committing to things deeply unacceptable to liberals.  He already has.  Anyway, I think Obama will win back base as he continues to push new jobs bills and new tax revenue.  Either he'll secure new tax revenue in the super-congress and win them back (doubtful) or he'll convince them he's serious about using his veto to block Bush tax rates if they include richest (they'll be skeptical but I believe eventually accept his word).

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I think once the field gets whittled down to one conservative alternative to Romney, he's in trouble.  It could even happen as soon as a few weeks from now, if perhaps substantial chunk of Bachmann's support deserts her for Perry. 

I know you qualified it with an "if", but do you really see the Bachmann supporters dumping her for Perry?  I just don't......I think she's a nutter but I'm not underestimating her......not yet, at least.

[allnjhaugh]

I cant wait for the limbaugh rule to bite the GOP. Hard.

[Bull Moose Base]

I think once the field gets whittled down to one conservative alternative to Romney, he's in trouble.  It could even happen as soon as a few weeks from now, if perhaps substantial chunk of Bachmann's support deserts her for Perry. 

I know you qualified it with an "if", but do you really see the Bachmann supporters dumping her for Perry?  I just don't......I think she's a nutter but I'm not underestimating her......not yet, at least.

You might be right about that.  If not this year, I do think Perry winning South Carolina could inspire a lot of her supporters onto his bandwagon.  But maybe not.  And even though I think Giuliani is the most likely VP for Perry, I think it's conceivable that if he's struggling to put her away, Perry might float Bachmann as a VP for himself, not unlike Hillary floating Obama for VP in 2008 (when he was leading her in delegates).

[Badger]

Possibly, but the economy's current state has strongly expanded the definition of "electable".

[nhmagic]

Unfair question...it assumes that the country is not willing to choose a conservative because the majority of liberals on this board believe that the country has moved to the left.  Michelle Bachmann is electable - so is Paul for that matter.  This was the same question we were asking about the left in 04, when the dems nominated the establishment candidate and especially 08, when they nominated the leftmost candidate they could. 

[Mr. Morden]

I think once the field gets whittled down to one conservative alternative to Romney, he's in trouble.  It could even happen as soon as a few weeks from now, if perhaps substantial chunk of Bachmann's support deserts her for Perry. 

I know you qualified it with an "if", but do you really see the Bachmann supporters dumping her for Perry?  I just don't......I think she's a nutter but I'm not underestimating her......not yet, at least.

I would hesitate to say that any of the candidates (well, except maybe Paul) really has that many "supporters" as of yet.  Rather, you have a bunch of voters who will give a candidate's name to a pollster when asked the question, but to call all those people "supporters" in any real sense may be a stretch.  Every indication is that many/most primary voters haven't really made up their minds.

[TheGlobalizer]

I would hesitate to say that any of the candidates (well, except maybe Paul) really has that many "supporters" as of yet.  Rather, you have a bunch of voters who will give a candidate's name to a pollster when asked the question, but to call all those people "supporters" in any real sense may be a stretch.  Every indication is that many/most primary voters haven't really made up their minds.