Mitch Daniels for Pres???

[jimmy olsen]

Languishites from the midwest/rustbelt, gimme the dirt on him, because this sounds too good to be true.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/opinion/01douthat.html?ref=opinion

A Republican Surprise

By ROSS DOUTHAT
Published: February 28, 2010

Set a group of plugged-in conservatives to talking presidential politics, and you'll get the same complaints about the 2012 field.

Mitt Romney? He couldn't make the voters like him last time ... Sarah Palin? She'd lose 47 states ... Mike Huckabee? Better as a talk-show host ... Tim Pawlenty, Jim DeMint, Bobby Jindal, David Petraeus? Too blah, too extreme, too green, and stop dreaming ...

But murmur the name Mitch Daniels, and everyone perks up a bit. Would he win? Maybe not. But he'd be the best president of any of them ...

"I've never seen a president of the United States when I look in the mirror," Daniels remarked last week, after officially inching the door ajar for 2012. You can't blame him: At 5'7", the Indiana governor wouldn't be the tallest man to occupy the White House, and he'd be the baldest president since Dwight D. Eisenhower. If Romney looks like central casting's idea of a chief executive, Daniels resembles the character actor who plays the director of the Office of Management and Budget — a title that he held, as it happens, during George W. Bush's first term.

Since then, though, he's become America's best governor. In a just world, Daniels's record would make him the Tea Party movement's favorite politician. During the fat years of the mid-2000s, while most governors went on spending sprees, he was trimming Indiana's payroll, slowing the state government's growth, and turning a $800 million deficit into a consistent surplus. Now that times are hard, his fiscal rigor is paying off: the state's projected budget shortfall for 2011, as a percentage of the budget, is the third-lowest in the country.

But Daniels hasn't just been a Dr. No on policy. His "Healthy Indiana" plan, which offers catastrophic coverage to low-income residents, aspires to eventually cover 130,000 people, about a third of the state's long-term uninsured. He's pushed targeted investments in kindergarten programs, the police force and the child welfare office. And he's been a pragmatic free-marketeer, rather than a strict ideologue. His controversial decision to lease the Indiana toll road reaped $3.8 billion for the state. But when an attempt to outsource welfare enrollment went awry, Daniels yanked the system back into the public sector.

If this portrait sounds suspiciously glowing, keep in mind that I saw the governor last Monday, in between the CPAC gathering of movement conservatives and the White House health care forum. In both cases, the contrast made Daniels seem particularly appealing.

Unlike the politicians who spoke at CPAC, Daniels eschewed triumphalism about conservatism's prospects. "I think a lot of Republicans are over-reading all of this," he said. "They're a little ahead of themselves, a little too giddy." What his party still needs, and doesn't have he said, are the answers to "the 'what' question — what are we about, what are our answers to the obvious problems the nation has?"

Unlike the Republicans at the health care summit, he balanced criticisms of Obamacare with candor about the problem of the uninsured. "This is a very real issue, and we were determined to have a constructive approach to it — but one that would be affordable." Healthy Indiana, he went on, is "incredibly popular with the people who are a part of it. I get tearful hugs from people who just want to tell me that it's brought them peace of mind."

And unlike both CPAC-goers and his party's leadership, Daniels was blunt about the challenges of deficit reduction. "There's been some very healthy hell-raising going on in the country," he said of the Tea Parties. "But to my knowledge, nobody's gotten up in front of those rallies and explained what's going to have to happen." His ideal approach to the deficit would look like Paul Ryan's fiscal roadmap, all spending restraint and no new taxes. But one way or another, deficit reduction "has to be done" — even if "you have to take the second- or third-best method."

All this honesty might evaporate on the campaign trail. And if it didn't, would Daniels have a prayer? He's admired by elites, but unknown at the grass-roots level. He's a social conservative, and his gubernatorial campaigns have played the populist card successfully — but he lacks the built-in constituencies of other candidates. And his years' carrying water for the Bush administration's budgets would doubtless be used against him in the battle for the Tea Partiers' affections.

For a Daniels candidacy to catch fire, what's left of the Republican establishment, currently (if reluctantly) coalescing around Mitt Romney, would have to decide that he's the better pick. That would mean gambling that the best way to defeat the most charismatic president of modern times is to nominate a balding, wonky Midwesterner who reminds voters of their accountant.

Stranger things have happened.
Sign in to Recommend

[Hansmeister]

As I've mentioned before he would be my choice.  he's the Anti-Obama.  He oozes competence, but is unlikely to ever give a rousing speech.

[jimmy olsen]

As I've mentioned before

Link?

[HisMajestyBOB]

As I've mentioned before

Link?

here

[Jaron]

If he is the Tea Partys ideal candidate, hes bad for America, very bad.

[Razgovory]

As I've mentioned before he would be my choice.  he's the Anti-Obama.  He oozes competence, but is unlikely to ever give a rousing speech.

Suddenly you start caring about competence?

[Eddie Teach]

If he is the Tea Partys ideal candidate, hes bad for America, very bad.

[jimmy olsen]

If he is the Tea Partys ideal candidate, hes bad for America, very bad.

Anyone who can balance a budget and increase health care coverage at the same time is good for America, and highly unlikely to be the kind of ideological wingnut that the Teabaggers would actually like.

[Razgovory]

If he is the Tea Partys ideal candidate, hes bad for America, very bad.

Anyone who can balance a budget and increase health care coverage at the same time is good for America, and highly unlikely to be the kind of ideological wingnut that the Teabaggers would actually like.

While he's at it maybe we can get someone who walks on water.

[Faeelin]

A pity. He seems competent, but so did Pawlenty before he decided to start catering to the crazies.

[Admiral Yi]

A pity. He seems competent, but so did Pawlenty before he decided to start catering to the crazies.

How does Pawlenty cater to the crazies?

[Viking]

Who?

Edit: The only way a man with a comb over can become president is if he defeats Nazism.

[DisturbedPervert]

5'7?  Does he also have video of Obama eating live puppies?

[Faeelin]

A pity. He seems competent, but so did Pawlenty before he decided to start catering to the crazies.

How does Pawlenty cater to the crazies?

Let me ask you about social issues your party has been dealing with. In her book, Palin claims that McCain's handlers wanted her to be silent about her belief in creationism. How would you describe your view?
I can tell you how we handle it in Minnesota. We leave it to the local school districts. We don't mandate a curriculum or an approach. We allow for something called "intelligent design" to be discussed as a comparative theory. It doesn't have to be in science class.

Where are you personally?
Well, you know I'm an evangelical Christian. I believe that God created everything and that he is who he says he was. The Bible says that he created man and woman; it doesn't say that he created an amoeba and then they evolved into man and woman. But there are a lot of theologians who say that the ideas of evolution and creationism aren't necessarily inconsistent; that he could have "created" human beings over time.


To borrow a phrase, have your views evolved over time?
In 1993 I voted for a bill prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation in public accommodation, housing, and employment. That was 16 years ago.

Yes, gay-rights activists regarded you as a pretty cool guy at the time.
We overbaked that statute, for a couple of reasons. If I had to do it over again I would have changed some things.

Overbaked?
That statute is not worded the way it should be. I said I regretted the vote later because it included things like cross-dressing, and a variety of other people involved in behaviors that weren't based on sexual orientation, just a preference for the way they dressed and behaved. So it was overly broad. So if you are a third-grade teacher and you are a man and you show up on Monday as Mr. Johnson and you show up on Tuesday as Mrs. Johnson, that is a little confusing to the kids. So I don't like that.

Has the law been changed?
No. It should be, though.

So you want to protect kids against cross-dressing elementary-school teachers. Do you have any in Minnesota?
Probably. We've had a few instances, not exactly like that, but similar.

[DisturbedPervert]