bob ehrlich?

[WalterMitty]

anyone else want to join me on the bandwagon?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Mitty, what is it with you picking losing candidates?  First you picked Coleman, now Ehrlich?  He lost a race for Governor; no way he could be a serious Presidential candidate.

[Lunar]

Besides, we already have one has-been governor who is itching to enter the race in the form of Dirk Kempthorne

[Verily]

For what, Anne Arundel County dogcatcher?

[Lunar]

For what, Anne Arundel County dogcatcher?

They have a strong incumbent there, maybe he could run for the open seat for Deputy Dogcatcher

[Franzl]

For what, Anne Arundel County dogcatcher?

They have a strong incumbent there, maybe he could run for the open seat for Deputy Dogcatcher

Regardless....the primary will be brutal.

[Keystone Phil]

I like the guy but he's not a top choice for me.

Oddly enough, I definitely just had a dream about him running for President. Very weird.

[WalterMitty]

why couldnt he be a serious candidate?

romney was a one term governor (who would have lost had he not chickened out)

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

why couldnt he be a serious candidate?

romney was a one term governor (who would have lost had he not chickened out)

He was smart enough to "chicken out", which he did because he really wanted just wanteda  launching pad. Ehrlich didn't see the writing on the wall, so he's stuck with the stigma of a loss now. Plus I doubt he's even interested (the main reason.)

[Keystone Phil]

why couldnt he be a serious candidate?

romney was a one term governor (who would have lost had he not chickened out)

He doesn't have a strong connection to the base. Is he even that politically active anymore?

[WalterMitty]

why couldnt he be a serious candidate?

romney was a one term governor (who would have lost had he not chickened out)

He doesn't have a strong connection to the base. Is he even that politically active anymore?

he was active in rudy's campaign.

[Keystone Phil]

why couldnt he be a serious candidate?

romney was a one term governor (who would have lost had he not chickened out)

He doesn't have a strong connection to the base. Is he even that politically active anymore?

he was active in rudy's campaign.

Yeah, like I said, not really "in" with the base and doesn't seem politically ambitious anymore anyway.

[WalterMitty]

why couldnt he be a serious candidate?

romney was a one term governor (who would have lost had he not chickened out)

He doesn't have a strong connection to the base. Is he even that politically active anymore?

he was active in rudy's campaign.

Yeah, like I said, not really "in" with the base and doesn't seem politically ambitious anymore anyway.

im sure he is still politically ambitious.

without looking it up, id suspect he is working in the private sector trying to make money.

but he will back in the political arena.

[Keystone Phil]

im sure he is still politically ambitious.

without looking it up, id suspect he is working in the private sector trying to make money.

but he will back in the political arena.

Well, that's not a convincing argument for why he'd be a contender for the nomination, Walter. 

[WalterMitty]

im sure he is still politically ambitious.

without looking it up, id suspect he is working in the private sector trying to make money.

but he will back in the political arena.

Well, that's not a convincing argument for why he'd be a contender for the nomination, Walter. 

the most convincing argument is that the gop has no one else.

palin, huck et al are unelectable in the general.

[Akno21]

Ehrlich received 46% of the vote - in Maryland, in 2006, as a Republican, against a very strong Democratic candidate. Of course, he also only won 52% in 2002, against the uninspiring Lt. Governor of a collapsing administration. Still, we're not talking Santorum-Casey numbers here.

[Keystone Phil]

Still, we're not talking Santorum-Casey numbers here.

We're also not looking at a man that is well known or well liked by the base.

[The Mikado]

My advice to the Republicans (with the usual caveat that Democrats don't really get the internal dynamics of the Republicans any more than vice versa: look at the unanimous GOP predictions that Hillary Clinton would steamroll Obama) :

Step 1:  Wait.  Just wait two years.  Some figure in your party will emerge between now and the midterms presenting a bold, aggressive challenge to Obamaism and will be seen as a natural leader, arising (probably) from the backbenches and obscurity to be a major figure in American politics.

Step 2:  Nominate him.

Step 3:  Discover on Election Day if the American people want to reject Obamaism.

[WalterMitty]

Still, we're not talking Santorum-Casey numbers here.

We're also not looking at a man that is well known or well liked by the base.

the gop base isnt going to win you any presidential election.

your young phil, but there was a time when the republican party was competitive in suburbia and the northeast.

[Boris]

Ehrlich might wait to sit 2012 out if Obama is seemingly invincible. In that case, being the political powerhouse that Bob Ehrlich is, we will most likely see a Caroline Kennedy vs. Bob Ehrlich race in 2016.

[The Mikado]

Ehrlich might wait to sit 2012 out if Obama is seemingly invincible. In that case, being the political powerhouse that Bob Ehrlich is, we will most likely see a Caroline Kennedy vs. Bob Ehrlich race in 2016.

I'd prefer that to a Bob Ehrlich v. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend matchup.

[Smash255]

Mitty's reasoning with a moderate being more electable than a conservative is fine (though you do have the issueof getting past a primary), but it sure as heel isn't going to be someone who lost a re-election bid for Governor 6 years prior and has had very little political involvement since.

[Psychic Octopus]

CAROLINE KENNEDY? I want to know how'll she rise to the top.

[© tweed]

I'm sure if you pitched this idea to Bob Ehrlich himself he would instantly begin rolling around and laughing hysterically

[Akno21]

Still, we're not talking Santorum-Casey numbers here.

We're also not looking at a man that is well known or well liked by the base.

I was only using it as a reference point. I'm far less inclined to discount Santorum than, well, the rest of this forum. Eliminating anyone, in February 2009, with Santorum's ability to articulate the conservative message is foolish.

My point was that Ehrlich is not getting anywhere near the Republican nomination not just because he narrowly lost a heavily Democratic state in a wave election.