Call me crazy, but I count Pawlenty as Romney's strongest challenger for the nom

[Mr. Morden]

Just read this account of Larry Sabato's take on 2012:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-dorfman/just-you-wait-barack-obam_b_229047.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that Romney has merely a "slight edge" over T-Paw.  Rather, I'd give Romney a ~25-30% chance at winning the nomination, with Pawlenty having about half that, and everyone else trailing.  But otherwise, I largely agree with Sabato.  I know people on this forum are harping on the fact that Pawlenty's job approval ratings in his home state are weak, but honestly, no one cares.  As long as he's not in Bob Taft / David Paterson territory, it won't really hurt him.  People at the national level will only know that he was twice elected governor of Minnesota, and the nuances of what happened to his job approval rating at the end of his term won't hurt him anymore than the same issue will hurt Romney.

Anyway, Pawlenty seems best poised to cobble together a similar moderate-conservative coalition to the one McCain built in the 2008 primaries, made up of people who are turned off by Mitt, and who might be socially conservative, but aren't so keen on someone whose religiosity is as overt as Huckabee's.

Anyway, the rest of the field besides Pawlenty and Romney has some serious problems.  Huckabee is an evangelical identity politics candidate, who will be hard pressed to appeal to other segments of the GOP electorate.  Gingrich has way too much baggage.  Barbour is a walking Republican stereotype.  Palin is a disaster.  Crist and Jindal aren't going to run.  I'm trying to imagine the scenario where any of these people wins the nomination.  Sure, it's possible.  But it's harder for me to see the scenario than it is for me to see the scenario for Pawlenty or Romney.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I actually agree with you that Pawlenty is Romney's biggest threat, but I disagree in that I think Huck is his biggest opponent, as of right now. I do agree that Romney and Pawlenty have a broad appeal. From right now the top contender for Mr X is probably John Thune in that he is a Senate, will likely win by a wide margin in 2010, and appeals to the base. Whether or not he has any appeal beyond that as off yet I do not know but he definately has potential. Among Romney, Pawlenty, and Thune I would be comfortable with any of them as our nominee.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I think Pawlenty is the person most likely to win the nomination not named Mitt Romney.  He could do well winning states 34-33-33 over Romney and Huckabee.

I still think Mitt wins the nomination, but Pawlenty will finish second.

[Vepres]

Pawlenty is one of those politicians who is a good candidate in theory, but in reality isn't. He has little charisma, and nothing stands out about him. McCain had the surge, and Obama had his opposition to Iraq, and Romney had his business knowledge. Pawlenty doesn't seem to have an issues or expertise that would make him stand out. Sort of like Fred Thompson, who performed well, but never came close to winning a state.

[Rob]

Pawlenty let a Jew Democrat clown into the Senate, though.

[Mr. Morden]

Pawlenty let a Jew Democrat clown into the Senate, though.

Right, he certified Franken's victory.  Just like Romney certified Ted Kennedy's victory in the 2006 senate race.  Obviously Pawlenty should have refused to certify even after Coleman conceded.

[Mr. Morden]

Pawlenty is one of those politicians who is a good candidate in theory, but in reality isn't. He has little charisma, and nothing stands out about him. McCain had the surge, and Obama had his opposition to Iraq, and Romney had his business knowledge. Pawlenty doesn't seem to have an issues or expertise that would make him stand out. Sort of like Fred Thompson, who performed well, but never came close to winning a state.

OK, except, everyone else who might run for the nomination in 2012 is either deeply deeply flawed or even more boring than Pawlenty.  Who else is going to catch fire?  John Thune?  Dirk Kempthorne?  Seems a bit less plausible than Pawlenty.

I view Pawlenty as being kind of like Lamar Alexander in 1996.  The guy who can serve as the fallback candidate in case the frontrunner (Dole in the one case, Romney in the other) stumbles.  A guy who the GOP establishment would be fine with swinging behind if the guy currently in front doesn't work out.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Pawlenty is the strongest candidate besides Romney, at least right now. Him, Romney, and Thune are the only truly viable candidates this far out. No Newt, No Palin, No Huckabee, No Gary Johnson, No Giuliani, No Crist, No Barbour.

[Lunar]

Yeah, I think Pawlenty is Romney's biggest rival among his target donors, establishment types, and donors too.  Pawlenty could steal Romney's desired mantel as the electable

I always said Pawlenty doesn't have enough mojo to win the nomination, but thinking about it more, did Kerry necessarily have mojo in 2004?  I think Pawlenty and Kerry are pretty much on the same page personality wise...

[Lief 🗽]

If the Republican front runners are Romney and Pawlenty, then I'm feeling pretty good about our chances in 2012.

[You kip if you want to...]

If the Republican front runners are Romney and Pawlenty, then I'm feeling pretty good about our chances in 2012.

I agree. The republican nominee needs atleast some cross-over appeal. McCain had that, but any noticable support from democrats and independants was thrown away with his poor handling of the economic crisis in September. I personally think that Charlie Crist has alot of cross over appeal (although if he runs, i'm guessing it'll be 2016) and maybe Jon Huntsman (again 2016) aswell.

[big bad fab]

I agree of course on Romney and T-Paw, but with Romney having a huge advantage.

Can't Mr. X be Cantor ?
I mean, if Huck is out before 2012, for one reason or another.

He is ambitious; Romney would be the more centrist of big guys; Pawlenty would try to appear more moderate than he is; so the right wing will be free for Cantor, who is a shameless rightist.
Of course, he will never win, but he may think he must run in 2012 to be well placed in 2016.

[the artist formerly known as catmusic]

All right, I will. CRAZY!

G'night, I hope

z
 z
  z
   z
    z
     z
      z
       :l

[Lunar]

I agree of course on Romney and T-Paw, but with Romney having a huge advantage.

Can't Mr. X be Cantor ?
I mean, if Huck is out before 2012, for one reason or another.

He is ambitious; Romney would be the more centrist of big guys; Pawlenty would try to appear more moderate than he is; so the right wing will be free for Cantor, who is a shameless rightist.
Of course, he will never win, but he may think he must run in 2012 to be well placed in 2016.

again, it's relatively unlikely that the first Mormon nominee will pick a Jewish VP

[big bad fab]

I agree of course on Romney and T-Paw, but with Romney having a huge advantage.

Can't Mr. X be Cantor ?
I mean, if Huck is out before 2012, for one reason or another.

He is ambitious; Romney would be the more centrist of big guys; Pawlenty would try to appear more moderate than he is; so the right wing will be free for Cantor, who is a shameless rightist.
Of course, he will never win, but he may think he must run in 2012 to be well placed in 2016.

again, it's relatively unlikely that the first Mormon nominee will pick a Jewish VP

I'm not referring to VP nominees.
Romney will win in the 2012 primaries and he'll try to pick someone young, a woman would be fine.
For 2016, an ambitious like Cantor may think he'll have his chances. Of course, he is the only one but he may run in 2012, in order to have honourable scores and then be in a good position (from his viewpoint) for 2016.