• Barack Obama,  Eliot Abrams,  Israel,  John McCain,  Mitch Daniels,  Mitt Romney,  President 2012,  Tim Pawlenty

    President 2012: Obama’s Speech on Middle East and North Africa – The Reaction

    U.S. President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton talk with invited guests after his speech about the United States policy on the Middle East and North Africa at the State Department in Washington, May 19, 2011. Obama on Thursday invoked the killing of Osama bin Laden as a chance to recast relations with the Arab world and said the top U.S. priority was to promote democratic change across the region. Obama, in his much-anticipated “Arab spring” speech, also ratcheted up pressure on Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, saying for the first time that he must stop a crackdown on protests and lead a democratic transition “or get out of the way”

    The reaction to President Obama’s speech (transcript) yesterday (video) was swift and certain from his potential 2012 GOP opponents. Here is a sampling.

    • Mitt Romney – “President Obama has thrown Israel under the bus. He has disrespected Israel and undermined its ability to negotiate peace.”
    • Tim Pawlenty – “To send a signal to the Palestinians that America will increase its demands on our ally Israel, on the heels of the Palestinian Authority’s agreement with the Hamas terrorist organization, is a disaster waiting to happen. At this time of upheaval in the Middle East, it’s never been more important for America to stand strong for Israel and for a united Jerusalem.”
    • Mitch Daniels – “What is going on in the Arab world these days has little or nothing to do with Israel or Palestine, it has to do with tyrannical regimes which have really stifled prospects for their people who are now restless for a better life… I don’t think right now it pays very much of a dividend to try to cut the Gordian Knot of Israel and Palestine.”
    • John McCain – This is setting a limitation on the boundaries of the state of Israel without regard to the Israelis having a country that they can defend militarily..” http://bit.ly/m4lMyx
    • Eliot Abrams – “On the whole, the president’s comments about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will lead nowhere. It is striking that he suggested no action: no meeting, no envoy, no Quartet session, no invitations to Washington.” http://on.cfr.org/mxSqsG

    My take on this is that most Americans don’t give a flying flip about this issue. They object to their tax money being used to adjudicate a dispute that has been going on for thousands of years.

    So, this will not hurt Obama (execpt with his left-wing Jewish donors) and certainly not help the GOP candidates (since Jewish voters go about 75% for the Dems and are concentrted in New York and California – states which won’t be in play in the Electoral College.)

  • Mitch Daniels,  President 2012

    President 2012:Mitch Daniels to Headline National Republican Senatorial Committee Event Next Week – Presidential Announcement?

    I would think that Mitch will make the announcement next week that he is a candidate for President.

    Mitch Daniels is expected to be the special guest at a National Republican Senatorial Committee event in Washington next week, just as he’s deciding whether to run for president, POLITICO has learned.

    According to the invitation, Daniels will appear at the May 25 event as the star attraction.

    The invitation lists NRSC head Sen. John Cornyn, Indiana Sen. Dan Coats and others as the hosts.

  • Mitch Daniels,  President 2012

    Updated: President 2012 Video: Mitch Daniels at the Ripon Society – Far From Devastating

    *****Update*****

    Philip Klein over at the Washington Examiner refutes Jennifer Rubin’s “devastating” Mitch Daniels post.

    The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin is no fan of Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, and last night she posted a two-year old video clip of him that she claimed was “devestating.”

    What was so awful about it? (…)

    Daniels went on to speak about the debt and Obama’s spending binge.

    “The American people’s skepticism about debt and deficits I think is at an all time high, not only because of what they’re seeing in the public sector – most states, the federal government – but think about their lives,” he said. “Americans just came through a period where either they or their neighbors, or a business they were involved in, saved too little, borrowed too much, spent too much, didn’t work out too well. That door is about to be thrown wide open by the policies of this administration.”

    He was even optimistic about the ability of Republicans to win over the youth vote.

    “I just do not see in Americans today, the young people in particular, an embrace of collectivism, of statism,” Daniels said. “Quite the contrary. Almost to a fault, they insist on individual choice and almost limitless freedom. And I don’t think they’re going to be naturally herded together by government however charismatically it is presented. Into unions, or mass transit, or in any other fashion that infringes on what they see as their God-given right to make their own choices.”

    Keep in mind that at the time he was making these remarks, there was plenty of reason for GOP pessimism — Obama’s approval rating was still at a resilient 60 percent it was several months before Chris Christie and Bob McDonnell had won their governorships.

    Far from being “devastating,” the video actually makes Daniels come across as a mainstream (and prescient) conservative who predicted that the Republican Party could win by emphasizing solutions to real world problems and limited government principles.

    Refreshing to see another conservative pundit agreeing with me over Jennifer Rubin’s obvious dislike of Daniels.

    First Half of Governor Mitch Daniels’ Address to The Ripon Society on June 10. 2009.

    Jennifer Rubin over at the Washington Post has the hatchet out yet again for Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels. This time it is over a speech delivered in 2009.

    This devastating clip from a Ripon Society speech demonstrates why conservatives mistrust Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels:

    Here is the clip which is part two of Daniel’s speech delivered almost two years ago (and note before the 2010 midterm elections when the GOP won back the House):

    Second half of Indiana Governor, Mitch Daniels’ address to The Ripon Society, June 10, 2009

    It is very noteworthy that Jennifer does not date the video or mention the date anywhere in the text of her post. Doesn’t that lead the reader to believe that it was delivered recently?

    When Daniels says the GOP should avoid wedge issues, that means the entire debate must conform to what the Democrats will tolerate: The whole concept of a wedge issue should be foreign to us if we really want to come back. That is not what the partys base wants to hear. They want to set the agenda, not capitulate before beginning the bargaining. More than any single issue, it is this attitude that will be an anathema to the Republican primary electorate. Daniels is also, not to be too indelicate, boring.

    Well, we all know that Rubin, the former California Labor attorney, turned pundit, is pushing Paul Ryan and Chris Christie to run for the Presidency. But, she shouldn’t let her preferences to cloud or obfuscate Daniel’s record.

    Listen to Daniel’s speech – all of it and let me know if this is a “devastating clip?”

    Perhaps, I am being “moderate” or naive but I thought one of the first tenants of elected politics is to NOT alienate voters. I think that is what Mitch is saying here. The RIGHT Ideas and issues are what determines your success at the polls.

    Since I have run and held office in California and Rubin hasn’t, perhaps Mitch and I understand this just a little more.

  • Mitch Daniels,  President 2012

    President 2012 Video: Mitch Daniels at the Ripon Society

    First Half of Governor Mitch Daniels’ Address to The Ripon Society on June 10. 2009.

    Jennifer Rubin over at the Washington Post has the hatchet out yet again for Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels. This time it is over a speech delivered in 2009.

    This devastating clip from a Ripon Society speech demonstrates why conservatives mistrust Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels:

    Here is the clip which is part two of Daniel’s speech delivered almost two years ago (and note before the 2010 midterm elections when the GOP won back the House):

    Second half of Indiana Governor, Mitch Daniels’ address to The Ripon Society, June 10, 2009

    It is very noteworthy that Jennifer does not date the video or mention the date anywhere in the text of her post. Doesn’t that lead the reader to believe that it was delivered recently?

    When Daniels says the GOP should avoid “wedge” issues, that means the entire debate must conform to what the Democrats will tolerate: “The whole concept of a wedge issue should be foreign to us if we really want to come back.” That is not what the party’s base wants to hear. They want to set the agenda, not capitulate before beginning the bargaining. More than any single issue, it is this attitude that will be an anathema to the Republican primary electorate. Daniels is also, not to be too indelicate, boring.

    Well, we all know that Rubin, the former California Labor attorney, turned pundit, is pushing Paul Ryan and Chris Christie to run for the Presidency. But, she shouldn’t let her preferences to cloud or obfuscate Daniel’s record.

    Listen to Daniel’s speech – all of it and let me know if this is a “devastating clip?”

    Perhaps, I am being “moderate” or naive but I thought one of the first tenants of elected politics is to NOT alienate voters. I think that is what Mitch is saying here. The RIGHT Ideas and issues are what determines your success at the polls.

    Since I have run and held office in California and Rubin hasn’t, perhaps Mitch and I understand this just a little more.

  • Michele Bachmann,  Mike Huckabee,  Mitch Daniels,  Mitt Romney,  President 2012,  Sarah Palin

    President 2012: The Pros and Cons of Mitch Daniels

    Jennifer Rubin over at the Washington Post makes the case or not on a Mitch Daniels Presidential run.  

    On the positive side, he’s been a successful governor, implemented health-care reform that doesn’t rely on forcing people to buy insurance they don’t want, has a strong education plan and has won two statewide elections. In other words, his track record is nearly as good as Tim Pawlenty’s. He is smart, articulate, good with facts and figures, and is, by any measure, a serious candidate. In his gubernatorial runs he proved to be a very effective, down-to-earth candidate that could relate to relatively non-ideological, middle-class voters, the very ones who will be up for grabs in 2012. He is solidly grounded in a limited-government perspective. He has been an outspoken opponent of cap-and-trade.

    On the downside, he seems to have gone out of his way to needlessly antagonize social conservatives with his “truce” talk and anger hawks, by embracing defense cuts and suggesting America should do less in the world. He appears overly eager to seek the advice of and incur the approval of non-conservative elites. The prospect of Secretary of State Dick Lugar sends chills up the spine of many conservatives. According to many former Bush officials, he does not take input from anyone — subordinates, colleagues and certainly not critics. (The conviction that one is the “smartest man in the room” leads one to ignore important criticism and pile the miscues.) He has indicated his receptivity to a value-added tax. His tenure as George W. Bush’s OMB director may be a liability not a strength in this election. And finally, his tunnel vision on debt control, if adhered to in office, would wind up lacking focus on economic growth andsacrificing many other issues important to conservatives (e.g. judges,right-to-work).

    But, Jennifer, who has never been a Daniels fan and who favors a run by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin or New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, looks at Daniels in a vacuum. The primary election will be a face off between Daniels (if and when he decides to run) and Mitt Romney.

    With Mike Huckabee out, there will be a vacuum on the RIGHT which either Michele Bachmann or Sarah Palin or both will fill. Paul Ryan and Chris Christie will NOT be running and it is doubtful that they will enter the race with these four candidates, plus Ron Paul and Tim Pawlenty in the race. Jennifer gives a hopeful, but flawed analysis.

    These (Daniels Vs. Romney and Palin Vs. Bachmann) will be the semi-final races going into Super Tuesday and beyond.

    So, Jennifer, who would you support Daniels or Romney? Who would be the better candidate against President Obama?

    I would submit a ticket of Romney-Daniels or Daniels-Bachmann would make a very interesting team going into the summer of 2012.

  • Day By Day,  Michele Bachmann,  Mike Huckabee,  Mitch Daniels,  Mitt Romney,  President 2012,  Sarah Palin

    Day By Day May 17, 2011 – The Real Individual Mandate

    Day By Day by Chris Muir

    Chris, I have for months downplayed the notion that Sarah Palin will run for the 2012 Presidency. Now, I am not so sure.

    With Mike Huckabee out, there is a vacuum for social conservatives on the RIGHT. Michele Bachmann is ramping up her campaign and she has the conservative cred but she cannot ignite a crowd like Sarah Palin.

    Ultimately, it may be a Mitch Daniels Vs. Mitt Romney contest for the moderate candidate and Bachmann Vs. Palin for the conservative. This will be the semi-final contest and we may have to wait until late next spring to see who wins – maybe even the convention itself.

    It will be a bumpy ride for the GOP and exciting at the same time.

    Previous:


    The Day By Day Archive

  • Donald Trump,  Herman Cain,  Mitch Daniels,  Mitt Romney,  Polling,  President 2012,  Ron Paul,  Rudy Giuliani,  Sarah Palin,  Tim Pawlenty

    President 2012 Poll Watch: Romney 20% Vs. Palin 12% Vs. Gingrich 9% Vs. Giuliani 7%

    According to the latest Suffolk University Poll.

    Favorable Vs. Unfavorable:

    • Barack Obama – 51% Vs. 42%
    • Mitt Romney –  39% Vs. 32%
    • Mitch Daniels – 10% Vs. 14% Never heard of = 46%
    • Tim Pawlenty – 18% Vs. 16% Never heard of = 38%
    • Newt Gingrich – 29% Vs. 50%
    • Michele Bachmann – 20% vs. 28% Never heard of = 30%
    • Ron Paul – 24% Vs. 34%
    • Sarah Palin – 31% Vs. 58%

    Job Approval Vs. Disapproval:

    • President Barack Obama – 47% Vs. 45%

    Do you feel that Barack Obama deserves to be re-elected or is it time to give someone else a chance?

    • Deserve Re-election – 43% 
    • Someone else – 48%

    GOP Primary Head to Head:

    • Romney – 20%
    • Palin – 12%
    • Gingrich – 9%
    • Giuliani – 7%
    • Paul – 5%
    • Daniels – 4%
    • Cain – 4%
    • Bachmann – 4%
    • Pawlenty – 3%

    General Election:

    • Obama – 46% vs. Romney – 43%
    • Obama – 47% Vs. Pawlenty – 31%
    • Obama – 50% Vs. Bachmann – 30%
    • Obama – 52% Vs. Gingrich – 38%
    • Obama – 48% Vs. Daniels – 30%

    Is the economy improving or getting worse?

    • Improving – 41%
    • Getting Worse – 46%

    This is again a national poll and it is not certain that Sarah Palin, Mitch Daniels or Rudy Giuliani will be candidates. And, the poll was taken before Huckabee and Trump dropped out.

    But, at the present time, it looks like you would have to consider Mitt Romney as the front runner.

    The nationwide survey of 1,070 United States likely voters was conducted May 10-17, 2011, using live telephone interviews. The margin of error is +/- 3.0 percent at a 95 percent level of confidence.

  • Mitch Daniels,  Mitt Romney,  President 2012,  Tim Pawlenty

    President 2012: GOP Elite Favor Mitch Daniels?

    President Barack Obama is greeted by Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels as he steps off Air Force One in Indianapolis, Ind., Friday, May 6, 2011

    Or, see Mitch Daniels as the GOP 2012 Savior?

    Top Republicans are increasingly convinced that President Barack Obama will be easily reelected if stronger GOP contenders do not emerge, and some are virtually begging Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels to add some excitement to the slow-starting nomination race.

    It’s a sign of the GOP’s straits that the party is depending on the bland, wonkish Daniels for an adrenaline boost.

    But interviews this week with longtime party activists and strategists made clear that many in the Republican establishment are unnerved by a field led by Mitt Romney, who could have trouble confronting Obama on health reform; Tim Pawlenty, who has yet to ignite excitement; Jon Huntsman, who may be too moderate to get the nomination; and Newt Gingrich, weighed down by personal baggage and a sense that he is a polarizing figure from the 1990s.

    Despairing Republican lobbyists say their colleagues don’t ask, “Who do you like?” but instead, “Who do we back?”

    “It’s not that they’re up in arms,” said a central player in the GOP money machine. “It’s just that they’re depressed.”

    And a huge swath of operatives, donors and strategists remain uncommitted, in the hope that the field is not yet set.

    The fact is Mitch Daniels is being helped by Jeb Bush and the Karl Rove/Bush family GOP machine. Daniels is the anti-Romney and the GOP field is better with him in the race. He will announce within a few weeks.

    Daniels is an accomplished two-term GOP Governor in a midwestern state that President Barack Obama won in 2008. His political narrative will play well in the key battleground states where the GOP will confront Obama’s re-election juggernaut.

    The field is starting to shape up: Romney, Pawlenty, Daniels – all capable, non-damaged, accomplished Governors. If one of these fails, then the bench includes Chris Christie and/or Paul Ryan.

    Prospects are looking better to beat Barack Obama next year.

  • Day By Day,  Mitch Daniels

    Day By Day May 16, 2011 – Target Practice

    Day By Day by Chris Muir

    The GOP Presidential season has started for Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels with various conservative pundits taking their shots at him. Here is one.

    And, here is the story about the case.

    People have no right to resist if police officers illegally enter their home, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in a decision that overturns centuries of common law.

    The court issued its 3-2 ruling on Thursday, contending that allowing residents to resist officers who enter their homes without any right would increase the risk of violent confrontation. If police enter a home illegally, the courts are the proper place to protest it, Justice Steven David said.

    “We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,” David said. “We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.”

    Justices Robert Rucker and Brent Dickson strongly dissented, saying the ruling runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure, The Times of Munster reported.

    “In my view the majority sweeps with far too broad a brush by essentially telling Indiana citizens that government agents may now enter their homes illegally — that is, without the necessity of a warrant, consent or exigent circumstances,” Rucker said.

    Both dissenting justices suggested they would have supported the ruling if the court had limited its scope to stripping the right to resist officers who enter homes illegally in cases where they suspect domestic violence is being committed.

    But Dickson said, “The wholesale abrogation of the historic right of a person to reasonably resist unlawful police entry into his dwelling is unwarranted and unnecessarily broad.”

    Likely, this decision may very well go up on a federal court appeal on Constitutional grounds. But, whether it does or not, I caution folks to make sweeping generalizations about Mitch Daniels and his appointment of Justice Steven David from a list of three candidates presented him.

    In 1970, the Indiana Constitution was amended to create the Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission.  By Constitution and statute, the Nominating Commission is charged with vetting applications and submitting a list of the three most qualified applicants to the Governor for each vacancy that occurs on the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or Tax Court.  The Governor then appoints an individual from that list to fill the vacancy.

    Previous:

    The Day By Day Archive