The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza makes a good point about Tim Pawlenty and the Republican presidential race more generally:

Pawlenty isn’t likely to be the first choice of any of the GOP’s disparate interest groups but there is also no group that is adamantly opposed to the idea of him as the nominee. And, a look back at the last two Republican presidential nominees - George W. Bush and John McCain - reveals that the party tends to pick the person who is able to appeal to the broadest number of constituencies within the party rather than the person who embodies the ideal pick of a single constituency group.

There are some conservatives concerned primarily with environmental policy who do adamantly oppose Pawlenty, but I’m not sure how large this group will be. But for right now, Pawlenty does seem to be the nominee many conservatives could live with even though very few are passionately in favor of him. That is one way in which Pawlenty is in line with Republican nominating habits.

View all comments (9) |

Steven Ertelt| 3.22.11 @ 5:20PM

Pawlenty will likely receive strong support from pro-life voters and groups. He has one of the strongest records on life issues.

http://www.lifenews.com/2011/0.....president/

JPM| 3.22.11 @ 5:20PM

McCain didn't win because he had broad appeal. He was, in fact, broadly disliked in the Republican Party. The only thing he had going for him was the support of a single faction -- veterans. He won because nobody else had any significant base of support at all. A small base trumps no base every time.

Bush was a consensus choice and his example might provide a model for Pawlenty, if Obama's predecessor had been Pawlenty Sr. Bush had a network of ready-made support within the Party that Pawlenty cannot duplicate.

Pawlenty's candidacy is a nonstarter. It will serve no purpose other than to boost his book sales.

Floyd Looney | 3.22.11 @ 5:40PM

I am adamantly opposed to all of the potential candidates except for Palin and Bachmann at the moment

Occam's Tool| 3.22.11 @ 6:17PM

Hey, Floyd---what about the possibility of Allen West or John Bolton? But I would love Palin or Bachmann. For Bachmann I would definitely Turn her to Overdrive.

Michael L. Hauschild| 3.22.11 @ 6:21PM

You ain't seen nothin yet.................

Floyd Looney | 3.22.11 @ 6:51PM

Bolton just basically called for boots on the ground in Libya. I would have to say no, plus his mustache would scare women and children.

I think Allen West is to new to be considered for the White House.

I was wrong earlier, I would probably have to consider Herman Cain though.

Hook| 3.22.11 @ 11:36PM

The most important thing is to get this incompetent young man out of office who has the most incoherent foreign policy in history.

His medical program is a catastrophe already ie 1000 waivers granted!!!!

Actually we need to make the election about Obama and we need Palin and Bachmann to campaign and bring in their constituencies. Personally, they are too polarizing.

Daniels or Pawlenty will be the strongest. Romney's Mormonism will kill him with a portion of the electorate.

Zbigniew Mazurak | 3.23.11 @ 1:34AM

Daniels is a strident liberal who, luckily for America stands zero chance of getting elected.

Derek Leaberry| 3.23.11 @ 8:09AM

Pawlenty's chief virtues are that he is not Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Mitch Daniels, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Ron Paul or Jeb Bush.

More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/03/22/nobody-loves-or-hates-pawlenty

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?

Jeffrey Lord | 5.20.13

The Inoperative Jay Carney

Jeffrey Lord | 5.23.13

Holding AWOL Obama Accountable

Betsy McCaughey | 5.23.13

Obama's Imbroglios

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.23.13

Lerner's Plea

Ray V. Hartwell | 5.23.13

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara | 5.22.13

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer | 5.23.13

ADVERTISEMENT