Bachmann surge is fleeting

[Kevin]

According to this post by an analyst with the Atlanta-Journal-Constitution, Bachmann's surge of support is due to anti-Romney sentiment amongst Republican voters, and once a more viable "conservative" candidate enters the race Bachmann's support will collapse. Perspective candidates for this role include Perry, but also maybe even Huntsman or Pawlenty if they can position themselves better. Due to the fact that even though the latter two aren't viewed as "cosnervative enough" they are nowhere as unacceptable as Romney.

What are thoughts on this?

I see it as potentially going ether way at this point in regards this point made by the AJC Blog.

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2011/07/13/bachmann-surge-in-gop-polls-will-be-fleeting/

[Bluegrassball]

I really wish this "Dr." Bachmann fiasco would have come out later so she would have had a stronger chance at getting the nomination. It sure would have made for a much less stressful (and more entertaining) general election for Dems.

But with all this coming out now even the most ardent conservatives are realizing how utterly un-electable she is.

However I'm still holding out hope that the GOP nominates a basket-case. Anybody other than Romney or Huntsman will be a cakewalk.

[tmthforu94]

Hopefully this is true. I've always personally held the belief of supporting the two candidates in the primaries who'd do the best job as President, so hopefully on election day, there won't be any chance someone who's Presidency I would fear could be elected.

[pbrower2a]

Hopefully this is true. I've always personally held the belief of supporting the two candidates in the primaries who'd do the best job as President, so hopefully on election day, there won't be any chance someone who's Presidency I would fear could be elected.

I concur 100%. Attempting to do political mischief in the primaries of the Opposition poses two overt dangers:

1. One's own candidate might falter due to personal scandals or military/diplomatic/economic debacles, ensuring that any opponent could defeat him. 

2. One ignores down-ticket races -- at the least US Congress, but also state, county, city, or township  races that might have a more direct influence upon the quality of one's life. Congress matters no less than does the Presidency; if we are fortunate, the 2010 election and its aftermath is a harsh and necessary lesson.

[sg0508]

The only good news is that she may have peaked too soon.  Still though, she is very scary and again, while some of you may want to stick your heads in the sand, this is the party that threw three gimme Senate seats away in 2010 (CO, NV and DE) by nominating three human embarrassments to lead the ticket in those states.

[Bull Moose Base]

Except this "analyst" admits his dislike of Bachmann in the start.  It's mostly wishful thinking.  I don't think her surge is fleeting and I disagree that it's not something particular about her that appeals to conservatives as opposed to just filling a vacuum.  But yes, Perry eclipsing her is a plausible scenario.  The others are less likely.

[pbrower2a]

Except this "analyst" admits his dislike of Bachmann in the start.  It's mostly wishful thinking.  I don't think her surge is fleeting and I disagree that it's not something particular about her that appeals to conservatives as opposed to just filling a vacuum.  But yes, Perry eclipsing her is a plausible scenario.  The others are less likely.

We see what happens when a party caters to its base at the expense of the center: the extremists take over. Sure, they are enthusiastic -- but their enthusiasm somehow doesn't translate into support beyond the political base.

It is ironic, but two of the least-successful candidates for the President -- Goldwater in 1964 and McGovern in 1972 -- had the most enthusiastic supporters that I ever remember. (Sure, I was eight years old at the time of the Goldwater disaster, but  sometimes a kid can see things with unusual objectivity). Goldwater was going to save America; McGovern was going to save America.

If the Republican Party narrows enough it loses the likes of Gordon Smith, Lincoln Chaffee, and John Jeffords only to concentrate people strongly ideological, but with positions alien to much of America. Groupthink, always a peril within a political party, sets in, and some prominent figures start promoting extreme positions more likely to irritate and offend than to offer genuine reforms. Solutions that the Party offers become stereotyped. For the GOP, tax cuts become the solution for every manifestation of economic distress and budgetary difficulty.

Take a look at groups long considered extreme. Does anyone doubt that the Commies have long shown great enthusiasm about the 'impending' proletarian revolution that would destroy capitalism in favor of a 'Socialist' paradise just like the Soviet Union? Does anyone doubt that the neo-Nazis  show excitement about the overthrow of the "Zionist Occupation Government"? The Prohibition Party has been around for a long time, and its devotees  frequently believe that the outlawry of alcoholic drink is imminent.

Enthusiasm and relevance are two different creatures. Some Republicans may be excited about the prospect of a new moral climate in which "Bible-believing Christians" can refute science, in which wages can fall enough to create the necessary prosperity of the "job-creators", in which the private sector can take well-functioning government programs and turn them into money-makers, low-wage workers identify with their bosses, and that "only the little man pays the taxes". 

Meanwhile, pragmatic moderates recognize that effective politics requires give-and-take, that there is no free lunch, and that there might be some un-addressed needs to meet. Prime example: President Obama is such because he recognized that suburban America is legitimately urban in its problems -- high costs of public services, growing poverty, deteriorating infrastructure, and environmental degradation... and Republicans who ignore that fact will lose the ultimate swing voters again in 2012. 



The trend began before 2008.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Godwin's law so soon, pbrewer?

[pbrower2a]

Godwin's law so soon, pbrewer?

Not so fast. I'm just showing why fanatics and extremists are so enthusiastic about causes that others find either irrelevant or ghastly.

[Kevin]

The only good news is that she may have peaked too soon.  Still though, she is very scary and again, while some of you may want to stick your heads in the sand, this is the party that threw three gimme Senate seats away in 2010 (CO, NV and DE) by nominating three human embarrassments to lead the ticket in those states.

I agree with that statement wholeheartedly.

Although in the 2010 Colorado Senate race I consider Buck more a victim of the circumstances within the CO GOP, which was rocked by the scandal that both if it's gubernatorial candidates became unelectable. Due to the fact that both men in the race made a mix of highly shady dealings or very strange comments such as in the case of Dan Maes leaving another unelectable-Tom Tancrado to run as an independent/de facto Republican in the race.

Also Buck was far from an unelectable extremist nutjob/fraud like Angle or O'Donnell were, overall he was closer to John McCain or Lamar Alexander politically then the two clowns mentioned above 

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Er... For *months*, I've been saying that there's a significant anti-Romney contingent among Republican primary voters who are shifting their support to whatever flavor of the month pops up among the field: first Trump, then Cain, now Bachmann. If Perry gets in, I'm willing to bet he becomes their newest savior.

[DrScholl]

I agree that seems more like wishful thinking than anything of substance. Romney is not liked by many conservatives and that's where Bachmann's opening is.

[sg0508]

I agree that seems more like wishful thinking than anything of substance. Romney is not liked by many conservatives and that's where Bachmann's opening is.

It's funny, but having gone to college in the south and knowing a lot of "conservatives", many of them made one thing very clear...they don't care if they win the general election as long as "their" candidate is leading the ticket.  Obama could carry 45 states against her and they would still be pleased she was leading the ignorant march.

One thing I wonder (and I've already posted this), but what would actually happen in a national debate with America watching if she or others spewed off some nonsense and another candidate turned to her in a response and said, "you're an idiot"...right there on nat. tv, pants now down.

1) Sued by the GOP?
2) Sued by her?
3) Her political career over?
4) Their own over?

[Mehmentum]

One thing I wonder (and I've already posted this), but what would actually happen in a national debate with America watching if she or others spewed off some nonsense and another candidate turned to her in a response and said, "you're an idiot"...right there on nat. tv, pants now down.

1) Sued by the GOP?
2) Sued by her?
3) Her political career over?
4) Their own over?

Laughter and applause by the audience, Fox News and conservative blogosphere explodes in rage, Huffington Post orgasms, the story bounces around the media echo chamber a few days, dies down, people forget about it. 

[King]

One thing I wonder (and I've already posted this), but what would actually happen in a national debate with America watching if she or others spewed off some nonsense and another candidate turned to her in a response and said, "you're an idiot"...right there on nat. tv, pants now down.

1) Sued by the GOP?
2) Sued by her?
3) Her political career over?
4) Their own over?

The other candidate would have to be Obama, no?

[TheGlobalizer]

The only good news is that she may have peaked too soon.  Still though, she is very scary and again, while some of you may want to stick your heads in the sand, this is the party that threw three gimme Senate seats away in 2010 (CO, NV and DE) by nominating three human embarrassments to lead the ticket in those states.

Won't happen nationally.  The hick states will support a loon but the rest will come home to the GOP norm, especially with the O'Donnell lesson (Angle and Buck to a lesser degree).