¿Quién gana sin Thune? (II)

Según Chris Cillizza:

(...) So, who benefits from a Thune-less field?

The most obvious beneficiary is former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty who would have occupied similar space to Thune had the South Dakota Senator run.

Stylistically, the two men are quite similar. Both are happy warriors for the conservative cause, optimistic Midwestern/Plain states Republicans who bill themselves as fresh faces for a party badly in need of them. Both also rely heavily on their personal story; Pawlenty, the blue collar, Sam's Club Republican who was the first person in his family to go to college, Thune the small-town boy who made good.

Ideologically, the men also have a number of parallels. Both Thune and Pawlenty are social conservatives with often-underestimated support among evangelicals. But neither is the oft-caricatured fire-breathing conservative candidate, a trait that supporters of each have long argued make them more electable than many in the field.

Geographically, Thune and and Pawlenty would have been headed on a collision course had they both run. Both men represented states that border Iowa -- the site of the first-in-the-nation caucuses -- and would have made a major push in the Hawkeye State to catapult themselves into national prominence.

With Thune out of the running, Pawlenty will have more room to run -- both in Iowa and elsewhere -- as the new kid on the block, not a bad place to be given the Republican electorate's demonstrated desire for new voices in the 2010 midterms.

While Pawlenty may benefit most from Thune's no-go decision, it also should open up the Iowa field slightly -- good news for any of the lesser known candidates like Govs. Mitch Daniels (Ind.) and Haley Barbour (Miss.) who need to make their names, literally, with a strong finish in Iowa. (...)