As Republican activists contemplate their prospects against Barack Obama in 2012, there are two names they should keep prominently in mind: Walter Mondale and Bob Dole.
Ronald Reagan
In the aftermath of the 1982 midterm elections, Democrats were optimistic about their chances against President Ronald Reagan in 1984. Mr. Reagan’s party lost twenty-seven seats in Congress in that election. Many of us still remember Dan Rather on CBS News salivating over the prospect of huge Republican losses based on early returns, urging his fellow liberals to get out to vote before the polls closed in California. Democrats thought they had a great opportunity to win back the White House two years later.
It did not work out that way. Democrats nominated a safe and predictable old school, big government liberal, who got beaten to a pulp by the Gipper.
Twelve years later, in the aftermath of the 1994 midterm elections, President William Jefferson Clinton suffered one of the greatest bloodbaths in American political history, losing fifty-four seats in the House and eight in the Senate, handing Republicans their first majorities in both houses since Eisenhower. Republicans gleefully predicted Mr. Clinton’s demise two years later.
Again, it did not work out that way. Republicans nominated a safe and predictable Washington insider, a war hero and a great American, who nonetheless suffered a massive defeat at the hands of a resurgent Mr. Clinton.
While Republicans are likely to do well in the midterm elections this November, it would be a grave error to overlook the considerable political talents of the incumbent, which are of a magnitude equaling Mr. Reagan and Mr. Clinton. Absent economic Armageddon, a standard-issue Republican nominee will almost certainly have his head handed to him by Mr. Obama.
The best chance for Republicans to defeat Mr. Obama will be to nominate a candidate who can appeal beyond the party base – which eliminates Sarah Palin. This does not mean the party should nominate a squish or a RINO. Rather, Republicans should consider a nominee who is well outside the norm, an advocate of limited government with a track record of actually cutting the size of government, a candidate who advocates positions that are on the edge and are atypical of what voters have come to expect of the old and boring Grand Old Party.
Gary Johnson
As governor of New Mexico for eight years, Gary Johnson vetoed 750 bills backed by legislators in both parties, which was more vetoes than the other 49 governors serving during his tenure, combined. Mr. Johnson’s views on abortion, immigration and, most notably, the legalization of marijuana set him apart from many in the party core, but would appeal to independent voters who are tired of the platitudes espoused by most politicians. Mr. Johnson’s candor on the issues, and his inclination to say what he actually thinks rather than what he knows is safe, sets him apart from virtually every other politician in the country.
Republicans need to ask themselves: Can a safe nominee like Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich or Tim Pawlenty actually pry independent voters away from Mr. Obama? Based on current polling, it may be tempting to think that they could.
The pounding taken by Mr. Mondale in 1984 and by Mr. Dole in 1996 suggests otherwise.
Unfortunately, the public is not ready for a laissez faire candidate.
One reason is that few people understand the concept of rights. They do not understand what rights are or where they come from. Rights are not endowed in us by our Creator and they are not a matter of general agreement. Until rights are better understood it will be hard for a good candidate to win for the right reasons.
Leonard Peikoff’s book “Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand” is a good starting point:
http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/prodinfo.asp?number=LP02B