RSS Feed MenuAmong conservatives who value good public policy, no figure may be more adored than Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana. He is the thinking man’s conservative, a man who can successfully lease a toll road and keep taxes low to promote economic growth. Even liberals admit that he has done an excellent job in Indiana. In light of this track record, how can he not be considered a prime candidate to be the GOP’s presidential candidate in 2012? The problem is that he polls absolutely abysmally among the people who actually matter in making a candidate win a GOP primary: conservative activists.
David Brooks in the New York Times on September 30th 2010 described Daniels as: “the governor of Indiana who I think is most likely to win the GOP presidential nomination in 2012.”
Reihan Salam has argued in Newsweek that Daniels would be perfect to run against Obama: “Though it is far too early to know what the world will look like in 2012… I can’t help but think that a common-sense conservative like Daniels would be the perfect match for Obama.” This may be true, but polls suggest that Daniels would not even make it to that stage.
In one of ConservativeHome USA’s first polls, surveying more than a thousand conservative activists who have worked on Republican campaigns, Mitch Daniels came dead last in two polls: one asking who was their favorite candidate to be president (Palin won with 23% of the vote) and asking who they thought was actually likely to win (Romney won with 35%). Daniels got 3% and 2% in each poll respectively:
Which 2012 presidential contender is your favorite:
23% – Sarah Palin
21% – Newt Gingrich
18% – Mitt Romney
13% – Mike Huckabee
7% – Jeb Bush
7% – Tim Pawlenty
5% – Mike Pence
4% – John Thune
3% – Mitch Daniels
Which 2012 presidential contender is the most likely to win the nomination:
35% – Mitt Romney
17% – Sarah Palin
15% – Newt Gingrich
12% – Mike Huckabee
9% – Tim Pawlenty
4% – Jeb Bush
3% – John Thune
2% – Mitch Daniels
Daniels is not the only favored candidate of conservative elites who polls poorly. Senator John Thune has also gotten his fair share of praise. David Brooks praised Thune for being “unfailingly genial, modest and nice” and Fred Barnes devoted 7,659 words in The Weekly Standard in a feature piece on the Senator. Barnes insisted that despite having voted for the heresy of TARP, that John Thune could still be the nominee:
Thune’s [TARP] vote is a minor obstacle, not an insurmountable one. Much as they may dislike TARP, primary voters seem unlikely to use the vote as some kind of fiscal litmus test. As McConnell argues, many good conservatives voted for TARP.
The same poll shows that Thune was also the penultimate candidate in both polls. (4% as a favorite candidate, and 3% as likely to win the nomination.)
Similarly bad numbers do not seem to plague candidates who have proactive media presences, such as Palin, Gingrich, Romney, or Huckabee. In contrast, both Jeb Bush and Tim Pawlenty, both considered to be highly competent, fail to break the 10% mark in both polls.
While it is good news that there are Republicans who can demonstrate what effective conservative leadership can look like, it is important to remember that the current GOP grassroots probably judge their candidates by a different standard. In addition, even Daniels remains divisive among conservatives because of his support for a “truce” on social issues, and his interest in exploring a value-added tax. At the moment, Daniels and other candidates like him are qualified, but largely unknown.
Follow Noah on Twitter: @noahkgreen
CD-Host // Nov 22, 2010 at 1:38 pm
Noah –
And can you tell me what is fundamentally better about Daniels than Obama? Because he’s going to push through the income tax rate for the high end and then a VAT to speed up the transfer of income up the ladder?
quell // Nov 22, 2010 at 2:47 pm
“Reihan Salam has argued in Newsweek that Daniels would be perfect to run against Obama:”
except for the 5′3″ thingy.
McCain is 5′6″, and wore 3″ lifters in his shoes.
And he still looked small and old next to Obama.
Daniels would need 6″ lifters.
TAZ // Nov 22, 2010 at 3:04 pm
Romney/ Daniels 2012, there is your ticket (you saw it here first)…….
quell // Nov 22, 2010 at 4:01 pm
Nah…..Romney/Palin 2012
a poison pill for the TP/GOP.
that or she goes third party.
she’s your frankenstein monster…..and your doom.
Like Obama is the liberal avatar, Palin is your avatar.
Pure distillate of socon populist ressentiment.
Churl // Nov 22, 2010 at 4:16 pm
quell,”Pure distillate of socon populist ressentiment.”
Well parlay my voo! Danged if we ain’t got us a intellectual here, sure as shootin’. Jes what we need to fancy up the place.
quell // Nov 22, 2010 at 4:32 pm
merde…..im not a mere “intellectual.”
im an elitist intellectual snob that actually believes we live in a democratic meritocracy.
“commonsense” and “socon values” simply do not qualify as meritocratic traits in a Jeffersonian system.
As COD discovered in Delaware, anti-meritocratic candidates can win their respective base, but not the general.
Do the math. Nate Silver did. It is possible, praps even probable, that Palin could win the nom.
The presidency?
not so much.
ProfNickD // Nov 22, 2010 at 4:41 pm
Wonks love him? Really? You mean the Cato Institute? The Independence Institute? The Ludwig von Mises Institute? The Reason Foundation?
Some wonks like Daniels — DC/NYC Republican statists and establishmentarians, for sure, those who advocate free markets, not so much.
Churl // Nov 22, 2010 at 6:08 pm
quell “democratic meritocracy”. Can you flesh out what that means?
easton // Nov 22, 2010 at 6:17 pm
Taz, nah. Whoever it is will have to pick a woman or minority (if it is a white man). Sadly though the list of Republican women/minorities worth a damn is very small.
WaStateUrbanGOPer // Nov 22, 2010 at 6:30 pm
NickD: If you and other libertarians aren’t willing to get behind Daniels– arguably the most electable candidate in the anticipated ‘12 field– then can I count on you guys to put your money where your mouths are and help out Gary Johnson (if he runs)? His policy record as a governor is (in my estimation) even better than Daniels’. New Mexico was the only state running a budget surplus when he left office in ‘02.
PracticalGirl // Nov 22, 2010 at 6:41 pm
Like Noah, I note that 3 of the 4 highest polling GOPers are Fox News contributors and spend all of their time increasing their public profiles and promoting themselves, their various money-making projects and their ideas-in-a-vacuum about how Conservatism can be applied. It’s sad and speaks volumes about this particular rank and file that you have to scroll down so far to find somebody who’s actually doing it.
I think the VAT might not be the only thing that Daniels could be penalized for. He was pretty definitive that his state didn’t need its share of the Federal Medicaid funds from HR 1586, but accepted it any way. He’s also claimed budget cutting authority (and has actually cut spending) that was done within the context of Indianas’s 55+ billion in pork projects every year since at least 2007-68 billion in 2010 alone.
The first example is a clear violation of the Tea Party pact and the second leaves open the question of just how well Daniels could actually manage a budget that wasn’t the beneficiary of secondary funding.
ktward // Nov 22, 2010 at 7:12 pm
Just a quick observation, not necessarily an indictment:
Today, among Dems, who were/are the ‘non-intellectuals’ for POTUS candidacy?
Certainly not HRC, who was never indistinguishable from BHO. Anyone else from ‘08? ‘04?
Is there anyone who can legitimately characterize ‘grassroots’ Dems as, collectively, anti-intellectuals? Even the recently demonized ‘Professional Left’, so critical of BHO’s first 18 months? (Agree with him or not, it’s pretty hard to call Glenn Greenwald an anti-intellectual.)
Intra-party Dem drama is largely Wonk on Wonk.
Intra-Party GOP drama is largely Wonk on Wishful Masses.
quell // Nov 22, 2010 at 7:13 pm
Churl, allow me to let Ross Douthat explain.
As Salam-Douthat stratification on cognitive ability progresses (page 154 Grand New Party), it becomes impossible for conservatives to compete in a meritocracy on the basis of traditional meritocratic values….ie Jeffersonian “talent” (intelligence, education) and “virtue” (honor, honesty).
So Douthat is desperately seeking alternative meritocratic values that conservatives can compete in…or, barring that, affirmative action for intellectually-challenged redstate students.
I guess one could call it IQ-bussing.
Obama is the exemplar of Jefferson’s natural aristoi. …Palin unfortunately seems wholly bereft of both talent and virtue.
But she is running. She has said she can beat Obama.
What can we say? Fact blocking coupled with backfire effect.
Like COD, the stronger the facts, the stronger the salience of the counter-factual magical thinking that their candidate can be elected.
WaStateUrbanGOPer // Nov 22, 2010 at 7:29 pm
Of course the base of the current GOP– the Tea Partiers and “culture warriors”– won’t support Mitch Daniels or embrace his (serious) economic programme. These are, after all, the same people who not only couldn’t tell Bruce Bartlett the correct % of GDP that federal tax receipts comprised, but COULDN’T EVEN COME CLOSE.
The baggers and co. are ‘TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY’ even though federal tax receipts as a % of GDP are at their lowest level since Harry Truman was prez. Of course these ignoramuses won’t back Mitch Daniels.
Churl // Nov 22, 2010 at 7:43 pm
quell, you seem to be a linguist. Could you translate your post of Nov 22, 2010 at 7:13 pm into the Vulgate?
valkayec // Nov 25, 2010 at 9:49 pm
From the policy platforms thus far put forward by various candidates, Daniels is the only one who has any real ideas and the only one worth voting for. While I may not agree with him on everything, the rest of the field are mere shadows, and in some cases not even that, of his intelligence and ideas.
This country is economically stagnant and needs bold new ideas that not only bring down the deficit and gets working class people back to work again (which will reduce the deficit in and of itself) but will level the playing field of and assist new and smaller businesses to grow.
There is so much wrong with our country, our tax system, our governmental policies and our Congress. Yet, everyone continues to play party politics rather than seeking out solutions to change the dynamics of the last 30+ years. Instead of thinking from the top down, what is needed to move down up? What do average wage earners need who’ve fallen out of the middle class and the employment market need? It’s not unemployment. They’re not lazy or wanting a government handout. They want jobs. They want manufacturing to return to this country. So what policies does anyone have to return manufacturing (and high quality exports) to this country?
Palin, et al, may be good at snarking, but what policies have they put forward that will change the economic dynamics that affect our country? Reduce Wall St regulation? How does that put more money into R&D, domestic manufacturing, or reduce speculative gambling? Overturn health care? How does that reduce the cost of actual health care so families can afford it or help companies become more competitive in the world market? Reduce wages? How does that help families struggling with still high housing, utility, gas, clothing, and grocery costs? Go without? Live on the streets? No.
The questions need to be turned around, and instead of thinking from a partisan point of view, think about how to change the economic dynamics that affect the entire nation’s workforce. Stretch the imagination to derive new ideas and new solutions to our global and deficit challenge.
The world has changed, and we can either change our thinking to adapt to this new world or we can be left behind in as a third world nation.
Amongst the filed of Republican candidates, only Daniels seems to have a forward looking notion even though I believe it’s not forward looking enough at present or imaginative enough to solve our economic current woes.