Aparte de los anuncios de los distintos candidatos del partido opositor, también nos interesa conocer sobre qué fechas se situará la Casa Blanca en modo de campaña. La última campaña de re-elección de un Presidente fue la de George W. Bush en 2004 y puede servirnos como referencia.
El Presidente Bush presentó los papeles para crear su comité de re-elección ante la Federal Election Commission el 16 de mayo de 2003. El cuartel general de la campaña se estableció en Arlington, Virginia. La decisión de instalarse en los suburbios de Washington DC en lugar de volver a hacerlo en Austin, Texas, como cuatro años antes, se debió a que esto garantizaba una mejor coordinación con la Casa Blanca. Así Karl Rove pudo mantener su cargo como consejero principal de la Casa Blanca al tiempo que manejaba la campaña de re-elección. El único que abandonó la Casa Blanca fue el hasta entonces director de asuntos políticos del Presidente, Ken Mehlman, mano derecha de Rove, que el mismo 16 de mayo fue nombrado director nacional de la campaña.
Los primeros meses, el comité 'Bush Cheney 04, Inc.' se dedicó de forma exclusiva a recaudar dinero y reunir staff -casi 200 staffers sólo en el cuartel general y unos 130 en cada estado. La implicación del Presidente en campaña fue mínima hasta el mes de marzo de 2004. Se limitó a utilizar su posición para promocionarse de forma indirecta y asistir a cenas de recaudación de fondos. La primera el 17 de junio de 2003 en un hotel de Washington DC, lorgando una recaudaicón de 3,5 millones de dólares, cifra record de dinero recaudado hasta ese momento en una sóla cena.
El primer acto de campaña del Presidente, lo que conocemos como un campaign rally clásico, no tuvo lugar hasta el 20 de marzo de 2004, cuando ya conocía que John Kerry iba a ser su rival demócrata. Fue el pistoletazo de salida oficial a su campaña de re-elección (ver en el video). Para la ocasión eligió Orlando, en la Florida, el estado que le había dado la presidencia cuatro años antes.
sábado, 27 de noviembre de 2010
viernes, 26 de noviembre de 2010
Palin se burla de los medios
La principal razón por la que una parte importante de las bases conservadoras simpatizan con Sarah Palin a nivel personal es el martirio al que la someten los mass media vinculados al establishment. Los medios llevan un par de días haciendo una bola de nieve de un gafe verbal que cometió durante una entrevista, cuando confundió a Corea del Norte con Corea del Sur. Ella ha respondido en su Facebook con un mensaje de Acción de Gracias que contiene una demoledora lista de todos los gafes cometidos por el Presidente Obama y que no merecieron la atención de los medios de comunicación. Cada gafe va enlazado a un video de youtube en el que, efectivamente, puede verse a Obama pronunciando esas frases.
(...) My fellow Americans in all 57 states, the time has changed for come. With our country founded more than 20 centuries ago, we have much to celebrate – from the FBI’s 100 days to the reforms that bring greater inefficiencies to our health care system. We know that countries like Europe are willing to stand with us in our fight to halt the rise of privacy, and Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s. And let’s face it, everybody knows that it makes no sense that you send a kid to the emergency room for a treatable illness like asthma and they end up taking up a hospital bed. It costs, when, if you, they just gave, you gave them treatment early, and they got some treatment, and ah, a breathalyzer, or an inhalator. I mean, not a breathalyzer, ah, I don’t know what the term is in Austrian for that…
Of course, the paragraph above is based on a series of misstatements and verbal gaffes made by Barack Obama (I didn’t have enough time to do one for Joe Biden). YouTube links are provided just in case you doubt the accuracy of these all too human slips-of-the-tongue. If you can’t remember hearing about them, that’s because for the most part the media didn’t consider them newsworthy. I have no complaint about that. Everybody makes the occasional verbal gaffe – even news anchors.
Obviously, I would have been even more impressed if the media showed some consistency on this issue. Unfortunately, it seems they couldn’t resist the temptation to turn a simple one word slip-of-the-tongue of mine into a major political headline. The one word slip occurred yesterday during one of my seven back-to-back interviews wherein I was privileged to speak to the American public about the important, world-changing issues before us.
If the media had bothered to actually listen to all of my remarks on Glenn Beck’s radio show, they would have noticed that I refer to South Korea as our ally throughout, that I corrected myself seconds after my slip-of-the-tongue, and that I made it abundantly clear that pressure should be put on China to restrict energy exports to the North Korean regime. The media could even have done due diligence and checked my previous statements on the subject, which have always been consistent, and in fact even ahead of the curve. But why let the facts get in the way of a good story? (And for that matter, why not just make up stories out of thin air – like the totally false hard news story which has run for three days now reporting that I lobbied the producers of “Dancing with the Stars” to cast a former Senate candidate on their show. That lie is further clear proof that the media completely makes things up without doing even rudimentary fact-checking.)
“Hope springs eternal” as the poet says. Let’s hope that perhaps, just maybe, they might get it right next time. When we the people are effective in holding America’s free press accountable for responsible and truthful reporting, then we shall all have even more to be thankful for!
Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!
- Sarah Palin (...)
(...) My fellow Americans in all 57 states, the time has changed for come. With our country founded more than 20 centuries ago, we have much to celebrate – from the FBI’s 100 days to the reforms that bring greater inefficiencies to our health care system. We know that countries like Europe are willing to stand with us in our fight to halt the rise of privacy, and Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s. And let’s face it, everybody knows that it makes no sense that you send a kid to the emergency room for a treatable illness like asthma and they end up taking up a hospital bed. It costs, when, if you, they just gave, you gave them treatment early, and they got some treatment, and ah, a breathalyzer, or an inhalator. I mean, not a breathalyzer, ah, I don’t know what the term is in Austrian for that…
Of course, the paragraph above is based on a series of misstatements and verbal gaffes made by Barack Obama (I didn’t have enough time to do one for Joe Biden). YouTube links are provided just in case you doubt the accuracy of these all too human slips-of-the-tongue. If you can’t remember hearing about them, that’s because for the most part the media didn’t consider them newsworthy. I have no complaint about that. Everybody makes the occasional verbal gaffe – even news anchors.
Obviously, I would have been even more impressed if the media showed some consistency on this issue. Unfortunately, it seems they couldn’t resist the temptation to turn a simple one word slip-of-the-tongue of mine into a major political headline. The one word slip occurred yesterday during one of my seven back-to-back interviews wherein I was privileged to speak to the American public about the important, world-changing issues before us.
If the media had bothered to actually listen to all of my remarks on Glenn Beck’s radio show, they would have noticed that I refer to South Korea as our ally throughout, that I corrected myself seconds after my slip-of-the-tongue, and that I made it abundantly clear that pressure should be put on China to restrict energy exports to the North Korean regime. The media could even have done due diligence and checked my previous statements on the subject, which have always been consistent, and in fact even ahead of the curve. But why let the facts get in the way of a good story? (And for that matter, why not just make up stories out of thin air – like the totally false hard news story which has run for three days now reporting that I lobbied the producers of “Dancing with the Stars” to cast a former Senate candidate on their show. That lie is further clear proof that the media completely makes things up without doing even rudimentary fact-checking.)
“Hope springs eternal” as the poet says. Let’s hope that perhaps, just maybe, they might get it right next time. When we the people are effective in holding America’s free press accountable for responsible and truthful reporting, then we shall all have even more to be thankful for!
Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!
- Sarah Palin (...)
Videoteca de C-SPAN
En el antiguo blog vimos algunos anuncios de candidatura presidencial del pasado. Aquí tenemos más:
* 21 de febrero, 1983: Ex Vicepresidente Walter Mondale (D) anuncia candidatura en Saint Paul, Minnesota.
* 23 de febrero, 1987: Congresista Dick Gephardt (D - Missouri) anuncia candidatura en St. Louis, Missouri.
* 6 de marzo, 1987: Congresista Jack Kemp (R - Nueva York) anuncia candidatura en Washington DC.
* 10 de octubre, 1987: Jesse Jackson (D) anuncia candidatura en Raleigh, Carolina del Norte.
* 30 de abril, 1991: Ex Senador Paul Tsongas (D - Massachusetts) anuncia candidatura en Lowell, Massachusetts.
* 25 de febrero, 1995: Senador Phil Gramm (R - Texas) anuncia candidatura en College Station, Texas.
* 20 de marzo, 1995: Pat Buchanan (R) anuncia candidatura en Manchester, New Hampshire.
* 10 de abril, 1995: Senador Bob Dole (R - Kansas) anuncia candidatura en Topeka, Kansas.
* 21 de febrero, 1983: Ex Vicepresidente Walter Mondale (D) anuncia candidatura en Saint Paul, Minnesota.
* 23 de febrero, 1987: Congresista Dick Gephardt (D - Missouri) anuncia candidatura en St. Louis, Missouri.
* 6 de marzo, 1987: Congresista Jack Kemp (R - Nueva York) anuncia candidatura en Washington DC.
* 10 de octubre, 1987: Jesse Jackson (D) anuncia candidatura en Raleigh, Carolina del Norte.
* 30 de abril, 1991: Ex Senador Paul Tsongas (D - Massachusetts) anuncia candidatura en Lowell, Massachusetts.
* 25 de febrero, 1995: Senador Phil Gramm (R - Texas) anuncia candidatura en College Station, Texas.
* 20 de marzo, 1995: Pat Buchanan (R) anuncia candidatura en Manchester, New Hampshire.
* 10 de abril, 1995: Senador Bob Dole (R - Kansas) anuncia candidatura en Topeka, Kansas.
jueves, 25 de noviembre de 2010
Entrevista a Pawlenty (National Journal)
Reid Wilson (National Journal) entrevistó al Gobernador Tim Pawlenty la semana pasada en la conferencia anual de la RGA. Hoy publica sus declaraciones:
(...) I haven't made a final decision yet. I mean, we're obviously looking at it. But as to whether we do it or don't do it, I'm not going to make up my mind internally for probably a few months yet," Pawlenty said. "I've got a set of experiences and skills that might benefit the country. But, I haven't made a decision whether I'm the right person to do that, whether I'm the only person who can do that."
(...) "I think if you're a serious candidate for president, you become well-known. So over time that resolves itself. And early polls, early handicapping I think are just mere speculation," he said. Asked whether he would have the resources to mount a big campaign, Pawlenty is optimistic: "In terms of what it takes to run a Cadillac, or even a Buick, campaign in a bunch of early states, I mean if I decide to do this I think we can raise the money."
(...) "There is ... a new day in the conservative movement, the Republican Party," Pawlenty said. "The tradition is you take the establishment candidate who also can get support with social conservatives and came in second last time and nominate him or her. I think that's probably going to change this time."
(...) "You're going to have 5 or 6 people middle-aged men and maybe some women, saying, on the Republican stage, whether that's in California or somewhere else, talking about taxes and health care reform and education reform and Iran and New START treaties and jobs and you know, pro-growth, job policies that are going to sound pretty similar around the policies. I mean there'll be differences, but they wouldn't be huge differences," he said.
"I think the more interesting and important question is going to be as you look at the personal and political records of those individuals what does that tell you about their fortitude personally? Do they have the record to actually back up the rhetoric?" Pawlenty asked. "In other words, are they just giving you pretty rhetoric or do they actually get it done? And also have they demonstrated the willingness to take the hit to actually get it done? Because I think the next president is going to have to be unpopular for a while, casue there's some really tough stuff he's going to have to get done. And I think that's going to be the fuller measure of this thing."
(...) "You know, two years is an enternity in politics, but, uh, a lot can happen. There's always intervening events. So anyone who tells you they know what's going to happen two years from now is blowing smoke at you," he said. "But if the election were held today and a reasonable Republican candidate who could market our message effectively President Obama would be defeated."
(...) "You have an entire crop of really gifted and talented and principled governors who just got elected, and in most cases with Republican legislatures, and in many cases in Republican or at least swing states that are going to do amazing things," he said. "And I think the country is going to look at that and say, 'Wow, if they can do that in Michigan and take a state that was on the ropes, economically depressed and have somebody like [Gov.-elect] Rick Snyder come in and bring that state back then I think you can say we can do that nationally."
(...) "They're finally coming around on some issues that I think are historic. You know, George Bush got reelected in President of the United States in 2004. And back then he was still pretty popular. And he said he had political capital and he was going to use it. He teed up entitlement reforms, specifically Social Security and Medicare. He couldn't even get a hearing in one committee of a Congress controlled by his own party. I mean it was a complete non-starter back then. The country wasn't ready, the Congress wasn't ready, the Republican Party wasn't ready."
"Now you fast-forward just 6 years, not a generation, but just 6 years, 2010. And you ask people, 'What's your number one concern?' And of course it's the economy and jobs, for understandable reasons, but number two is government spending or something. You know, cousin of government spending. And 10 or 15 years ago, you talk about that, you know, the deficit spending, [and] people say, 'Yes it's a concern.' But does it really drive your vote? Does it really motivate you? Does it really tick you off? Are you really going to act on that? Eh, down the list a ways. But today? You've got average people, you know grocery stores, the Home Deport, coming up saying, 'Governor, this thing's out of control. You know, we're in deep trouble.' They're getting the spending deficit and debt. You know, they can't list the six things that need to be done to fix Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid. But they know we're in deep trouble, they know it has to do with entitlements, they know it has to do with run-away government. And now they're ready, at least conceptually.
"You know, there's an old adage that when the pupils are ready, the teacher will appear. The pupils are, maybe not fully ready, but they're warming up. And they're a lot more ready now on that issue than they were in 2004. I give President Bush credit, it took a lot of courage to say, and put a marker down, we're going to try this. But it tells you something about the Congress and the Republican Party back then that they wouldn't even touch it. They wouldn't even take a vote in a committee. And now you have the whole debate, in addition to the pro-growth and the pro-job policies, coming around to 'We gotta fix spending' and, really, it leads you back to the whole question entitlements."
More: "You've got to shoot it to them straight. You gotta try to make it a sense that there is a way forward, there is a future. And you've got to show them the way forward. And I think that the country is sufficiently concerned and, at some level, worried that they're willing to hear you out and most of them, I think, would be willing to sacrifice if they knew it was for the betterment of the country and if it was a fair deal."
"And frankly, it's not that hard. I mean this stuff has all been white papered, studied, seminared to death, think tanked to death. I mean every think tank has done every possible view of what needs to be done on the spending and entitlement reform. So the question isn't what needs to be done. The question is do you have the fortitude to actually do it? And that's why I get back to where I started this discussion. There's not a lot of mystery about the kinds of things you need to do to fix the entitlement programs. The question is do you have the fortitude to tell the American people the truth and get it done. And again, in Minnesota we've done all that. It's obviously smaller scale, but we have cracked down hard on the government, particularly structural spending, in a place that has a very different culture." (...)
(...) I haven't made a final decision yet. I mean, we're obviously looking at it. But as to whether we do it or don't do it, I'm not going to make up my mind internally for probably a few months yet," Pawlenty said. "I've got a set of experiences and skills that might benefit the country. But, I haven't made a decision whether I'm the right person to do that, whether I'm the only person who can do that."
(...) "I think if you're a serious candidate for president, you become well-known. So over time that resolves itself. And early polls, early handicapping I think are just mere speculation," he said. Asked whether he would have the resources to mount a big campaign, Pawlenty is optimistic: "In terms of what it takes to run a Cadillac, or even a Buick, campaign in a bunch of early states, I mean if I decide to do this I think we can raise the money."
(...) "There is ... a new day in the conservative movement, the Republican Party," Pawlenty said. "The tradition is you take the establishment candidate who also can get support with social conservatives and came in second last time and nominate him or her. I think that's probably going to change this time."
(...) "You're going to have 5 or 6 people middle-aged men and maybe some women, saying, on the Republican stage, whether that's in California or somewhere else, talking about taxes and health care reform and education reform and Iran and New START treaties and jobs and you know, pro-growth, job policies that are going to sound pretty similar around the policies. I mean there'll be differences, but they wouldn't be huge differences," he said.
"I think the more interesting and important question is going to be as you look at the personal and political records of those individuals what does that tell you about their fortitude personally? Do they have the record to actually back up the rhetoric?" Pawlenty asked. "In other words, are they just giving you pretty rhetoric or do they actually get it done? And also have they demonstrated the willingness to take the hit to actually get it done? Because I think the next president is going to have to be unpopular for a while, casue there's some really tough stuff he's going to have to get done. And I think that's going to be the fuller measure of this thing."
(...) "You know, two years is an enternity in politics, but, uh, a lot can happen. There's always intervening events. So anyone who tells you they know what's going to happen two years from now is blowing smoke at you," he said. "But if the election were held today and a reasonable Republican candidate who could market our message effectively President Obama would be defeated."
(...) "You have an entire crop of really gifted and talented and principled governors who just got elected, and in most cases with Republican legislatures, and in many cases in Republican or at least swing states that are going to do amazing things," he said. "And I think the country is going to look at that and say, 'Wow, if they can do that in Michigan and take a state that was on the ropes, economically depressed and have somebody like [Gov.-elect] Rick Snyder come in and bring that state back then I think you can say we can do that nationally."
(...) "They're finally coming around on some issues that I think are historic. You know, George Bush got reelected in President of the United States in 2004. And back then he was still pretty popular. And he said he had political capital and he was going to use it. He teed up entitlement reforms, specifically Social Security and Medicare. He couldn't even get a hearing in one committee of a Congress controlled by his own party. I mean it was a complete non-starter back then. The country wasn't ready, the Congress wasn't ready, the Republican Party wasn't ready."
"Now you fast-forward just 6 years, not a generation, but just 6 years, 2010. And you ask people, 'What's your number one concern?' And of course it's the economy and jobs, for understandable reasons, but number two is government spending or something. You know, cousin of government spending. And 10 or 15 years ago, you talk about that, you know, the deficit spending, [and] people say, 'Yes it's a concern.' But does it really drive your vote? Does it really motivate you? Does it really tick you off? Are you really going to act on that? Eh, down the list a ways. But today? You've got average people, you know grocery stores, the Home Deport, coming up saying, 'Governor, this thing's out of control. You know, we're in deep trouble.' They're getting the spending deficit and debt. You know, they can't list the six things that need to be done to fix Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid. But they know we're in deep trouble, they know it has to do with entitlements, they know it has to do with run-away government. And now they're ready, at least conceptually.
"You know, there's an old adage that when the pupils are ready, the teacher will appear. The pupils are, maybe not fully ready, but they're warming up. And they're a lot more ready now on that issue than they were in 2004. I give President Bush credit, it took a lot of courage to say, and put a marker down, we're going to try this. But it tells you something about the Congress and the Republican Party back then that they wouldn't even touch it. They wouldn't even take a vote in a committee. And now you have the whole debate, in addition to the pro-growth and the pro-job policies, coming around to 'We gotta fix spending' and, really, it leads you back to the whole question entitlements."
More: "You've got to shoot it to them straight. You gotta try to make it a sense that there is a way forward, there is a future. And you've got to show them the way forward. And I think that the country is sufficiently concerned and, at some level, worried that they're willing to hear you out and most of them, I think, would be willing to sacrifice if they knew it was for the betterment of the country and if it was a fair deal."
"And frankly, it's not that hard. I mean this stuff has all been white papered, studied, seminared to death, think tanked to death. I mean every think tank has done every possible view of what needs to be done on the spending and entitlement reform. So the question isn't what needs to be done. The question is do you have the fortitude to actually do it? And that's why I get back to where I started this discussion. There's not a lot of mystery about the kinds of things you need to do to fix the entitlement programs. The question is do you have the fortitude to tell the American people the truth and get it done. And again, in Minnesota we've done all that. It's obviously smaller scale, but we have cracked down hard on the government, particularly structural spending, in a place that has a very different culture." (...)
miércoles, 24 de noviembre de 2010
Palin estará en 16 ciudades en 9 días
Sarah Palin ínició ayer en Phoenix (Arizona) la gira nacional de promoción de su segundo libro American by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith and Flag. Pasará el día de Acción de Gracias en Arizona y el viernes comenzará un intenso viaje que le llevará a 12 estados en una semana. El itinerario sería el clásico de Oeste a Este salvo por el llamativo detalle de visitar Iowa dos veces.
26 de noviembre: Tulsa (Oklahoma)
27 de noviembre: Norfolk (Nebraska) y Des Moines (Iowa)
28 de noviembre: Andover (Kansas) y Dallas (Texas)
29 de noviembre: Houston (Texas) y New Orleans (Louisiana)
30 de noviembre: Baton Rouge (Louisiana) y Little Rock (Arkansas)
1 de diciembre: Brentwood (Tennessee) y Lexington (Kentucky)
2 de diciembre: Spirit Lake (Iowa) y Carmel (Indiana)
3 de diciembre: Cincinnati (Ohio) y Columbia (Carolina del Sur).
Video: ayer en el norte de Phoenix.
26 de noviembre: Tulsa (Oklahoma)
27 de noviembre: Norfolk (Nebraska) y Des Moines (Iowa)
28 de noviembre: Andover (Kansas) y Dallas (Texas)
29 de noviembre: Houston (Texas) y New Orleans (Louisiana)
30 de noviembre: Baton Rouge (Louisiana) y Little Rock (Arkansas)
1 de diciembre: Brentwood (Tennessee) y Lexington (Kentucky)
2 de diciembre: Spirit Lake (Iowa) y Carmel (Indiana)
3 de diciembre: Cincinnati (Ohio) y Columbia (Carolina del Sur).
Video: ayer en el norte de Phoenix.
"Independence Day"
El primer spot electoral de 2012 ya está en el aire. Dura 90 segundos y se podrá ver en las filiales de CNN y FOX en todo el estado de Iowa durante este puente de Acción de Gracias. Lo ha lanzado el comité exploratorio del activista gay Fred Karger, el único candidato declarado hasta ahora para la nominación presidencial republicana. Karger es un antiguo asesor electoral de nombres ilustres del republicanismo como Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Gerald Ford, Bob Dole, Charles Percy o John Connally, que en los últimos años ha dedicado su tiempo a organizar campañas en favor de la legalización del matrimonio homosexual y de una reforma migratoria.
Anuzis reúne apoyos para presidir el RNC
Saul Anuzis está aglutinando en poco tiempo importantes apoyos para convertirse en el nuevo presidente del Comité Nacional Republicano (RNC). En los últimos días se ha hecho con el endorsement público de varios miembros del comité que la última vez apoyaron a Michael Steele pero que ahora están desertando.
Al frente del Partido Republicano de Michigan, Anuzis logró un alto nivel de desarrollo de las técnicas de captación de donantes, siendo el suyo uno de los primeros comités republicanos estatales en utilizar listas de correos electrónicos para recaudar fondos y movilizar electorado. Ha sido propietario de dos compañías de telecomunicaciones y su esfuerzo para presidir el RNC se apoya en la promesa de aplicar las nuevas tecnologías para ganar elecciones, y cubrir más territorio con los movimientos de base porque, según sus palabras, "ahora mismo hay demasiadas comunidades en las que es más fácil encontrar un unicornio que un republicano."
En su contra pueden jugar los malos resultados que obtuvieron los republicanos en 2008 en Michigan. Él responsabiliza de aquel fracaso a la campaña de McCain por haber dejado de emitir publicidad en el estado un mes antes de las elecciones. Se mantuvo neutral en las primarias de aquel año, aunque siempre se le ha considerado un hombre cercano a Romney: por esta razón, a finales de 2006 los aliados de McCain en Michigan conspiraron sin éxito para sustituirlo por uno de los suyos, en lo que fue un enfrentamiento de los líderes republicanos de Grand Rapids, afines a McCain, con los del condado de Oakland (suburbios de Detroit), afines a Romney.
Hay otras dos candidaturas que son inminentes: Maria Cino, directora de asuntos políticos de la campaña presidencial de Bush en 2000 y estratega jefe del RNC en las elecciones de 2004; y Ann Wagner, ex presidenta del GOP de Missouri y jefa de la exitosa campaña de Roy Blunt al Senado este año. Otros se lo están pensando.
Anuzis Adds RNC Backers
(...) Michigan RNC member Saul Anuzis, who announced his candidacy two weeks ago, will roll out his first roster of endorsements Tuesday in an effort to capture momentum before other candidates announce their own bids after the Thanksgiving break.
Some of the eight new RNC members publicly supporting Anuzis had backed Steele on the final ballots in 2009. They include Rhode Island GOP chairman Gio Cicione, Colorado Republican Party chairman Dick Wadhams and Delaware state GOP chair Tom Ross. Ross's defection will be the most painful for Steele, for whom Ross served as a regional whip during the votes.
Anuzis will also unveil support from West Virginia GOP chair Mike Stuart, Nebraska party chief Mark Fahleson and national committee members Linda Ackerman of California, Dana Randall of South Dakota and Heidi Smith of Nevada. With his own vote and support from Virginia national committee member Morton Blackwell, Anuzis now has 10 votes for chairman.
Other contenders, though, are showing no signs of backing down. Former RNC co-chair Ann Wagner has filed paperwork establishing a fundraising vehicle with the IRS. Former RNC official Maria Cino has filed similar paperwork with the FEC. And Wisconsin Republican Party chairman Reince Priebus is close to making his own decision, and he's already garnering support from other committee members like Illinois GOP chairman Pat Brady.
The roster of possible candidates also includes Republican Governors Association executive director Nick Ayers, former RNC political director Gentry Collins, former RNC chairman Mike Duncan, Connecticut party chairman Chris Healy and former South Carolina party chair Katon Dawson. Dawson has hinted he is also working to pull in a big name that would quickly coalesce RNC members. (...)
Al frente del Partido Republicano de Michigan, Anuzis logró un alto nivel de desarrollo de las técnicas de captación de donantes, siendo el suyo uno de los primeros comités republicanos estatales en utilizar listas de correos electrónicos para recaudar fondos y movilizar electorado. Ha sido propietario de dos compañías de telecomunicaciones y su esfuerzo para presidir el RNC se apoya en la promesa de aplicar las nuevas tecnologías para ganar elecciones, y cubrir más territorio con los movimientos de base porque, según sus palabras, "ahora mismo hay demasiadas comunidades en las que es más fácil encontrar un unicornio que un republicano."
En su contra pueden jugar los malos resultados que obtuvieron los republicanos en 2008 en Michigan. Él responsabiliza de aquel fracaso a la campaña de McCain por haber dejado de emitir publicidad en el estado un mes antes de las elecciones. Se mantuvo neutral en las primarias de aquel año, aunque siempre se le ha considerado un hombre cercano a Romney: por esta razón, a finales de 2006 los aliados de McCain en Michigan conspiraron sin éxito para sustituirlo por uno de los suyos, en lo que fue un enfrentamiento de los líderes republicanos de Grand Rapids, afines a McCain, con los del condado de Oakland (suburbios de Detroit), afines a Romney.
Hay otras dos candidaturas que son inminentes: Maria Cino, directora de asuntos políticos de la campaña presidencial de Bush en 2000 y estratega jefe del RNC en las elecciones de 2004; y Ann Wagner, ex presidenta del GOP de Missouri y jefa de la exitosa campaña de Roy Blunt al Senado este año. Otros se lo están pensando.
Anuzis Adds RNC Backers
(...) Michigan RNC member Saul Anuzis, who announced his candidacy two weeks ago, will roll out his first roster of endorsements Tuesday in an effort to capture momentum before other candidates announce their own bids after the Thanksgiving break.
Some of the eight new RNC members publicly supporting Anuzis had backed Steele on the final ballots in 2009. They include Rhode Island GOP chairman Gio Cicione, Colorado Republican Party chairman Dick Wadhams and Delaware state GOP chair Tom Ross. Ross's defection will be the most painful for Steele, for whom Ross served as a regional whip during the votes.
Anuzis will also unveil support from West Virginia GOP chair Mike Stuart, Nebraska party chief Mark Fahleson and national committee members Linda Ackerman of California, Dana Randall of South Dakota and Heidi Smith of Nevada. With his own vote and support from Virginia national committee member Morton Blackwell, Anuzis now has 10 votes for chairman.
Other contenders, though, are showing no signs of backing down. Former RNC co-chair Ann Wagner has filed paperwork establishing a fundraising vehicle with the IRS. Former RNC official Maria Cino has filed similar paperwork with the FEC. And Wisconsin Republican Party chairman Reince Priebus is close to making his own decision, and he's already garnering support from other committee members like Illinois GOP chairman Pat Brady.
The roster of possible candidates also includes Republican Governors Association executive director Nick Ayers, former RNC political director Gentry Collins, former RNC chairman Mike Duncan, Connecticut party chairman Chris Healy and former South Carolina party chair Katon Dawson. Dawson has hinted he is also working to pull in a big name that would quickly coalesce RNC members. (...)
martes, 23 de noviembre de 2010
Bush da su bendición a Romney
El ex Presidente George Bush (padre) preguntado por Larry King sobre quién es su favorito para ser candidato del GOP en 2012: "Bueno, mencioné a Jeb, pero no lo va a intentar. Si me preguntas quién será el nominado, no podría decirte. Nos gusta Mitt Romney. Lo conocemos bien y nos gusta mucho."
Cómo podría Huckabee parar a Palin
David Frum:
(...) Huckabee’s words are more than an observation. They are a warning. And they are a warning especially to be heeded because they come from the one politician who can probably do most to stop Palin, the candidate best positioned to win Iowa.
Huckabee himself is also persona non grata with party leaders, because of his repeated criticism of Wall Street and Wall Street minded GOP insiders.
But Huckabee is a very different cat from Sarah Palin. He’s smart and policy-minded. And while he expresses a strong social conservative message, he does not play the politics of division, disparagement, and resentment in which Palin specializes. In the days of party conventions, the answer to the Palin problem would have been obvious: party leaders would assemble and force the mutually mistrustful Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee onto the same ticket. In modern times, the game is played differently, but the structure of the situation remains the same: an early Huckabee pact with a candidate acceptable to Republican donors (if not Romney, then Tim Pawlenty or even Jeb Bush) would command enough clout to push Palin off the stage. If not, all bets are off. As I think about it, that’s one of the big problems with the candidacies of a Thune, a Daniels or a Barbour: They will need Huckabee as much or more than Romney does. Yet Huckabee is also a re-elected governor, plus he won the second largest haul of delegates last time. Why should he defer to any of the lower-polling governors? And who will make him? (...)
(...) Huckabee’s words are more than an observation. They are a warning. And they are a warning especially to be heeded because they come from the one politician who can probably do most to stop Palin, the candidate best positioned to win Iowa.
Huckabee himself is also persona non grata with party leaders, because of his repeated criticism of Wall Street and Wall Street minded GOP insiders.
But Huckabee is a very different cat from Sarah Palin. He’s smart and policy-minded. And while he expresses a strong social conservative message, he does not play the politics of division, disparagement, and resentment in which Palin specializes. In the days of party conventions, the answer to the Palin problem would have been obvious: party leaders would assemble and force the mutually mistrustful Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee onto the same ticket. In modern times, the game is played differently, but the structure of the situation remains the same: an early Huckabee pact with a candidate acceptable to Republican donors (if not Romney, then Tim Pawlenty or even Jeb Bush) would command enough clout to push Palin off the stage. If not, all bets are off. As I think about it, that’s one of the big problems with the candidacies of a Thune, a Daniels or a Barbour: They will need Huckabee as much or more than Romney does. Yet Huckabee is also a re-elected governor, plus he won the second largest haul of delegates last time. Why should he defer to any of the lower-polling governors? And who will make him? (...)
Rumores sobre Jeb Bush
Matt Lewis en Hot Air:
(...)Having said that, I am starting to hear rumors that Jeb is telling potential prominent supporters to “keep their powder dry,” meaning not to endorse or support any 2012 candidates until they check back with him. (...)
(...)Having said that, I am starting to hear rumors that Jeb is telling potential prominent supporters to “keep their powder dry,” meaning not to endorse or support any 2012 candidates until they check back with him. (...)
12 in 2012: otros
Gobernador Rick Perry, de Texas; ex Senador Rick Santorum, de Pennsylvania; Gobernador Bob McDonnell, de Virginia; Congresista Ron Paul, de Texas; ex Alcalde Rudy Giuliani, de Nueva York; ex Gobernador Gary Johnson, de New Mexico; ex Gobernador George Pataki, de Nueva York; ex Embajador John Bolton; y Donald Trump.
Huckabee en The View
Mike Huckabee deabatiendo sobre impuestos con Joy Behar ayer en The View (ABC).
lunes, 22 de noviembre de 2010
¿A quién le toca?
Erin McPike analiza la estrategia de Romney en RealClearPolitics:
Romney's Strategy: Stay in Medal Contention
(...) Bill Greener, a Republican media consultant currently neutral in the coming presidential fight, explained in an interview that in the past, "the general milieu of the party has been, ‘whose turn is it?' That was how doubt was resolved." He went on, "Part of being a Republican is that we hate confusion and ambiguity."
Inside Romney's current inner circle, strategists say they don't put any stock into the idea that it's the former governor's turn to be the GOP nominee. They say it's never something that has been mentioned in a planning session or discussion.
Romney strategists declined to be quoted on the record for this story, as they maintain that they are not ready to map out the next presidential race because it has not begun for them yet. Some of their strategizing, however, does suggest that even though the Romney team may not be banking on the idea that he is next in line, it has colored the team's approach to the current primary process.
A Romney confidante put it this way: "If there's one thing running before has earned us, it's that we do not have to flex or adapt because of something a speculative candidate does or says."
And a top Romney messaging strategist from the last campaign said: "I think one of my main takeaways from ‘08 was that it takes six years to run for president if you start out at one or two percent - on the GOP side at least."
Continúa (...)
Romney's Strategy: Stay in Medal Contention
(...) Bill Greener, a Republican media consultant currently neutral in the coming presidential fight, explained in an interview that in the past, "the general milieu of the party has been, ‘whose turn is it?' That was how doubt was resolved." He went on, "Part of being a Republican is that we hate confusion and ambiguity."
Inside Romney's current inner circle, strategists say they don't put any stock into the idea that it's the former governor's turn to be the GOP nominee. They say it's never something that has been mentioned in a planning session or discussion.
Romney strategists declined to be quoted on the record for this story, as they maintain that they are not ready to map out the next presidential race because it has not begun for them yet. Some of their strategizing, however, does suggest that even though the Romney team may not be banking on the idea that he is next in line, it has colored the team's approach to the current primary process.
A Romney confidante put it this way: "If there's one thing running before has earned us, it's that we do not have to flex or adapt because of something a speculative candidate does or says."
And a top Romney messaging strategist from the last campaign said: "I think one of my main takeaways from ‘08 was that it takes six years to run for president if you start out at one or two percent - on the GOP side at least."
Continúa (...)
Demócratas dudan entre Charlotte, Cleveland, Minneapolis y St. Louis
Es un secreto a voces que la Casa Blanca desea (o deseaba) que Charlotte (Carolina del Norte) albergue la Convención que a finales de verano de 2012 renomine al Presidente Obama como candidato del Partido Demócrata a un nuevo mandato. Una de las ciudades más dinámicas del país, símbolo del Nuevo Sur, es el segundo mayor centro bancario de los Estados Unidos y sede de cinco compañías de Fortune 500. Sería la primera convención demócrata en una ciudad sureña desde hace casi un cuarto de siglo -la última fue en Atlanta en 1988.
En las últimas dos o tres semanas, en cambio, las urgencias políticas han situado a Cleveland (Ohio) como la aparente favorita. La candidatura de Cleveland no tiene página web, no ha lanzado ningún video promocional, y tiene un sólo grupo de Facebook que apenas se actualiza. Pero los resultados de las midterms en Ohio, con los republicanos ganando las elecciones a Gobernador y al Senado, cinco nuevos escaños para la Cámara de Representantes, y las dos cámaras de la Legislatura estatal, han llevado a varios estrategas del Comité Nacional Demócrata a advertir que Ohio es una cuestión de vida o muerte para las chances de reelección de Obama y que no les vendría mal tener una presencia continuada de cuatro días en el estado dos meses antes de la elección.
Hay un tercer frente, los sindicatos, que presionan en favor de Minneapolis (Minnesota) o Saint Louis (Missouri). Las centrales sindicales no quieren ni oír hablar de Charlotte por considerarla una ciudad hostil a las asociaciones de trabajadores. Dicen que a los miles de invitados que asistan a la convención hay que hospedarlos en hoteles sindicalizados porque pagan más a sus empleados, y Charlotte no tiene ningún hotel sindicalizado. También se quejan de que los trabajadores del centro de convenciones de Charlotte no están sindicalizados. Cleveland sí cuenta con hoteles sindicalizados pero están controlados sólo por Workers United, que el año pasado se escindió de UNITE HERE para afiliarse a SEIU, y está enfrentada con la UNITE HERE que es afiliada de AFL-CIO.
Próximamente conoceremos cual de esas cuatro ciudades es la elegida. Será aquella que más interese a la Casa Blanca después de escuchar a todas las partes, y que garantice ser capaz de recaudar unos 40 millones de dólares para cubrir gastos. El Comité Nacional Demócrata hará pública la decisión cualquier día en los próximos dos meses.
Los republicanos, hace ya meses, seleccionaron Tampa (Florida) para su convención. Derrotó a Phoenix (Arizona) y Salt Lake City (Utah) en el proceso de selección. El área metropolitana de Tampa, que incluye St. Petersburg y Clearwater, es la segunda área metropolitana más poblada de Florida (después de Miami) y la tercera del Sudeste de EEUU. Políticamente, los suburbios de Tampa constituyen una de las zonas más competitivas del estado y son en gran parte responsables del buen rendimiento del Partido Republicano de Florida en los últimos tiempos.
La Convención Republicana volverá a Florida por primera vez en cuarenta años -las últimas fueron en Miami con Nixon en 1968 y en 1972. Es un premio a la lealtad y al gran número de donantes que aporta al GOP. Tampa ya fue favorita para albergar la convención de 2004 pero al final se decidió apostar por Nueva York para apoyarla económicamente después del 11-S y también, por supuesto, para instrumentalizar el tema.
*Lista de ciudades que han albergado convenciones demócratas
*Lista de ciudades que han albergado convenciones republicanas
*El papel de la Convención
Palin prepara logística en Iowa
Asesores de Sarah Palin están echando un vistazo a locales para instalar oficinas en Iowa. ¿Una primera evidencia de que se presenta a las elecciones?
Sarah Palin drops 2012 presidency hint with staff visit to Iowa
(...) Sarah Palin has dropped another hint of her intention to run for the White House in 2012, dispatching aides to scope out office space in Iowa, the first stop in the presidential race.
(...) In the course of making arrangements for that tour, two aides organising Palin's visit to Des Moines on 27 November told locals they were looking into office space and other logistical needs for the coming year, the Guardian has learned.
(...) Some of her staff now appear to be putting the pieces in place in case Palin does decide to run. One of the aides, who only eats kosher food, told a local rabbi he was looking into longer term arrangements in Iowa.
"He was looking to be able to accommodate the needs of those coming down looking to set up shop here for campaigning in the coming years," said Yossi Jacobson of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement in Des Moines. (...)
Sarah Palin drops 2012 presidency hint with staff visit to Iowa
(...) Sarah Palin has dropped another hint of her intention to run for the White House in 2012, dispatching aides to scope out office space in Iowa, the first stop in the presidential race.
(...) In the course of making arrangements for that tour, two aides organising Palin's visit to Des Moines on 27 November told locals they were looking into office space and other logistical needs for the coming year, the Guardian has learned.
(...) Some of her staff now appear to be putting the pieces in place in case Palin does decide to run. One of the aides, who only eats kosher food, told a local rabbi he was looking into longer term arrangements in Iowa.
"He was looking to be able to accommodate the needs of those coming down looking to set up shop here for campaigning in the coming years," said Yossi Jacobson of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement in Des Moines. (...)
Discurso de Huckabee ante la IFPC
domingo, 21 de noviembre de 2010
Huckabee, de vuelta en Iowa
Antes de pronunciar su discurso ante la Iowa Family Policy Center (IFPC), el Gobernador Mike Huckabee ha atendido a la prensa en la First Federated Church, en Des Moines, Iowa. Lo ha hecho flanqueado por Bob Vander Plaats (el tipo que está a su lado en el video), jefe de su victoriosa campaña en Iowa en 2008 y ahora presidente de The Family Leader, un consorcio que agrupa a organizaciones conservadoras sociales como la IFPC. En caso de que Huckabee decida presentarse, este hombre puede reclutar para él un poderosísimo ejército de voluntarios para ganar el Caucus de Iowa.
El ex Gobernador de Arkansas ha dicho que aún no ha tomado una decisión sobre si presentarse o no a Presidente en 2012: "no tengo un calendario establecido. No me he puesto una fecha límite para decir 'este es el momento en que tengo que decidir (si me presento)'. ¿Estoy dejando la puerta abierta? Sí. ¿Estoy abierto a considerarlo? Por supuesto."
El ex Gobernador de Arkansas ha dicho que aún no ha tomado una decisión sobre si presentarse o no a Presidente en 2012: "no tengo un calendario establecido. No me he puesto una fecha límite para decir 'este es el momento en que tengo que decidir (si me presento)'. ¿Estoy dejando la puerta abierta? Sí. ¿Estoy abierto a considerarlo? Por supuesto."
Jindal: "Presidente no en 2012; VP tal vez"
Hoy en Meet The Press:
(...) DAVID GREGORY: "¿No quiere ser Presidente en 2012?"
GOBERNADOR JINDAL (de Louisiana): "No. Tienes la cinta de lo que dije la última vez."
DAVID GREGORY: "La tengo. ¿Estaría en un ticket presidencial? ¿Sería el número dos?"
GOBERNADOR JINDAL: "Mira, me presentó a la reelección en 2011. Me presento a Gobernador de Louisiana. Habrá otros candidatos que se presenten a Presidente y Vicepresidente."
DAVID GREGORY: "¿Descartaría ser el número dos en el ticket?"
GOBERNADOR JINDAL: "No voy a rechazar algo que no se me ha ofrecido."
DAVID GREGORY: "Vale."
GOBERNADOR JINDAL: "Pero no me presento a Vicepresidente."
DAVID GREGORY: "¿Le gustaría ser Presidente algún día?"
GOBERNADOR JINDAL: "Mi única aspiración política es ser reelegido Gobernador para un segundo mandato. Hemos recortado el gasto en Louisiana. Portfolio.com dice que hemos hecho la segunda mejor gestión económica del país. No vamos a subir impuestos..." (...)
(...) DAVID GREGORY: "¿No quiere ser Presidente en 2012?"
GOBERNADOR JINDAL (de Louisiana): "No. Tienes la cinta de lo que dije la última vez."
DAVID GREGORY: "La tengo. ¿Estaría en un ticket presidencial? ¿Sería el número dos?"
GOBERNADOR JINDAL: "Mira, me presentó a la reelección en 2011. Me presento a Gobernador de Louisiana. Habrá otros candidatos que se presenten a Presidente y Vicepresidente."
DAVID GREGORY: "¿Descartaría ser el número dos en el ticket?"
GOBERNADOR JINDAL: "No voy a rechazar algo que no se me ha ofrecido."
DAVID GREGORY: "Vale."
GOBERNADOR JINDAL: "Pero no me presento a Vicepresidente."
DAVID GREGORY: "¿Le gustaría ser Presidente algún día?"
GOBERNADOR JINDAL: "Mi única aspiración política es ser reelegido Gobernador para un segundo mandato. Hemos recortado el gasto en Louisiana. Portfolio.com dice que hemos hecho la segunda mejor gestión económica del país. No vamos a subir impuestos..." (...)
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Perry: "No quiero ser Presidente"
Hoy en Fox News Sunday:
(...) CHRIS WALLACE: "Ha dicho repetidamente que no va a presentarse a Presidente. ¿Por qué no?"
GOBERNADOR PERRY (de Texas): "Ser el Gobernador de un estado como Texas, Oklahoma o New Mexico será un trabajo más fundamental en el futuro. Espero verdaderamente que haya alguien que diga, 'voy a Washington a recuperar nuestras raíces constitucionales, a transferir esta centralización del Gobierno de vuelta a los estados.' ¿Así que por qué querer estar allí si la acción está aquí en los estados?"
CHRIS WALLACE: "Cuando asumió la presidencia de la Republican Governors Association (RGA), ¿tuvo que comprometerse a que no se presentaría a Presidente (de los Estados Unidos)?"
GOBERNADOR PERRY: "He expresado ese compromiso cada vez que me han preguntado, y lo mantengo. No quiero ser Presidente de los Estados Unidos. Quiero trabajar con los gobernadores por todo el país para hacer que los estados sean más importantes, más poderosos, como deberían ser." (...)
(...) CHRIS WALLACE: "Ha dicho repetidamente que no va a presentarse a Presidente. ¿Por qué no?"
GOBERNADOR PERRY (de Texas): "Ser el Gobernador de un estado como Texas, Oklahoma o New Mexico será un trabajo más fundamental en el futuro. Espero verdaderamente que haya alguien que diga, 'voy a Washington a recuperar nuestras raíces constitucionales, a transferir esta centralización del Gobierno de vuelta a los estados.' ¿Así que por qué querer estar allí si la acción está aquí en los estados?"
CHRIS WALLACE: "Cuando asumió la presidencia de la Republican Governors Association (RGA), ¿tuvo que comprometerse a que no se presentaría a Presidente (de los Estados Unidos)?"
GOBERNADOR PERRY: "He expresado ese compromiso cada vez que me han preguntado, y lo mantengo. No quiero ser Presidente de los Estados Unidos. Quiero trabajar con los gobernadores por todo el país para hacer que los estados sean más importantes, más poderosos, como deberían ser." (...)
Barbara Bush espera que Palin se quede en Alaska
Barbara Bush, esposa, madre y sobrina-tataranieta de Presidentes, la Primera Dama más popular de la historia (86% de popularidad cuando entró en la Casa Blanca y 85% cuando salió, según Gallup), conocida por su enorme franqueza y absoluta falta de diplomacia, se ha pronunciado sobre Sarah Palin: "Me senté a su lado una vez, me pareció muy bonita, y creo que es muy feliz en Alaska y espero que se quede allí."
sábado, 20 de noviembre de 2010
viernes, 19 de noviembre de 2010
Barbour y Daniels esperarán hasta abril-mayo
Los Gobernadores Haley Barbour (Mississippi) y Mitch Daniels (Indiana) aprovecharon la conferencia de la RGA para charlar con los reporteros sobre sus planes presidenciales. Coincidieron en señalar abril-mayo como fecha para el anuncio de candidaturas, en caso de producirse.
Mitch Daniels:
(...) "I'm going to spend the next five to six months effecting another round of big reforms in our state. We've got a great opportunity to do some things we haven't gotten to do yet," added Daniels, who governs a state where Republicans just took over the state House. "Maybe in a spare moment along the line I'll think about it." (...)
Haley Barbour:
(...) "I don't feel any time pressure. I have a responsibility to the citizens of Mississippi. We have a legislative session with a very tough budget and I'm going to fulfill my responsibility," Barbour said. Asked whether he was considering the race, Barbour conceded: "I am. And my family, we have begun to talk about it, and some people whose opinions I respect. But I haven't asked anybody to sit down and kind of lay out what a budget would be and a timeline."
(...) "Once a person becomes a candidate or perceived as a candidate, if that person isn't dedicating the vast majority of his or her time to running, then it actually hurts them. So I'm not going to make a decision to run until I both decide that I should do it, and I'm prepared to pretty well go most if not full-time from that point forward," he said.
(...) "This is all-consuming, somebody running for president of the United States. Running is the easy part. If you get it, you're talking about all-consuming. Do you want to give ten years of your life? Because you have to be prepared to do that," Barbour said. "You have to be prepared to run, win and serve two terms. Whether you end up succeeding or not, you have to be prepared to do that, and that's a very big commitment. You know, I'm 63 years old. So I'd spend the rest of my useful life essentially doing nothing but this. There's a lot to think about, because if you do it you owe the country to be in whole hog." (...)
Barbour también tuvo buenas palabras para el Gobernador Palenty (Minnesota):
(...) Barbour also told reporters Thursday he was happy he had chosen Pawlenty as vice chairman of the RGA. Pawlenty's tenure, Barbour said, would help if the Minnesotan decides to go forward with a White House bid.
"My belief was that he was thinking about running for president. To run for president, you've really got to learn to raise money. But the Minnesota campaign finance laws are such that the governor of Minnesota never really had much opportunity to raise money. And so I appointed him to this because I thought it would be good for him if he decided to run, but I also thought he had every incentive to go out and raise a bunch of money for us so he'd learn how, and we'd be the beneficiary of that. And I turned out to be right, he raised a bunch of money for us," Barbour said. "I was proud of myself." (...)
Mitch Daniels:
(...) "I'm going to spend the next five to six months effecting another round of big reforms in our state. We've got a great opportunity to do some things we haven't gotten to do yet," added Daniels, who governs a state where Republicans just took over the state House. "Maybe in a spare moment along the line I'll think about it." (...)
Haley Barbour:
(...) "I don't feel any time pressure. I have a responsibility to the citizens of Mississippi. We have a legislative session with a very tough budget and I'm going to fulfill my responsibility," Barbour said. Asked whether he was considering the race, Barbour conceded: "I am. And my family, we have begun to talk about it, and some people whose opinions I respect. But I haven't asked anybody to sit down and kind of lay out what a budget would be and a timeline."
(...) "Once a person becomes a candidate or perceived as a candidate, if that person isn't dedicating the vast majority of his or her time to running, then it actually hurts them. So I'm not going to make a decision to run until I both decide that I should do it, and I'm prepared to pretty well go most if not full-time from that point forward," he said.
(...) "This is all-consuming, somebody running for president of the United States. Running is the easy part. If you get it, you're talking about all-consuming. Do you want to give ten years of your life? Because you have to be prepared to do that," Barbour said. "You have to be prepared to run, win and serve two terms. Whether you end up succeeding or not, you have to be prepared to do that, and that's a very big commitment. You know, I'm 63 years old. So I'd spend the rest of my useful life essentially doing nothing but this. There's a lot to think about, because if you do it you owe the country to be in whole hog." (...)
Barbour también tuvo buenas palabras para el Gobernador Palenty (Minnesota):
(...) Barbour also told reporters Thursday he was happy he had chosen Pawlenty as vice chairman of the RGA. Pawlenty's tenure, Barbour said, would help if the Minnesotan decides to go forward with a White House bid.
"My belief was that he was thinking about running for president. To run for president, you've really got to learn to raise money. But the Minnesota campaign finance laws are such that the governor of Minnesota never really had much opportunity to raise money. And so I appointed him to this because I thought it would be good for him if he decided to run, but I also thought he had every incentive to go out and raise a bunch of money for us so he'd learn how, and we'd be the beneficiary of that. And I turned out to be right, he raised a bunch of money for us," Barbour said. "I was proud of myself." (...)
Palin en el dominical del NYT
Robert Draper dedica un reportaje de siete páginas a Sarah Palin en el suplemento dominical del New York Times de esta semana.
The Palin Network
(...) On the night of the midterm elections earlier this month, Sarah Palin stayed up until 3 in the morning. From her hotel bedroom in Manhattan, she and her husband, Todd, followed the returns while she wrote e-mails on her iPad — congratulating winners, consoling losers — while reading others from people who wanted her to know that they had cast their vote for her daughter Bristol on “Dancing With the Stars” the evening before. Like much of her recent life, Palin’s day had been replete with reminders of the clout she had rapidly acquired. She had spent most of her time ensconced at the Fox television studios, though she managed to squeeze in a jog in Central Park — which she promptly chronicled on Twitter: “Beautiful!”
Also at the studios was her fellow Fox News contributor Karl Rove, who had recently questioned in a British newspaper whether Palin’s new reality TV series, “Sarah Palin’s Alaska,” made her appear Oval Office-worthy. The building was abuzz over what would ensue when the two would inevitably bump into each other. The moment came after Palin finished a segment with the anchor Bret Baier and saw Rove lingering stageside with Brit Hume, a Fox colleague, holding a well-marked copy of “Alaska for Dummies” — a prop clearly intended to mollify Palin. She laughed, used her phone’s camera to take a picture of Rove with the book, traded brief hellos and then left the studio without mentioning Rove’s earlier comment.
Continúa (...)
The Palin Network
(...) On the night of the midterm elections earlier this month, Sarah Palin stayed up until 3 in the morning. From her hotel bedroom in Manhattan, she and her husband, Todd, followed the returns while she wrote e-mails on her iPad — congratulating winners, consoling losers — while reading others from people who wanted her to know that they had cast their vote for her daughter Bristol on “Dancing With the Stars” the evening before. Like much of her recent life, Palin’s day had been replete with reminders of the clout she had rapidly acquired. She had spent most of her time ensconced at the Fox television studios, though she managed to squeeze in a jog in Central Park — which she promptly chronicled on Twitter: “Beautiful!”
Also at the studios was her fellow Fox News contributor Karl Rove, who had recently questioned in a British newspaper whether Palin’s new reality TV series, “Sarah Palin’s Alaska,” made her appear Oval Office-worthy. The building was abuzz over what would ensue when the two would inevitably bump into each other. The moment came after Palin finished a segment with the anchor Bret Baier and saw Rove lingering stageside with Brit Hume, a Fox colleague, holding a well-marked copy of “Alaska for Dummies” — a prop clearly intended to mollify Palin. She laughed, used her phone’s camera to take a picture of Rove with the book, traded brief hellos and then left the studio without mentioning Rove’s earlier comment.
Continúa (...)
jueves, 18 de noviembre de 2010
12 in 2012: Mike Huckabee
Ex Gobernador Mike Huckabee, de Arkansas.
Sobre las presidenciales dice: "es todo mucho más sobre el dinero que sobre el mensaje. Y al centrarnos más en el proceso que en la política, terminamos prestando atención a la gente que no necesariamente tiene las mejores ideas, sino a la gente con la maquinaria y el dinero, incluso aunque sus mensajes ni siquiera sean convincentes."
Sobre las presidenciales dice: "es todo mucho más sobre el dinero que sobre el mensaje. Y al centrarnos más en el proceso que en la política, terminamos prestando atención a la gente que no necesariamente tiene las mejores ideas, sino a la gente con la maquinaria y el dinero, incluso aunque sus mensajes ni siquiera sean convincentes."
Próximos retos de Daniels
El National Review nos explica la importancia que tiene para el Gobernador Mitch Daniels que los republicanos hayan recuperado la mayoría en la Legislatura de Indiana. Con la nueva mayoría, Daniels buscará recortar el presupuesto estatal y desregular el sistema educativo antes de decidir si se lanza a la Presidencia.
Mitch Daniels’s Next Hurdle
(...) Cutting Indiana’s budget even further will be hard, but a newly Republican legislature will help.
Right after the 2008 general election, in which Barack Obama became the first Democratic presidential candidate to win Indiana since Lyndon Johnson, Gov. Mitch Daniels decided it was the perfect time to stage a Republican comeback. His goal was to win a GOP majority in the state house of representatives, which had been Democrat-controlled since 2006.
On Election Day this year, Daniels succeeded: The GOP gained a majority in the house and picked up enough seats in the state senate to give Republicans a supermajority. The careful planning begun in 2008 and intensified in 2009 by Daniels and other Indiana Republican leaders had paid off.
The importance of gaining a legislative majority is illustrated by the 2009 budget fight, one of the most contentious the state has had in recent years. Democrats and Republicans disagreed on many things, most notably how much to increase education spending and whether the state should use some of its reserve fund. When legislators were unable to pass a budget in the regular session, they went into special session. Ultimately, just hours before the state government would have had to shut down, they passed a budget that used $300 million of the state’s reserve fund and increased education spending more than Republicans would have liked.
Continúa (...)
Mitch Daniels’s Next Hurdle
(...) Cutting Indiana’s budget even further will be hard, but a newly Republican legislature will help.
Right after the 2008 general election, in which Barack Obama became the first Democratic presidential candidate to win Indiana since Lyndon Johnson, Gov. Mitch Daniels decided it was the perfect time to stage a Republican comeback. His goal was to win a GOP majority in the state house of representatives, which had been Democrat-controlled since 2006.
On Election Day this year, Daniels succeeded: The GOP gained a majority in the house and picked up enough seats in the state senate to give Republicans a supermajority. The careful planning begun in 2008 and intensified in 2009 by Daniels and other Indiana Republican leaders had paid off.
The importance of gaining a legislative majority is illustrated by the 2009 budget fight, one of the most contentious the state has had in recent years. Democrats and Republicans disagreed on many things, most notably how much to increase education spending and whether the state should use some of its reserve fund. When legislators were unable to pass a budget in the regular session, they went into special session. Ultimately, just hours before the state government would have had to shut down, they passed a budget that used $300 million of the state’s reserve fund and increased education spending more than Republicans would have liked.
Continúa (...)
RGA no quiere a Steele
Parece que hay consenso en la conferencia anual de la Republican Governors Association (RGA) sobre la necesidad de sustituir a Michael Steele como presidente del Partido Republicano. Barbour, Pawlenty, Perry o el recién elegido Gobernador de Wisconsin Scott Walker se han expresado con bastante claridad en ese sentido.
El nombre que está ganando terreno en los últimos días como posible alternativa a Steele es el jovencísimo director ejecutivo de la RGA, Nick Ayers (leer este perfil que le dedicó el Washington Post hace unos meses). Ayers no forma parte del actual Comité Nacional Republicano. En caso de llegarse a la conclusión de que un miembro del actual comité tendría más posibilidades de derrotar a Steele, suenan sobre todo tres nombres: Saul Anuzis, ex presidente del Partido Republicano de Michigan; Reince Priebus, presidente del GOP de Wisconsin; y Gentry Collins, el recién dimitido director político del RNC.
Top governors turn against Michael Steele
(...) SAN DIEGO — Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele’s prospects for a second term dimmed Wednesday as Republicans went public with their concerns about the committee’s fundraising and two prominent governors indicated a preference for new leadership atop the party.
Asked in an interview at the Republican Governors Association meeting here whether there should be a new chairman of the party, Mississippi Gov. and outgoing RGA Chairman Haley Barbour flatly said: “Yes.”
“To defeat an incumbent president, even one that’s got the political problems of this one, the RNC has to operate at absolutely maximum capacity, and this year they operated far, far, far below that in terms of fundraising, in terms of grass-roots organization and in terms of building strong, self-reliant state parties,” said Barbour, an influential voice in the GOP and himself a former national party chairman.
In a separate interview, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, the incoming RGA chairman and one of the nation’s longest-serving governors, didn’t say directly that Steele should go but made an impassioned case for members of the RNC to consider Nick Ayers, executive director of the governors association.
Continúa (...)
El nombre que está ganando terreno en los últimos días como posible alternativa a Steele es el jovencísimo director ejecutivo de la RGA, Nick Ayers (leer este perfil que le dedicó el Washington Post hace unos meses). Ayers no forma parte del actual Comité Nacional Republicano. En caso de llegarse a la conclusión de que un miembro del actual comité tendría más posibilidades de derrotar a Steele, suenan sobre todo tres nombres: Saul Anuzis, ex presidente del Partido Republicano de Michigan; Reince Priebus, presidente del GOP de Wisconsin; y Gentry Collins, el recién dimitido director político del RNC.
Top governors turn against Michael Steele
(...) SAN DIEGO — Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele’s prospects for a second term dimmed Wednesday as Republicans went public with their concerns about the committee’s fundraising and two prominent governors indicated a preference for new leadership atop the party.
Asked in an interview at the Republican Governors Association meeting here whether there should be a new chairman of the party, Mississippi Gov. and outgoing RGA Chairman Haley Barbour flatly said: “Yes.”
“To defeat an incumbent president, even one that’s got the political problems of this one, the RNC has to operate at absolutely maximum capacity, and this year they operated far, far, far below that in terms of fundraising, in terms of grass-roots organization and in terms of building strong, self-reliant state parties,” said Barbour, an influential voice in the GOP and himself a former national party chairman.
In a separate interview, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, the incoming RGA chairman and one of the nation’s longest-serving governors, didn’t say directly that Steele should go but made an impassioned case for members of the RNC to consider Nick Ayers, executive director of the governors association.
Continúa (...)
12 in 2012: Mike Pence
Congresista Mike Pence, de Indiana. En septiembre ganó por sorpresa el straw poll del Values Voter Summit, el encuentro anual de los conservadores sociales, adquiriendo status de candidato serio. En su contra juega el hecho de que los Gobernadores y Senadores suelen tenerlo más fácil que los miembros de la Cámara de Representantes. El último Congresista que se hizo con la nominación de uno de los dos grandes partidos fue John W. Davis en 1924, el último demócrata jeffersoniano. Los republicanos no nominan a un Congresista desde James Garfield en 1880.
miércoles, 17 de noviembre de 2010
Los tea partiers adoran a Palin pero esperan a otro candidato
Tras dedicar los últimos meses a hacer un seguimiento del Tea Party, incluyendo entrevistas con sus activistas, Jon Ward (The Daily Caller) llega a la conclusión de que la historia de amor entre estos y Palin no tiene que traducirse necesariamente en un respaldo del movimiento a las ambiciones presidenciales de la ex Gobernadora de Alaska. Una gran parte de los tea partiers (mayoría según Ward) simpatizan con Palin pero no la ven presidenciable.
Palin a hero to many in Tea Party but not their pick for President
(...) “I like Palin,” said Alan Reasin, a 65-year old retired nuclear power plant engineer from Conowingo, Md, holding a large “Don’t Tread on Me” flag outside the U.S. Capitol Monday at a small rally featuring Tea Party favorites Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican, and Rep. Michele Bachmann, Minnesota Republican.
But Reasin, who is on the steering committee of the Cecil County Tea Party Patriots, said he thought Gen. David Petraeus, the decorated military official who commands U.S. forces in Afghanistan, should run for president.
As for Palin, Reasin said, “She’s got too many negatives, not for me, but for too many people. So I think she’s better off on the outside looking in.”
(...) Brenda Tackett, a white-haired retiree from Bristol, Tennessee, traveled to the rally Monday with 29 others on a bus paid for by Americans for Prosperity, a Washington-based conservative group. She held a hand-painted sign that read, “Listen to the People.”
Tackett said Palin might make a good vice president.
“She’s a very smart lady, a very good speaker, but being a woman I think they’ll be after her tooth and nail,” Tackett said. “I don’t think she would hold the main ticket … I think it’s going to take someone a little more powerful than Sarah, that has more connections, that will be able to carry the country with more supporters.”
(...) Katherine McArthur, a 58-year old retired real estate agent and mother of two from Newport Beach, Calif., flew to Washington for the Beck rally and showed up 48 hours early, sleeping two nights on the Mall with nothing more than a camping chair.
“I guess I don’t have confidence in her, at this point in her career,” McArthur said of Palin.
Her friend, Linda Lumsden, a 58-year old skincare specialist also from Newport Beach, was more forceful in her opinion.
“I would like to see someone else emerge. I think she’s too divisive,” Lumsden said. “It’s good for her to be part of the party. I have nothing against her. But I just think a leader has to be more articulate than she is. I just don’t think that person’s emerged yet.”
Adam Washburn, a 47-year old plumber from Oceanside, Calif., also slept on the Mall overnight in a camping chair to save his spot up front at the Beck rally.
“I could support Sarah Palin, but I don’t think she is the one. VP yes, president not so much,” Washburn said in an e-mail this week. “Unfortunately I think the media beat her up too much, and I think she can be more valuable doing other things for the conservative movement.”
“I’m not sure if we have seen the one who needs to run. It has to be someone who can articulate the conservative message like a Buckley or Reagan,” Washburn said. “We have time to find someone. I do like Chris Christie, and Marco Rubio.”
(...) Ryan Rhodes, chairman of the Iowa Tea Party Patriots, said that if the Iowa caucuses were held today, Huckabee would win. Palin, he said, has strong support and would come in second to Huckabee. But he also said many in the grassroots are unsure about the former Alaska governor, based on her performance in the 2008 election
(...) A national Tea Party organizer who talks to activists around the country said he sees the same dynamic everywhere when it comes to Palin.
“Lot’s love her on a personal level, and as a conservative icon, but I haven’t heard widespread support for her as a presidential candidate,” he said. “I think the candidates who will be on top in 2012 have yet to really emerge from the pack … Folks have interest in Mike Pence and of course [Sen. Jim] DeMint. I would guess that if asked, DeMint would be the top choice of Tea Party folks right now. He’s fighting the establishment from inside, and I think that will be a plus in 2012.”
Bob MacGuffie, a libertarian-leaning Republican activist involved in the Connecticut Tea Party movement, said that Palin “is a fantastic organizer for the conservative movement — she is pitch perfect on the stump.”
“I would hope she keeps doing that through the 2012 cycle. There are other, better positioned, more qualified candidates the Republican Party could nominate,” MacGuffie said. (...)
Palin a hero to many in Tea Party but not their pick for President
(...) “I like Palin,” said Alan Reasin, a 65-year old retired nuclear power plant engineer from Conowingo, Md, holding a large “Don’t Tread on Me” flag outside the U.S. Capitol Monday at a small rally featuring Tea Party favorites Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican, and Rep. Michele Bachmann, Minnesota Republican.
But Reasin, who is on the steering committee of the Cecil County Tea Party Patriots, said he thought Gen. David Petraeus, the decorated military official who commands U.S. forces in Afghanistan, should run for president.
As for Palin, Reasin said, “She’s got too many negatives, not for me, but for too many people. So I think she’s better off on the outside looking in.”
(...) Brenda Tackett, a white-haired retiree from Bristol, Tennessee, traveled to the rally Monday with 29 others on a bus paid for by Americans for Prosperity, a Washington-based conservative group. She held a hand-painted sign that read, “Listen to the People.”
Tackett said Palin might make a good vice president.
“She’s a very smart lady, a very good speaker, but being a woman I think they’ll be after her tooth and nail,” Tackett said. “I don’t think she would hold the main ticket … I think it’s going to take someone a little more powerful than Sarah, that has more connections, that will be able to carry the country with more supporters.”
(...) Katherine McArthur, a 58-year old retired real estate agent and mother of two from Newport Beach, Calif., flew to Washington for the Beck rally and showed up 48 hours early, sleeping two nights on the Mall with nothing more than a camping chair.
“I guess I don’t have confidence in her, at this point in her career,” McArthur said of Palin.
Her friend, Linda Lumsden, a 58-year old skincare specialist also from Newport Beach, was more forceful in her opinion.
“I would like to see someone else emerge. I think she’s too divisive,” Lumsden said. “It’s good for her to be part of the party. I have nothing against her. But I just think a leader has to be more articulate than she is. I just don’t think that person’s emerged yet.”
Adam Washburn, a 47-year old plumber from Oceanside, Calif., also slept on the Mall overnight in a camping chair to save his spot up front at the Beck rally.
“I could support Sarah Palin, but I don’t think she is the one. VP yes, president not so much,” Washburn said in an e-mail this week. “Unfortunately I think the media beat her up too much, and I think she can be more valuable doing other things for the conservative movement.”
“I’m not sure if we have seen the one who needs to run. It has to be someone who can articulate the conservative message like a Buckley or Reagan,” Washburn said. “We have time to find someone. I do like Chris Christie, and Marco Rubio.”
(...) Ryan Rhodes, chairman of the Iowa Tea Party Patriots, said that if the Iowa caucuses were held today, Huckabee would win. Palin, he said, has strong support and would come in second to Huckabee. But he also said many in the grassroots are unsure about the former Alaska governor, based on her performance in the 2008 election
(...) A national Tea Party organizer who talks to activists around the country said he sees the same dynamic everywhere when it comes to Palin.
“Lot’s love her on a personal level, and as a conservative icon, but I haven’t heard widespread support for her as a presidential candidate,” he said. “I think the candidates who will be on top in 2012 have yet to really emerge from the pack … Folks have interest in Mike Pence and of course [Sen. Jim] DeMint. I would guess that if asked, DeMint would be the top choice of Tea Party folks right now. He’s fighting the establishment from inside, and I think that will be a plus in 2012.”
Bob MacGuffie, a libertarian-leaning Republican activist involved in the Connecticut Tea Party movement, said that Palin “is a fantastic organizer for the conservative movement — she is pitch perfect on the stump.”
“I would hope she keeps doing that through the 2012 cycle. There are other, better positioned, more qualified candidates the Republican Party could nominate,” MacGuffie said. (...)
"History is on Our Side"
Este web ad producido por su comité de acción política, nos permite intuir cual será la narrativa de la campaña presidencial del Gobernador Tim Pawlenty. Es una narrativa que lo puede convertir en un candidato muy del agrado del Tea Party sin dejar de ser un republicano corriente.
Detalla sus orígenes en una familia trabajadora de Saint Paul y su trabajo en una tienda de ultramarinos después de la muerte de su madre siendo él un adolescente, que conectan con su habilidad para comprender la ansiedad económica de las clases medias. Y expone una filosofía política sencilla (austeridad, Gobierno limitado, responsabilidad individual, respeto a la tradición liberal-conservadora de la República) que resume como una vuelta al "good old-fashioned american common sense".
Detalla sus orígenes en una familia trabajadora de Saint Paul y su trabajo en una tienda de ultramarinos después de la muerte de su madre siendo él un adolescente, que conectan con su habilidad para comprender la ansiedad económica de las clases medias. Y expone una filosofía política sencilla (austeridad, Gobierno limitado, responsabilidad individual, respeto a la tradición liberal-conservadora de la República) que resume como una vuelta al "good old-fashioned american common sense".
Reunión de la RGA en San Diego
Entre hoy y mañana se celebra en San Diego, California, la conferencia anual de la Republican Governors Association (RGA). Participarán varios posibles candidatos presidenciales: Barbour, Pawlenty, Daniels, Christie y Jindal, entre otros. También se tratará la posición a tomar ante las próximas elecciones a la presidencia nacional del Partido Republicano, y varios posibles sustitutos de Michael Steele mantendrán reuniones con los Gobernadores.
El Gobernador Rick Perry, de Texas, será nombrado nuevo presidente de la RGA, sucediendo a Barbour, lo que le descartaría como candidato presidencial porque de otro modo no hubiera aceptado la responsabilidad y tendrá que ocuparse de las elecciones a Gobernador en Louisiana, Kentucky y Mississippi que tendrán lugar en otoño de 2011.
(...) At least five possible GOP '12 presidential contenders and a trio of newly elected women governors will share the spotlight here today at the Republican Governors Association's annual conference, where Texas Gov. Rick Perry will be formally elected to head the group.
Perry, who succeeds Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour as RGA chairman, is also flogging a new book, "Fed Up: Our Fight to Save America From Washington," as is Minnesota's Tim Pawlenty (author of the forthcoming "Courage to Stand: An American Story") and Louisiana's Bobby Jindal (whose own new tome is "Leadership and Crisis"). Barbour, Pawlenty, Jindal, the so-far-bookless Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, and RGA guest panelist Newt Gingrich are all rumored to be seriously considering a White House run.
(...) Governors-elect Nikki Haley of South Carolina, the country's first Indian-American governor, New Mexico's Susana Martinez, the first Hispanic woman to be elected governor, and Oklahoma's Mary Fallin, who drew national notice for "playing the mommy card'' against her childless female opponent, are also scheduled to attend the meeting, where a main topic of conversation will be whether gaffe-prone Michael Steele should have a second term running the Republican National Committee; Barbour has already said flatly that he should be replaced.
Perry, the Texas governor who was easily elected to a third term earlier this month, effectively took himself off the list of presidential aspirants by accepting the job as top fundraiser for the committee. He will also be heavily involved in the three gubernatorial contests in 2011 -- in Louisiana, Mississippi and Kentucky.
(...) Other governors scheduled to attend the meetings in San Diego include Utah's Gary Herbert, Arizona's Jan Brewer, Nebraska's Dave Heineman, Hawaii's Linda Lingle, Georgia's Sonny Perdue, Vermont's Jim Douglas, South Dakota's Mike Rounds, New Jersey's Chris Christie, Rhode Island's Don Carcieri, Puerto Rico's Luis Fortuno, Idaho's Butch Otter, Virginia's Bob McDonnell, Alabama's Bob Riley, and South Carolina's Mark Sanford, who despite having recovered from his scandal, according to the New York Times, is not scheduled to attend the press briefings.
Newly elected incoming governors who've said they will be here include Pennsylvania's Tom Corbett, Georgia's Nathan Deal, Florida's Rick Scott, Tennessee's Bill Haslam, Ohio's John Kasich, Wisconsin's Scott Walker, South Dakota's Dennis Daugaard, Wyoming's Matt Mead, Nevada's Brian Sandoval, Michigan's Rick Snyder, Alabama's Robert Bentley and Maine's Paul LePage. (...)
El Gobernador Rick Perry, de Texas, será nombrado nuevo presidente de la RGA, sucediendo a Barbour, lo que le descartaría como candidato presidencial porque de otro modo no hubiera aceptado la responsabilidad y tendrá que ocuparse de las elecciones a Gobernador en Louisiana, Kentucky y Mississippi que tendrán lugar en otoño de 2011.
(...) At least five possible GOP '12 presidential contenders and a trio of newly elected women governors will share the spotlight here today at the Republican Governors Association's annual conference, where Texas Gov. Rick Perry will be formally elected to head the group.
Perry, who succeeds Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour as RGA chairman, is also flogging a new book, "Fed Up: Our Fight to Save America From Washington," as is Minnesota's Tim Pawlenty (author of the forthcoming "Courage to Stand: An American Story") and Louisiana's Bobby Jindal (whose own new tome is "Leadership and Crisis"). Barbour, Pawlenty, Jindal, the so-far-bookless Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, and RGA guest panelist Newt Gingrich are all rumored to be seriously considering a White House run.
(...) Governors-elect Nikki Haley of South Carolina, the country's first Indian-American governor, New Mexico's Susana Martinez, the first Hispanic woman to be elected governor, and Oklahoma's Mary Fallin, who drew national notice for "playing the mommy card'' against her childless female opponent, are also scheduled to attend the meeting, where a main topic of conversation will be whether gaffe-prone Michael Steele should have a second term running the Republican National Committee; Barbour has already said flatly that he should be replaced.
Perry, the Texas governor who was easily elected to a third term earlier this month, effectively took himself off the list of presidential aspirants by accepting the job as top fundraiser for the committee. He will also be heavily involved in the three gubernatorial contests in 2011 -- in Louisiana, Mississippi and Kentucky.
(...) Other governors scheduled to attend the meetings in San Diego include Utah's Gary Herbert, Arizona's Jan Brewer, Nebraska's Dave Heineman, Hawaii's Linda Lingle, Georgia's Sonny Perdue, Vermont's Jim Douglas, South Dakota's Mike Rounds, New Jersey's Chris Christie, Rhode Island's Don Carcieri, Puerto Rico's Luis Fortuno, Idaho's Butch Otter, Virginia's Bob McDonnell, Alabama's Bob Riley, and South Carolina's Mark Sanford, who despite having recovered from his scandal, according to the New York Times, is not scheduled to attend the press briefings.
Newly elected incoming governors who've said they will be here include Pennsylvania's Tom Corbett, Georgia's Nathan Deal, Florida's Rick Scott, Tennessee's Bill Haslam, Ohio's John Kasich, Wisconsin's Scott Walker, South Dakota's Dennis Daugaard, Wyoming's Matt Mead, Nevada's Brian Sandoval, Michigan's Rick Snyder, Alabama's Robert Bentley and Maine's Paul LePage. (...)
Thune en Your World y On The Record
Ayer en Your World (FOX News):
NEIL CAVUTO: "Cuentas con abundantes fondos de financiación, más de 7 millones de dólares ya, podrías presentarte. ¿Lo harás?"
SENADOR THUNE: "Lo estamos pensando. Tenemos varios buenos candidatos. Lo que sé es que necesitamos un candidato que se enfrente a este Presidente y esperar que los derrote a él y a su agenda y nos devuelva al camino..."
NEIL CAVUTO: "¿Cual sería tu causa? ¿Qué sería lo que te diferenciaría de los demás?"
SENADOR THUNE: "Bueno, pienso que soy alguien que cree que el papel del gobierno federal debe ser limitado. Lo que hemos visto en los últimos dos años, bajo esta administración, es la mayor expansión del gobierno desde los años 60. Creo en la libre empresa y la libertad económica y que la manera de crear empleos es expandiendo la economía, no expandiendo el Gobierno. Hay muy diferentes visiones filosóficas sobre cómo enfrentar la tarea de crear empleo y crecimiento económico, sobre cómo enfrentar el problema del gasto y el déficit, sobre cómo enfrentar el desafío de mantener este país seguro y fuerte en el futuro. Así que habrá muchos contrastes entre quien sea nuestro candidato y el Presidente, pero necesitamos a alguien que sea capaz de estar en el ruedo, argumentar y ofrecer al pueblo americano una opción clara."
NEIL CAVUTO: "Pero está claro que, si anunciaras que te presentas, mucho antes lo harías aquí que, digamos, en el prorgama de Bill O'Reilly, ¿no?"
(RISAS)
SENADOR THUNE: "Por supuesto, siempre, Neil. Sabes que eres el primero."
También estuvo en el programa de Greta Van Susteren (On The Record) para defender la extensión de los recortes fiscales de 2001 y 2003.
NEIL CAVUTO: "Cuentas con abundantes fondos de financiación, más de 7 millones de dólares ya, podrías presentarte. ¿Lo harás?"
SENADOR THUNE: "Lo estamos pensando. Tenemos varios buenos candidatos. Lo que sé es que necesitamos un candidato que se enfrente a este Presidente y esperar que los derrote a él y a su agenda y nos devuelva al camino..."
NEIL CAVUTO: "¿Cual sería tu causa? ¿Qué sería lo que te diferenciaría de los demás?"
SENADOR THUNE: "Bueno, pienso que soy alguien que cree que el papel del gobierno federal debe ser limitado. Lo que hemos visto en los últimos dos años, bajo esta administración, es la mayor expansión del gobierno desde los años 60. Creo en la libre empresa y la libertad económica y que la manera de crear empleos es expandiendo la economía, no expandiendo el Gobierno. Hay muy diferentes visiones filosóficas sobre cómo enfrentar la tarea de crear empleo y crecimiento económico, sobre cómo enfrentar el problema del gasto y el déficit, sobre cómo enfrentar el desafío de mantener este país seguro y fuerte en el futuro. Así que habrá muchos contrastes entre quien sea nuestro candidato y el Presidente, pero necesitamos a alguien que sea capaz de estar en el ruedo, argumentar y ofrecer al pueblo americano una opción clara."
NEIL CAVUTO: "Pero está claro que, si anunciaras que te presentas, mucho antes lo harías aquí que, digamos, en el prorgama de Bill O'Reilly, ¿no?"
(RISAS)
SENADOR THUNE: "Por supuesto, siempre, Neil. Sabes que eres el primero."
También estuvo en el programa de Greta Van Susteren (On The Record) para defender la extensión de los recortes fiscales de 2001 y 2003.
martes, 16 de noviembre de 2010
Romney inicia una petición online para apoyar la prohibición de earmarks
Hay un consenso más o menos general entre los potenciales candidatos republicanos a la hora de apoyar la propuesta de Jim DeMint de prohibir los gastos que se añaden a las leyes para proyectos particulares (la primera maniobra del Tea Party en la conferencia republicana obligando a los senadores a retratarse) pero Mitt Romney ha tomado la delantera a los demás presidenciables y ha habilitado en la web de su comité de acción política una petición online de apoyo a los esfuerzos de DeMint.
(...) Senator DeMint is courageously standing on conviction with his much-needed proposal to ban earmarks, which will curb wasteful spending and restore accountability to the way Congress spends taxpayer dollars. We all need to recognize that Washington can’t responsibly begin to address out-of-control debt and deficits until the practice of cramming earmarks into spending bills is stopped. While earmarks are not the only cause of our budget proplems (sic), they have come to symbolize what’s wrong with Washington. What was once accepted as the normal way of doing business has to be re-examined in light of our $13 trillion national debt. I encourage all Republicans to embrace Senator DeMint’s earmark ban and send a powerful message that we will no longer tolerate business as usual on Capitol Hill. (...)
(...) Senator DeMint is courageously standing on conviction with his much-needed proposal to ban earmarks, which will curb wasteful spending and restore accountability to the way Congress spends taxpayer dollars. We all need to recognize that Washington can’t responsibly begin to address out-of-control debt and deficits until the practice of cramming earmarks into spending bills is stopped. While earmarks are not the only cause of our budget proplems (sic), they have come to symbolize what’s wrong with Washington. What was once accepted as the normal way of doing business has to be re-examined in light of our $13 trillion national debt. I encourage all Republicans to embrace Senator DeMint’s earmark ban and send a powerful message that we will no longer tolerate business as usual on Capitol Hill. (...)
Conservadores sociales se organizan para el Caucus de Iowa
Bob Vander Plaats, aliado clave de Huckabee en Iowa, está organizando un consorcio de grupos conservadores sociales para jugar un papel activo en el caucus republicano de 2012. Vander Plaats fue candidato a Gobernador este año pero perdió la primaria republicana por poco frente al ahora Gobernador-electo Terry Branstad (aliado de Romney). Después de eso montó una agresiva campaña contra tres jueces liberales del Tribunal Supremo de Iowa y los tres fueron derrotados el pasado 2 de noviembre. El éxito de la campaña contra los jueces ha convertido al personaje en un héroe en los círculos conservadores de Iowa.
Huckabee estará el domingo en Iowa en un acto organizado precisamente por Vander Plaats.
(...) Former Republican candidate for governor Bob Vander Plaats will lead a reorganized conservative policy and political advocacy group aimed in part at becoming an influential player in the campaign for Iowa’s 2012 Republican presidential caucuses.
Vander Plaats, who led a campaign to oust three Iowa Supreme Court justices in the Nov. 2 election, said Monday he will become president and chief executive officer of an umbrella group that includes the Iowa Family Policy Center, Marriage Matters and their political action committee.
Vander Plaats of Sioux City gives the new coalition of socially conservative groups a familiar face as it is plans a more influential role in the caucus campaign than four years ago, including offering its endorsement for the first time.
“We are going to be very engaged in the 2012 cycle. We believe it is our responsibility and our duty to be actively involved in taking a look at the candidates, vetting the candidates and then either recommending a candidate or candidates for consideration by the people who support us,” Vander Plaats told The Des Moines Register during an interview. The new group’s name, The Family Leader, is expected to be adopted today at the Iowa Family Policy Center’s board meeting.
The new organization, and Vander Plaats’ role, will be formally announced Sunday at the Iowa Family Policy Center’s annual fundraiser in Des Moines. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, the winner of the 2008 caucuses, is scheduled to speak at the event at First Federated Church, 4801 Franklin Ave. (...)
Huckabee estará el domingo en Iowa en un acto organizado precisamente por Vander Plaats.
(...) Former Republican candidate for governor Bob Vander Plaats will lead a reorganized conservative policy and political advocacy group aimed in part at becoming an influential player in the campaign for Iowa’s 2012 Republican presidential caucuses.
Vander Plaats, who led a campaign to oust three Iowa Supreme Court justices in the Nov. 2 election, said Monday he will become president and chief executive officer of an umbrella group that includes the Iowa Family Policy Center, Marriage Matters and their political action committee.
Vander Plaats of Sioux City gives the new coalition of socially conservative groups a familiar face as it is plans a more influential role in the caucus campaign than four years ago, including offering its endorsement for the first time.
“We are going to be very engaged in the 2012 cycle. We believe it is our responsibility and our duty to be actively involved in taking a look at the candidates, vetting the candidates and then either recommending a candidate or candidates for consideration by the people who support us,” Vander Plaats told The Des Moines Register during an interview. The new group’s name, The Family Leader, is expected to be adopted today at the Iowa Family Policy Center’s board meeting.
The new organization, and Vander Plaats’ role, will be formally announced Sunday at the Iowa Family Policy Center’s annual fundraiser in Des Moines. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, the winner of the 2008 caucuses, is scheduled to speak at the event at First Federated Church, 4801 Franklin Ave. (...)
lunes, 15 de noviembre de 2010
Op-ed de Pawlenty en el Union Leader
Artículo de opinión del Gobernador Tim Pawlenty en el Union Leader, periódico de referencia para los votantes republicanos de New Hampshire. Habla de recortar el gasto público y revocar la nueva ley de asistencia sanitaria.
Time to close the open bar in Washington
(...) Lobbyists, public-employee unions and special interests will fight every change. They'll insist that every program is sacred, every cut is too deep, and every reform will fail. But they're wrong.
The story in my state of Minnesota is instructive. In the four decades before I was elected governor, Minnesota's biennial budget increased an average of about 21 percent -- the same rate that the federal budget grew during President Obama's first two years in the White House. But under my watch, we cut that rate of growth down to less than 2 percent annually. Last year, we cut the 2-year budget in real terms for the first time in Minnesota's 150-year history.
It wasn't easy, especially in such a historically liberal state, but we proved it was possible to cut spending.
For example, when it came to state employees and their health care, we gave individuals more freedom and responsibility to decide how to spend their own money. What does that mean? To reverse the trend of soaring health care costs in Minnesota, we gave our state employees financial incentives to select high-quality, low-cost health care. With some of their own skin in the game, the vast majority of employees chose more efficient providers. As a result, over the last five years we've seen low, and in some years no, premium increases.
Contrast that with President Obama's approach to health care reform. It drags health care into Washington, D.C., expanding bureaucracy, mandates, entitlements and government subsidies. It does nothing to control costs. And once again, the government will serve up the allure of endless consumption and a magically disappearing bill. But we know nothing is truly free.
The new House of Representatives should make repeal of ObamaCare a top priority. And as I did in Minnesota, newly elected governors around the country should refuse to embrace it and join lawsuits to overturn it. (...)
Time to close the open bar in Washington
(...) Lobbyists, public-employee unions and special interests will fight every change. They'll insist that every program is sacred, every cut is too deep, and every reform will fail. But they're wrong.
The story in my state of Minnesota is instructive. In the four decades before I was elected governor, Minnesota's biennial budget increased an average of about 21 percent -- the same rate that the federal budget grew during President Obama's first two years in the White House. But under my watch, we cut that rate of growth down to less than 2 percent annually. Last year, we cut the 2-year budget in real terms for the first time in Minnesota's 150-year history.
It wasn't easy, especially in such a historically liberal state, but we proved it was possible to cut spending.
For example, when it came to state employees and their health care, we gave individuals more freedom and responsibility to decide how to spend their own money. What does that mean? To reverse the trend of soaring health care costs in Minnesota, we gave our state employees financial incentives to select high-quality, low-cost health care. With some of their own skin in the game, the vast majority of employees chose more efficient providers. As a result, over the last five years we've seen low, and in some years no, premium increases.
Contrast that with President Obama's approach to health care reform. It drags health care into Washington, D.C., expanding bureaucracy, mandates, entitlements and government subsidies. It does nothing to control costs. And once again, the government will serve up the allure of endless consumption and a magically disappearing bill. But we know nothing is truly free.
The new House of Representatives should make repeal of ObamaCare a top priority. And as I did in Minnesota, newly elected governors around the country should refuse to embrace it and join lawsuits to overturn it. (...)
Boogie Man: The Lee Atwater Story
Documental sobre la vida y obra de Lee Atwater, a pocos meses de que se cumplan 20 años de su prematura muerte.
Es Megavideo así que el video se os parará hacia la mitad. Cuando eso ocurre hay que esperar una o dos horas y retomarlo donde se paró.
Es Megavideo así que el video se os parará hacia la mitad. Cuando eso ocurre hay que esperar una o dos horas y retomarlo donde se paró.
Sobre la reelección de Obama
David Axelrod, estratega jefe de la campaña presidencial de Obama en 2008 y ahora consejero principal de la Casa Blanca, anunció ayer que abandonará Washington DC en verano de 2011 para instalarse en Chicago y empezar a preparar la operación para reelegir al Presidente. Es la primera prueba que tenemos de que Obama ya ha tomado la decisión de competir en 2012, y llegó el mismo día que en un artículo de opinión del Washington Post dos veteranos consultores demócratas invitaban al Presidente a considerar la idea de renunciar a un segundo mandato.
Al respecto de la reelección de Obama, recupero un artículo de Jonathan V. Last publicado hace unos días en el Weekly Standard. Echando la vista atrás, Last advierte a Obama que rara vez un Presidente que haya perdido base electoral en su primer mandato ha conseguido salir reelegido. Un Presidente que gana la reelección acostumbra a hacerlo ampliando su anterior registro en votos populares y votos electorales (estados). Sólo hay dos excepciones en la historia: Franklin Delano Roosevelt en 1940 -esta es una excepción engañosa ya que era la segunda reelección de FDR quien en 1936 sí que amplió su base electoral; y Andrew Jackson en el Siglo XIX.
La mala noticia para Obama es que a día de hoy sus posibilidades de reelección, altas ya que un Presidente en funciones siempre es favorito para ganar porque ya ha ganado una vez, pasan por una victoria más ajustada y problemática que la de 2008 contra McCain. No sólo por el resultado de las midterms o porque la economía no crezca lo suficiente para generar empleo, sino porque 1) Obama se ha convertido en una figura polarizante y no lo era hace dos años, y 2) las organizaciones externas vinculadas al GOP han superado a las demócratas en inversión en esta campaña electoral, y auguran una operación republicana mucho más potente que la de 2008.
Nuestra generación no ha visto que ningún Presidente haya conseguido materializar un escenario de victoria como el que maneja actualmente la Casa Blanca, ganar perdiendo terreno respecto a la primera elección.
(...) Of course, 24-month forecasts are a black box. Two years ago the Office of Management and Budget predicted that today’s unemployment rate would be 5.1 percent. Last Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the October unemployment level was 9.6 percent.
So what if it is high? Roosevelt won reelection in 1940 with unemployment at 14.6 percent. But that was a marked improvement from where it sat two years earlier, at 19 percent. Even if jobs were to mushroom over the next 24 months and the unemployment rate did drop to 8 percent, it would still be higher than it was when George W. Bush left office. People may not remember, but on the day Barack Obama was elected president, unemployment was 6.5 percent. In 2012 Republicans will remind everyone in America of this fact.
The final trend, however, is the most troubling for Obama, because it hints at an underlying problem with his presidency: Since FDR, no president has won reelection without enlarging his share of the popular vote.
Roosevelt was elected with 57 percent in 1932. He expanded his support to 61 percent four years later and saw it drop to a “mere” 55 percent in his third campaign. Since then, all successful reelections have featured an expansion of the president’s base. Eisenhower went from 55 percent to 57 percent; Nixon from 43 percent to 61 percent; Reagan from 51 percent to 59 percent; Clinton from 43 percent to 49 percent; George W. Bush from 48 percent to 51 percent.
These numbers suggest that an essential feature of successful presidents is that they find ways to broaden their coalitions. Doing the opposite—pursuing policies which shed support, but keep just enough of it to maintain a majority—is a very difficult needle to thread. How difficult? FDR in 1940 was the first president to do it since Andrew Jackson in 1832. And he had the Great Depression and World War II working in his favor and was starting from the second-highest popular-vote margin ever recorded.
Whatever one thinks of Obama’s political future, it is difficult to imagine him getting more than the 53 percent of the vote he commanded in 2008. For one thing, Obama’s first campaign was designed to allow him to be all things to all people. Almost by definition, his appeal cannot be broader than it was two years ago. And for another, Obama’s legislative agenda has dismantled his coalition with dazzling efficiency. He has lost support in every conceivable subgroup—from young voters to old, among both liberals and conservatives, among high school grads, college grads, and postgraduate professionals, too.
In order to win reelection, Obama must either dramatically reconfigure his presidency or titrate his loss of support in a manner so precise that only two American presidents have ever pulled it off. It’s difficult to tell which would be the tougher trick.
The other possibility, of course, is that he’s toast. (...)
Al respecto de la reelección de Obama, recupero un artículo de Jonathan V. Last publicado hace unos días en el Weekly Standard. Echando la vista atrás, Last advierte a Obama que rara vez un Presidente que haya perdido base electoral en su primer mandato ha conseguido salir reelegido. Un Presidente que gana la reelección acostumbra a hacerlo ampliando su anterior registro en votos populares y votos electorales (estados). Sólo hay dos excepciones en la historia: Franklin Delano Roosevelt en 1940 -esta es una excepción engañosa ya que era la segunda reelección de FDR quien en 1936 sí que amplió su base electoral; y Andrew Jackson en el Siglo XIX.
La mala noticia para Obama es que a día de hoy sus posibilidades de reelección, altas ya que un Presidente en funciones siempre es favorito para ganar porque ya ha ganado una vez, pasan por una victoria más ajustada y problemática que la de 2008 contra McCain. No sólo por el resultado de las midterms o porque la economía no crezca lo suficiente para generar empleo, sino porque 1) Obama se ha convertido en una figura polarizante y no lo era hace dos años, y 2) las organizaciones externas vinculadas al GOP han superado a las demócratas en inversión en esta campaña electoral, y auguran una operación republicana mucho más potente que la de 2008.
Nuestra generación no ha visto que ningún Presidente haya conseguido materializar un escenario de victoria como el que maneja actualmente la Casa Blanca, ganar perdiendo terreno respecto a la primera elección.
(...) Of course, 24-month forecasts are a black box. Two years ago the Office of Management and Budget predicted that today’s unemployment rate would be 5.1 percent. Last Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the October unemployment level was 9.6 percent.
So what if it is high? Roosevelt won reelection in 1940 with unemployment at 14.6 percent. But that was a marked improvement from where it sat two years earlier, at 19 percent. Even if jobs were to mushroom over the next 24 months and the unemployment rate did drop to 8 percent, it would still be higher than it was when George W. Bush left office. People may not remember, but on the day Barack Obama was elected president, unemployment was 6.5 percent. In 2012 Republicans will remind everyone in America of this fact.
The final trend, however, is the most troubling for Obama, because it hints at an underlying problem with his presidency: Since FDR, no president has won reelection without enlarging his share of the popular vote.
Roosevelt was elected with 57 percent in 1932. He expanded his support to 61 percent four years later and saw it drop to a “mere” 55 percent in his third campaign. Since then, all successful reelections have featured an expansion of the president’s base. Eisenhower went from 55 percent to 57 percent; Nixon from 43 percent to 61 percent; Reagan from 51 percent to 59 percent; Clinton from 43 percent to 49 percent; George W. Bush from 48 percent to 51 percent.
These numbers suggest that an essential feature of successful presidents is that they find ways to broaden their coalitions. Doing the opposite—pursuing policies which shed support, but keep just enough of it to maintain a majority—is a very difficult needle to thread. How difficult? FDR in 1940 was the first president to do it since Andrew Jackson in 1832. And he had the Great Depression and World War II working in his favor and was starting from the second-highest popular-vote margin ever recorded.
Whatever one thinks of Obama’s political future, it is difficult to imagine him getting more than the 53 percent of the vote he commanded in 2008. For one thing, Obama’s first campaign was designed to allow him to be all things to all people. Almost by definition, his appeal cannot be broader than it was two years ago. And for another, Obama’s legislative agenda has dismantled his coalition with dazzling efficiency. He has lost support in every conceivable subgroup—from young voters to old, among both liberals and conservatives, among high school grads, college grads, and postgraduate professionals, too.
In order to win reelection, Obama must either dramatically reconfigure his presidency or titrate his loss of support in a manner so precise that only two American presidents have ever pulled it off. It’s difficult to tell which would be the tougher trick.
The other possibility, of course, is that he’s toast. (...)
Nadie quiere ser el primero
The New York Times repasa esta mañana el estado de la carrera por la nominación presidencial republicana.
Los nombres más conocidos (Palin, Romney, Huckabee, Gingrich) prefieren entrar tarde en la competición porque no necesitan de una gran inversión para darse a conocer, y los Gobernadores en funciones (Daniels y Barbour) tienen que esperar a que cierre la sesión legislativa en sus estados, en primavera en el mejor de los casos. Esto deja a otros poco conocidos y con pocos compromisos (sobre todo Pawlenty que deja de ser Gobernador en enero y lo tiene claro, y en menor medida Thune que es Senador y parece menos decidido) ante la oportunidad de aprovechar mejor los primeros meses de 2011.
Lots of Republican Toes in the 2012 Waters, but No Rush to Dive In
(...) Tim Pawlenty, the departing governor of Minnesota, is gearing up for a book tour in January and highlighting his opposition to the new federal health care law.
Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi is trying to persuade donors to remain neutral until he decides whether to make a bid for the White House.
And Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, is quietly courting top-shelf contributors and trying to keep his old team together.
But for all the maneuvering, not one of the possible 2012 Republican presidential contenders is planning to make a formal announcement before early next year or even later. Seeking to avoid the scrutiny and expenses that come with opening a full-fledged campaign, the potential candidates, including Sarah Palin and former Gov. George E. Pataki of New York, are instead quietly testing campaign messages, wooing local activists and trying to assess the shifting political climate.
(...) Senator John Thune of South Dakota is making inquiries to top Republican operatives and has amassed a $7.2 million Senate campaign account that he could use in a presidential run. Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House, introduced himself to a new generation of Republicans by holding candidate training sessions in early-voting states. And former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas is returning to Iowa, where he won the caucuses in 2008, to headline a major gathering of conservative Christians.
(...) The roster of potential Republican contenders also includes Gov. Mitch Daniels of Indiana, Representative Mike Pence of Indiana, and Rick Santorum, a former senator from Pennsylvania. All have made at least some movements — from baby steps to significant efforts — toward a presidential bid.
At this time four years ago, the Republican candidates to succeed President George W. Bush were already well along in filling out their campaign staffs. Senator John McCain announced his team and opened an exploratory committee in early December, a benchmark that seems unlikely for any candidate this year.
Strategists with several potential candidates said that all of the campaigns wanted to avoid becoming ensnared in the bidding war for top talent that took place in 2006 and ultimately drove up salaries and expenditures long before the real contours of the nominating contest were known. The political terrain is made more uncertain by the new Republican majority in the House and a field of contenders that could have several late entrants like Ms. Palin, whose fund-raising capacity is potentially strong enough that she could wait until relatively late in the process to decide whether to run.
(...) Mr. Romney is seen by Republicans as being closest to running, even though his advisers said he had not completely decided. Mr. Pawlenty is also seen as almost certainly running, particularly because he has surrounded himself with some of the earliest operatives from Mr. Bush’s 2000 campaign.
Mr. Huckabee and Ms. Palin, both of whom appeal to social conservatives, must weigh whether to risk their contracts at the Fox News Channel and other ventures to run for president. Mr. Gingrich also must decide whether it is worth setting aside his lucrative speaking career.
Advisers to Mr. Barbour and Mr. Daniels said they were unlikely to decide until the end of their legislative sessions next spring. Associates of Mr. Daniels said he had been hashing out the family toll that a presidential run takes. His wife, Cheri Daniels, has not always embraced the traditional first lady role in Indiana and is said to have reservations. (...)
Los nombres más conocidos (Palin, Romney, Huckabee, Gingrich) prefieren entrar tarde en la competición porque no necesitan de una gran inversión para darse a conocer, y los Gobernadores en funciones (Daniels y Barbour) tienen que esperar a que cierre la sesión legislativa en sus estados, en primavera en el mejor de los casos. Esto deja a otros poco conocidos y con pocos compromisos (sobre todo Pawlenty que deja de ser Gobernador en enero y lo tiene claro, y en menor medida Thune que es Senador y parece menos decidido) ante la oportunidad de aprovechar mejor los primeros meses de 2011.
Lots of Republican Toes in the 2012 Waters, but No Rush to Dive In
(...) Tim Pawlenty, the departing governor of Minnesota, is gearing up for a book tour in January and highlighting his opposition to the new federal health care law.
Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi is trying to persuade donors to remain neutral until he decides whether to make a bid for the White House.
And Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, is quietly courting top-shelf contributors and trying to keep his old team together.
But for all the maneuvering, not one of the possible 2012 Republican presidential contenders is planning to make a formal announcement before early next year or even later. Seeking to avoid the scrutiny and expenses that come with opening a full-fledged campaign, the potential candidates, including Sarah Palin and former Gov. George E. Pataki of New York, are instead quietly testing campaign messages, wooing local activists and trying to assess the shifting political climate.
(...) Senator John Thune of South Dakota is making inquiries to top Republican operatives and has amassed a $7.2 million Senate campaign account that he could use in a presidential run. Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House, introduced himself to a new generation of Republicans by holding candidate training sessions in early-voting states. And former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas is returning to Iowa, where he won the caucuses in 2008, to headline a major gathering of conservative Christians.
(...) The roster of potential Republican contenders also includes Gov. Mitch Daniels of Indiana, Representative Mike Pence of Indiana, and Rick Santorum, a former senator from Pennsylvania. All have made at least some movements — from baby steps to significant efforts — toward a presidential bid.
At this time four years ago, the Republican candidates to succeed President George W. Bush were already well along in filling out their campaign staffs. Senator John McCain announced his team and opened an exploratory committee in early December, a benchmark that seems unlikely for any candidate this year.
Strategists with several potential candidates said that all of the campaigns wanted to avoid becoming ensnared in the bidding war for top talent that took place in 2006 and ultimately drove up salaries and expenditures long before the real contours of the nominating contest were known. The political terrain is made more uncertain by the new Republican majority in the House and a field of contenders that could have several late entrants like Ms. Palin, whose fund-raising capacity is potentially strong enough that she could wait until relatively late in the process to decide whether to run.
(...) Mr. Romney is seen by Republicans as being closest to running, even though his advisers said he had not completely decided. Mr. Pawlenty is also seen as almost certainly running, particularly because he has surrounded himself with some of the earliest operatives from Mr. Bush’s 2000 campaign.
Mr. Huckabee and Ms. Palin, both of whom appeal to social conservatives, must weigh whether to risk their contracts at the Fox News Channel and other ventures to run for president. Mr. Gingrich also must decide whether it is worth setting aside his lucrative speaking career.
Advisers to Mr. Barbour and Mr. Daniels said they were unlikely to decide until the end of their legislative sessions next spring. Associates of Mr. Daniels said he had been hashing out the family toll that a presidential run takes. His wife, Cheri Daniels, has not always embraced the traditional first lady role in Indiana and is said to have reservations. (...)
Michael Steele contra las cuerdas
Uno de los puntos de interés en los próximos dos meses será la elección del nuevo presidente del Partido Republicano (Republican National Committee, RNC), prevista para mediados de enero. Michael Steele (en la foto con Palin) no convence a los capitostes del partido. Le acusan de no generar confianza en los grandes donantes por repartir dinero entre los comités estatales de manera indiscriminada y poco estratégica. Los donantes han preferido destinar su dinero a grupos 527 o a la Republican Governors Association (RGA) para ayudar a candidatos concretos. También creen que su ineficiencia a la hora de articular un programa para atacar y movilizar el voto en las últimas 72 horas de la campaña (algo en lo que la eficacia del RNC llegó a ser casi legendaria en los años de Bush) les ha costado las elecciones en varios estados.
Steele fue elegido para presidir el RNC después de la dolorosa derrota de 2008. Los republicanos quedaron fuera de todas las ramas del poder, sin caras, sin referencias, sin portavoces nacionales, sin enunciadores de política a nivel nacional. La elección de Steele, esencialmente un pensador y un comunicador, se debió a esa necesidad de contar con una cabeza parlante que trasladase un discurso coordinado a los medios de comunicación. Esa función pasa ahora a John Boehner, que como Speaker of the House será el principal enunciador de políticas nacionales, y al frente del RNC se necesita a un estratega, un táctico que trabaje en la sombra para fortalecer la maquina y ponerla al servicio de los dos grandes desafíos del partido para 2012, tomar el Senado y la Casa Blanca.
Steele se considera capaz de interpretar ese nuevo papel, pero las dos/tres personalidades más influyentes en el partido no están de acuerdo y llevan semanas intentando reclutar alternativas para desplazarlo. Esas personalidades son el Gobernador de Mississippi Haley Barbour, el más influyente cargo electo del GOP a día de hoy, y actuando desde fuera el ex presidente del partido Ed Gillespie (el mejor presidente que ha tenido el RNC en la última década), que es a su vez un hombre de Karl Rove.
Gillespie, y por extensión Rove, ha montado en los últimos dos años la más potente estructura paralela al partido que ha habido: una red de cinco organizaciones, tres de ellas creadas este mismo año, que son American Crossroads, un grupo 527; la American Action Forum, un grupo 501(c); la American Action Network, dedicada a la publicidad electoral; la Resurgent Republic, análisis del electorado y estrategia; y el Republican State Leadership Committee, enfocada a las luchas por la redistribución de los distritos electorales.
Gillespie y Rove ya han mantenido contactos con Rob Gleason, presidente del Partido Republicano de Pennsylvania y uno de los posibles aspirantes a suceder a Steele al frente del RNC. A Gleason le avalan las importantes victorias republicanas en su estado este año; Pennsylvania ha sido el estado en el que más demócratas han sido derrotados. Barbour intenta convencer a Reince Priebus, presidente del partido en Wisconsin que ha ayudado a que los republicanos ganaran las elecciones a Gobernador y al senado, dos nuevos escaños en la Cámara de Representantes, y las dos cámaras de la Legislatura estatal. También se ha hablado con Nick Ayers, mano derecha de Barbour y director ejecutivo de la RGA, de sólo 26 años, y con el veterano David Norcross, ex presidente del partido en New Jersey y consejero legal del RNC cuando Barbour lo presidía.
Es probable que surjan varios candidatos y que tras varias votaciones todos los que no quieren que Steele continúe terminen apoyando al más fuerte de sus rivales. De momento sólo se ha presentado de manera oficial Saul Anuzis, ex presidente del GOP en Michigan, bien visto por todos los sectores, aunque muy ligado a Romney. De aquí al Día de Acción de Gracias saldrán más.
Falta por saber también si Steele competirá por la re-elección. Todo hace indicar que así será. En los últimos meses ha viajado por 48 estados, incluídos territorios como Guam o las Northern Mariana Islands que tienen representación en el RNC. Se cree que Steele cuenta con el voto asegurado de entre 40 y 50 miembros del comité (se necesitan 85 para ganar, una mayoría simple de los 168 miembros del comité); habría otros 40 o 50 que definitivamente piensan votar contra él; y unos 70 u 80 indecisos. Steele cuenta con apoyos de peso, destacando el probable apoyo del Tea Party (y de Sarah Palin) que prefiere un RNC poco intervencionista en los procesos electorales internos.
Otros nombres que suenan: Chris Healy, presidente del partido en Connecticut; Kevin DeWine, presidente del partido en Ohio; Ron Kaufman, miembro del comité por Massachusetts; Katon Dawson, ex presidente del partido en Carolina del Sur y máximo rival de Steele hace dos años; Ann Wagner, jefa de la campaña de Roy Blunt para el Senado por Missouri este año; Gary Emineth, ex presidente del partido en Dakota del Norte; Mike Duncan, ex presidente del RNC; el ex Gobernador Bob List, de Nevada; el ex Gobernador Frank Keating, de Oklahoma; o el ex Senador Norm Coleman, de Minnesota, entre otros.
*Lista completa de presidentes que ha tenido el Partido Republicano. Los mejores de la era moderna Ray Bliss que lo cogió tras la debacle de 1964 y lo llevó a las victorias de 1966 y 1968 con la famosa estrategia sureña y la resurrección de Nixon; William Brock en las vísperas del reaganismo; Haley Barbour en los primeros años 90; y Marc Racicot y Ed Gillespie en el primer mandato de Bush. Mención especial para Lee Atwater, que hubiera sido uno de los mejores de no haber fallecido prematuramente.
sábado, 13 de noviembre de 2010
Mike Huckabee con Bill Maher
El ex Gobernador Mike Huckabee, de Arkansas, estuvo ayer vía satélite en el programa del cómico de izquierdas Bill Maher en la HBO, territorio hostil. Habló sobre las presidenciales, su peso y la reforma sanitaria. Cautivador como de costumbre.
12 in 2012: Bobby Jindal
Gobernador Bobby Jindal, de Louisiana.
"Cuando otros candidatos se presenten, yo estaré presentándome a la reelección. Tengo el trabajo que quiero. Estamos haciendo un buen trabajo aquí (en Louisiana) pero todavía tenemos más por hacer."
"Cuando otros candidatos se presenten, yo estaré presentándome a la reelección. Tengo el trabajo que quiero. Estamos haciendo un buen trabajo aquí (en Louisiana) pero todavía tenemos más por hacer."
viernes, 12 de noviembre de 2010
El ranking de Cillizza (WaPo)
Chris Cillizza (Washington Post) ha hecho su primer ranking para la nominación republicana a partir de conversaciones mantenidas con varios estrategas republicanos:
(...) 1. Mitt Romney: Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, spent the entire 2008 cycle trying to win over skeptics with a be-everywhere-do-everything, Energizer Bunny sort of approach to the presidential race. His style in advance of the 2012 race has been strikingly different; Romney has picked his issues -- economic ones, mostly -- carefully and avoided wading into every fight with President Obama or intraparty squabble. The goal seems clear: to make Romney look like the adult in the room. And, to date, it's worked well -- establishing him as a candidate of serious purposes who won't be distracted by the shiny objects thrown in front of him. Romney also has, by far, the most intricate and able political and financial organization in the race -- a machine that can instantly be turned on whenever he decides to announce for president. Challenges remain, most notably explaining to Republican primary voters why the healthcare bill he passed in Massachusetts is different from what Congress passed earlier this year.
2. Sarah Palin: There is no one more difficult to fit into the Line than the former Alaska governor and 2008 presidential nominee. On the one hand, she is the only real rock-star level candidate on the Republican side -- the sort of politician who could draw huge crowds in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina without much effort. She is also the face of the tea party movement, a movement that demonstrated its ability to upset the establishment apple cart during a series of Senate primaries over the last year. And yet, Palin has a skeleton organization (at best) and seems to operate from personal pique as often as from genuine political calculation. If Palin does decide to run -- and we tend to think, based on her public pronouncements, she is leaning that way -- she would be a (and maybe the) prime mover in the race.
3. Tim Pawlenty: Tpaw had, by any account, a very solid 2010 cycle -- touring the country in support of Republican candidates while putting together the sort of fundraising and staff operations necessary to run for president. Pawlenty was, literally, everywhere over the past year -- making regular stops in Iowa and New Hampshire even as many of his rivals for the nomination shied away from doing so. That sort of head start is exactly what the governor of Minnesota needed as he is, without question, the least well known of the top tier 2012 candidates. It remains to be seen whether Pawlenty can perform when the national spotlight shines on him -- as it will soon enough -- but his spade work over the last two years has put him into place as a serious contender.
4. Haley Barbour: Barbour proved his political skills -- yet again -- as chairman of the Republican Governors Association in the 2010 cycle. The Mississippi governor turned the RGA into the fundraising flagship within the party and helped recapture key swing states likes Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida and Pennsylvania for the party. Combine that performance with Barbour's affable nature and popularity with Republican activists and he has a shot at the nomination -- although it remains to be seen how large a liability his resume (southern governor, ex-lobbyist) will be.
5. John Thune: The South Dakota Senator is the buzz candidate of the moment among the Washington chattering class. (Make sure to read Steve Hayes' terrific Thune profile in the Weekly Standard.) Thune looks like a president, has surrounded himself with a top-tier consulting team and is sitting on more than $7 million that could be used to jumpstart as presidential race. Questions linger over how badly Thune wants to run (and "want to" makes a big difference in a presidential primary fight) and whether he could overcome his vote for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) back in 2008.
Continúa (...)
(...) 1. Mitt Romney: Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, spent the entire 2008 cycle trying to win over skeptics with a be-everywhere-do-everything, Energizer Bunny sort of approach to the presidential race. His style in advance of the 2012 race has been strikingly different; Romney has picked his issues -- economic ones, mostly -- carefully and avoided wading into every fight with President Obama or intraparty squabble. The goal seems clear: to make Romney look like the adult in the room. And, to date, it's worked well -- establishing him as a candidate of serious purposes who won't be distracted by the shiny objects thrown in front of him. Romney also has, by far, the most intricate and able political and financial organization in the race -- a machine that can instantly be turned on whenever he decides to announce for president. Challenges remain, most notably explaining to Republican primary voters why the healthcare bill he passed in Massachusetts is different from what Congress passed earlier this year.
2. Sarah Palin: There is no one more difficult to fit into the Line than the former Alaska governor and 2008 presidential nominee. On the one hand, she is the only real rock-star level candidate on the Republican side -- the sort of politician who could draw huge crowds in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina without much effort. She is also the face of the tea party movement, a movement that demonstrated its ability to upset the establishment apple cart during a series of Senate primaries over the last year. And yet, Palin has a skeleton organization (at best) and seems to operate from personal pique as often as from genuine political calculation. If Palin does decide to run -- and we tend to think, based on her public pronouncements, she is leaning that way -- she would be a (and maybe the) prime mover in the race.
3. Tim Pawlenty: Tpaw had, by any account, a very solid 2010 cycle -- touring the country in support of Republican candidates while putting together the sort of fundraising and staff operations necessary to run for president. Pawlenty was, literally, everywhere over the past year -- making regular stops in Iowa and New Hampshire even as many of his rivals for the nomination shied away from doing so. That sort of head start is exactly what the governor of Minnesota needed as he is, without question, the least well known of the top tier 2012 candidates. It remains to be seen whether Pawlenty can perform when the national spotlight shines on him -- as it will soon enough -- but his spade work over the last two years has put him into place as a serious contender.
4. Haley Barbour: Barbour proved his political skills -- yet again -- as chairman of the Republican Governors Association in the 2010 cycle. The Mississippi governor turned the RGA into the fundraising flagship within the party and helped recapture key swing states likes Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida and Pennsylvania for the party. Combine that performance with Barbour's affable nature and popularity with Republican activists and he has a shot at the nomination -- although it remains to be seen how large a liability his resume (southern governor, ex-lobbyist) will be.
5. John Thune: The South Dakota Senator is the buzz candidate of the moment among the Washington chattering class. (Make sure to read Steve Hayes' terrific Thune profile in the Weekly Standard.) Thune looks like a president, has surrounded himself with a top-tier consulting team and is sitting on more than $7 million that could be used to jumpstart as presidential race. Questions linger over how badly Thune wants to run (and "want to" makes a big difference in a presidential primary fight) and whether he could overcome his vote for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) back in 2008.
Continúa (...)
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)