“When you compare the balanced budgets Gingrich pounded out, with the budgets Daniel’s OMB prepared I can’t understand how it is you prefer Daniels to Gingrich.”

Mostly because I think Daniels seven years as chief executive of Indiana is a better guide to his governing style and philosophy than his several years as a functionary for Bush. If you want to see “results”, then I guess you could look at changes to Indiana’s budget in Daniels’ first term or the education reforms in his second term. I wish Gingrich was the guy he seemed to be in the 1990. He isn’t that guy anyone (if he ever was.) His budget proposals were utterly fantastical and weren’t designed for someone who was running to win office. they were for a scam artist. Speaking of bomb throwers wasting everybody’s time (and profiting off of their reputation.)

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2011/11/24/fantasy-politics-in-an-age-of-austerity/

“I tend to think that the Obamacare ruling would have gone the other way if it had been Robert’s wife in tears at the confirmation hearings.” Maybe, but who knows. Reagan got along with Democrats fine (he didn’t get everything he wanted of course – but he was never going to.) If hostility to (and hostility from) Team Blue is our measuring stick, then the incentives are for Republican pols to engage in right-of-center niche marketing.

And governing doesn’t even matter that much since the hostility to the other side is more important than anything one has actually accomplished. The model for this would be McCain’s 2008 campaign that was fought over identity politics (small towns, hockey moms, the patriotic part of America) than on any real issues. As long as you are making the libs really mad, you must be okay. It is also why some conservatives look at Palin as a “real conservative” unlike say… Daniels. She gets liberals really mad and he doesn’t. He also decertified Indiana’s state public employee unions on the first day and implemented some interesting right-of-center health care reforms. She said “death panels” and left Alaska’s state public employee unions intact. But it feel like she is a “fighter” so she is the real conservative. This entire set of priorities and dynamic ensures that conservatives will be played for suckers by the very people who are pretending to represent them.

I guess I just don’t see the cuts Daniel’s made. When you compare the balanced budgets Gingrich pounded out, with the budgets Daniel’s OMB prepared I can’t understand how it is you prefer Daniels to Gingrich. If a quiet temperament isn’t conducive to results, does it have anything to recommend itself?

I tend to think that the Obamacare ruling would have gone the other way if it had been Robert’s wife in tears at the confirmation hearings. Cultural conservatism inoculates conservatives from “strange new respect” when they get to Washington.

Having said all that I’m sorry to have taken so much of your time.

I do think that Daniels running 20% ahead of the ticket in a Democratic wave election after having had a pretty bold first term agenda is pretty impressive. It doesn’t tell us how he does in a presidential election. Maybe he doesn’t get out of Iowa. But it wouldn’t be any lack of charisma holding him back.

“Put colloquially if you aren’t throwing bombs in the culture war you probably won’t be cutting much from the budget.” The experience of Daniels would tend to contradict that rule – also McDonnell. Jindal is a social conservative of course (though I’ve never known him to be a “bomb thrower” in his elected career.) I don’t even know what “bomb thrower” means in this context. If it means having principles and not backing off from them, then I guess Paul Ryan is a culture war “bomb thrower.” But Paul Ryan doesn’t strike me as anybody’s idea of bomb thrower. You could say that Ryan hasn’t been able to enact a government cutting agenda. Then again, you could say the same thing about DeMint himself. If it means making yourself pointlessly objectionable to people who would otherwise be persuadable, then that seems counterproductive. Todd Akin probably won’t be in the Senate to cut the budget. If culture war bomb thrower is some kind of identity politics test then that is counterproductive too. Having said all that, I want the Republican nominee to be a solid and articulate pro-lifer and I don’t want it to be just a checked box. But I wouldn’t think of such a person as a “bomb thrower.” George Voinovich was a pro-lifer and his ilk would be no help in fixing the budget.

Your data is certainly compelling. However, the electoral data you use support Daniel’s electoral popularity is all drawn from his re-election. I concede his re-election was impressive, but inevitably on the national scene he will have to win as a non-incumbent. His victory in 2004 was pretty “eh.” He ran 7 points behind Bush. .

Ultimately, our positions are inviolable to the other’s argument’s because we disagree on Demint’s First Rule of Politics. Put colloquially if you aren’t throwing bombs in the culture war you probably won’t be cutting much from the budget.

Sam, and who would we be hurting if it was just the two of us?

“We are talking about a guy who dealt himself out of the one national issue, public sector unionism, that a governor could address and did so in such a way as to cut the legs out from a fellow Republican Governor.”

You are aware that Daniels decertified Indiana’s state employee unions on his first day right? Your description of his record is the opposite of the truth – on the order of Obama proposed to move to a Chilean-style Social Security reform. You might be referring to Daniels’ stance during the legislative fight over right-to-work. So Daniels prioritized passing education reform and got right-to-work later.

Scott Walker doesn’t seem to share your opinion of Daniels as he has called Daniels a “model” for his own policies. So he has been paying attention. http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/0411/Walker_Mitch_Daniels_a_model.html

Daniels and Jindal have comparable records on education, but Daniels has the bolder record on health care policy with his HSA/catastrophic coverage plan for state employees and the Healthy Indiana Plan for Medicaid recipients.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/11/11/obama-administration-denies-waiver-for-indianas-popular-medicaid-reform/

But I don’t think that is strike against Jindal as Louisiana’s political culture would have made it tougher to implement that kind of Medicaid reform. Your “surrender” characterization is hostile and not especially correct but it is a plausible interpretation of Daniels’ “truce” comment and that was a real mistake.

“I do not include you in this category, complain about the aging, whitness of the party can turn around and hype a 5′ 7″, balding guy.” The balding white guy did substantially better among African-American and young voters in 2008 than did the top of the ticket. Maybe the race and ethnicity of the candidate should be a more distant consideration. The Republicans would hardly be doing any better with nonwhites if they had nominated Cain.

“And to the extent that Jindal has been criticized for his persona” The shots at Jindal’s persona are as misguided as the ones at Daniels’. His persona is fine. It isn’t hostile and it isn’t show biz and some folks are looking for one or the other or both and I think that is a mistake.

“So, I guess I wonder why the critique of Huckabee as non-serious about national issues doesn’t equally pertain to Daniels.”

I think calling Huckabee non-serious in 2008 was a mistake by those who did it. It is too bad he didn’t prepare as well as he might have. You could compare Daniels’ response to Obama’s speech with Huckabee’s speech at the 2008 to RNC as to why Daniels might have made stronger candidate in an economy-focused election. And the FairTax was always going to sink Huckabee if it looked like he was a real possibility to get the nomination. I wish he didn’t have those weaknesses in the same way that I wish Daniels hadn’t made the truce comment.

Not to take anything away from Jindal. He was my second choice for this year, and after Daniels wouldn’t run, I used me feeble powers of public persuasion to urge Jindal run. Daniels isn’t going to be president and I’m already on the Jindal 2012 bandwagon if Romney loses (and maybe if he wins.)

It seems from that pairing you are conflating a technocrat like Jindal (I wish every technocrat had participated in an exorcism in college), with a bean counter like Daniels. Jindal is a true reformer with new ideas. Daniels is really classic ward politician. His major “reform” was privatizing toll ways. Any time the Indiana house proposed true ideological reforms, of the kind this website seems to think are necessary, Daniels had an excuse about why he just couldn’t support it.

Daniels one “national” idea was basically that conservatives should surrender on the culture war. So, I guess I wonder why the critique of Huckabee as non-serious about national issues doesn’t equally pertain to Daniels. We are talking about a guy who dealt himself out of the one national issue, public sector unionism, that a governor could address and did so in such a way as to cut the legs out from a fellow Republican Governor.

And to the extent that Jindal has been criticized for his persona, it has not been for staidness, but for almost preppy giddiness. I just do not understand how writers, I do not include you in this category, complain about the aging, whitness of the party can turn around and hype a 5′ 7″, balding guy.

It occurs to me that Dick Morris is not the only conservative “leader” making a living with that kind of “schtick.” He stands out only because his opportunism and insincerity is so obvious.

For all his flaws, Romney at least can’t be accused of that kind of cynicism.

You and I will never know the exact circumstances of the Daniels family reconciliation much less whether Mitch Daniels “he took her back like nothing had happened.” I actually think that the story of the marriage healing itself could have been really compelling and that anyone who took the chance to mock Daniels would look like a world class jerk. Having said all that, there is more to it than political calculation. I wouldn’t want to put my wife through all that even if there was a presidential election win at the end of the rainbow. Maybe he was just too decent a guy. So we got Gingrich….

Why would Huckabee’s 2008 speech not have a national focus and how does his weird story about the school teacher make it any less national than anything else he might say. Veterans are everywhere after all. It is indicative of a problem he had in the primaries of not taking national-level issues seriously enough and trying to get by on his charisma.

Brian, I know what you’re saying, but my sense is that the RCP average is still closer to reality than either the most Romney or the most Obama-leaning polls. I don’t think it is tied and I don’t think Obama is up 7. So I keep using the average. If that gets me an F in the statistics class I’m not taking, then I can live with that.

Pseudoplotinus, ”
“I suspect it’s precisely because you’re running even, or in this case, just barely ahead.”

The problem is that both campaigns, by their body language are indicating that they see different numbers. If you had the less likeable candidate and were even or ahead, the debates would be something to get through rather than a chance to “reset” the race. If you’re even or ahead, you don’t need a reset. You notice Obama isn’t planning any debate reset. He knows he is ahead and so does the Romney campaign. Do either of them think Obama is up by 9 or whatever in Florida? Probably not.

As for Morris, take his Fox News appearances ought to be taken about as seriously as his 2010 contentions that Steny Hoyer was vulnerable if only you contribute some money to Dick Morris-affiliated organizations. He has his shtick and he is telling people what they want to hear. And even if he is wrong it doesn’t matter because it doesn’t change his record as Clinton’s svengali and his audience will want to be reassured later on too. It’s a living I guess.

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/79059/hack-dick-morris-tea-party#

I can go into the ‘I have many black and mulatto friends’ schpiel but let’s not. However, given the cause and effect of misguided racial policies (the primary cause of the current financial collapse being the gummint forcing banks to make bad loans to minorities), it’s way beyond the time that this nation had a serious and objective discussion on the question of racial policies (affirmative action, quotas, etc.).

Sadly, I think it may be too late as the dread infections of multiculturalism, diversity, and political correctness have taken their toll among an entire American generation (or two) that is no longer capable of clear thinking.