The Right Stuff

[The_Dude 1,142]

The right stuff

He has begun to share such opinions in Washington and on Fox News. In recent months Republican kingmakers have quietly descended on Indianapolis for private dinners. Nevertheless, he remains a long shot. Unlike Mr Romney or Mrs Palin, he is still running a state. The recession knocked Indiana backwards. Last year Mr Daniels closed a $957m budget gap by using reserves and making cuts, including some for education. But another hole is expected next year, and the next round of cuts will be more painful. Democrats argue that Mr Daniels has oversold his economic record. The unemployment rate is now 10% and the unemployment trust fund is insolvent.

THE governor does not like to keep people waiting. On a recent morning this small man leapt out of a trooper’s Toyota (Indiana-made) while it was still moving. He burst into a tiny chamber of commerce and began joking with businessmen, teachers and farmers. He is comfortable with most people in most places. He can command a boardroom. He has moseyed through enough fairs to know how to sign a goat—on its left side, so as not to write against the grain of its coat. After some small talk with the chamber, he introduced himself formally: “Mitch Daniels, your employee in public service.”

Most Americans know little or nothing of Mr Daniels. He does not tweet. “I’m not an interesting enough person,” he explains. He is a Republican who had never heard of 9/12, Glenn Beck’s tea-party group, before The Economist mentioned it to him. But he is good at one thing in particular: governing.

Wonks have long revered Mr Daniels. Since February, when he said he would consider a presidential run, others have started to as well. The Weekly Standard, a conservative magazine, published a glowing profile in June. At Indiana’s Republican convention he was greeted by chants of “Run, Mitch, run!” Mr Daniels is an interesting model. But whether national Republicans will embrace him is less clear.

“I never expected to go into politics,” he explains. Born in Pennsylvania and weaned in the South, he moved to Indiana at the age of ten before a scholarship took him off to Princeton. Over the years he has worked for Richard Lugar, Indiana’s respected and moderate senior senator, served as Ronald Reagan’s budget director, run North American operations for Eli Lilly, a big pharmaceuticals firm, and, from 2001 to 2003, served as George Bush’s budget director. To these jobs he brought a decidedly dorky passion: a reverence for restraint and efficacy. This pervades his life. At 61, he runs or swims almost every day. He subsists, it seems, largely on oatmeal. On a recent shopping trip his credit card was declined for “unusual activity”. He is, in short, just the kind of man to relish fixing a broken state—or country.

In 2003 Mr Daniels announced that he would run for governor. Democrats knew he was intelligent. To their horror, he turned out to be likeable too. Sarah Palin is strident and Mitt Romney disconcertingly perfect. Mr Daniels is at ease, an unusual politician who does not seem like one. He criss-crossed the state in an RV decorated with his slogan, “My Man Mitch”, and soon covered with signatures. He ate pork and watched baseball in the shadow of Gary’s steel mills. He stayed in private homes, first to save money on hotels, then because he liked it and his hosts seemed to as well. (He continues this even now, sleeping in children’s rooms, cramped Latino households and even more crowded Amish ones, often riding between them on his beloved Harley.) In November 2004 he won, by 53% to 45%.

Mr Daniels oozed with ideas. He introduced merit pay for public workers and performance metrics for state agencies. Indiana’s counties skittered illogically between two time zones, so he reset the state’s clocks. A toll road was losing money, so he oversaw a $3.85 billion lease to foreign investors. He was not dogmatic. In his first year he proposed a tax increase. He shrank the state workforce but increased the number of case workers for children. He passed a health plan that included private accounts for the poor.

Not everything went smoothly. The road lease and time change were, at first, enormously unpopular. He privatised the state’s welfare system, an unqualified disaster—eventually he cancelled the contract. But by the end of his first term he had transformed a $200m deficit into a $1.3 billion surplus and the state had earned its first AAA credit rating.

It helped that Indiana was faring better than its rusty neighbours. Manufacturing output grew by 20% between 1998 and 2008. Michigan’s slumped by 12% during the same time. The number of bioscience jobs, still small, grew 17.2% from 2001 to 2008. Mr Daniels tried to help, keeping taxes low and investing in infrastructure before it was hip. When the recession began, Indiana’s unemployment rate was lower than the national average.

By 2008 all this had culminated in a simple reality: Indiana liked its man Mitch. Barack Obama won the state, but Mr Daniels trounced his Democratic opponent, 58% to 40%. Some of this was luck. The opponent was lacklustre; the recession had yet to do its worst. But his victory was still notable. He won the young by 51% to 42%, and even picked up 20% of black and 37% of Hispanic voters.

Such numbers should make strategists swoon. Mr Daniels used to deny any presidential aspirations. Then Newt Gingrich shared a secret: if you say you might run, people will listen to your ideas. Mr Daniels has plenty. He calls the health-care bill “a wasted opportunity”, blaming both Democrats and Republicans. He is deeply worried about debt—he wants to raise the retirement age and stop sending Social Security cheques to the rich. He wonders whether America can afford all its military commitments, particularly those only loosely tied to fighting terrorism.

Added to this, Mr Daniels is largely untested on the national stage. On television, he can seem wooden. His record includes contradictions. Though he has been a fiscal hawk in Indiana, during his time at the budget office a national surplus became a deficit. He has derided the federal stimulus but taken its cash—a sign of pragmatism or hypocrisy, depending on the audience.

More problematic, it is unclear that a clever, measured candidate stands a chance within the Republican Party. Neo-cons are allergic to talk of defence cuts. Social conservatives were rabid after Mr Daniels, anti-abortion himself, told the Weekly Standard that he favoured a temporary truce on social issues. “It just happens to be what I think,” he says, arguing that politicians need to unite on urgent matters of national security and debt. He is also unlikely to fire up tea-partiers. “Didn’t somebody say in a different context, ‘Anger is not a strategy’?” he asked your correspondent over a rare plate of steak and chips.

Mr Daniels still insists he is unlikely to run for president. But he has a familiar post-partisan sheen, not unlike a certain former senator—though he is more conservative, shorter and much balder. He likes to talk about a “programme of unusual boldness” that unites the parties and sets America back on track. “Supposedly we are not capable of making decisions like this,” Mr Daniels said, grinning as he smacked a stubborn bottle of ketchup. “But somebody has got to try.”

Source

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This guy is the most dangerous candidate for the democrats. He is pragmatic, extremely intelligent, and works well with both parties. I think the major detriment to any run for him will be the religious right, and the far right end of the republicans. He could pull all those moderates and independants who made the difference for Obama, and could even pull some democrats.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Yep. I think he would be a good candidate, but the Democrats will castigate him with how Bush turned a surplus into a deficit. After all, he was OMB director those first three years.

[^_^ 5,021]

The GOP has a lot of top-notch talent who are governors.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The GOP has a lot of top-notch talent who are governors.

And Governors get elected. Having two Senators competing last time sucked balls.

[^_^ 5,021]

He is a Republican who had never heard of 9/12, Glenn Beck’s tea-party group, before The Economist mentioned it to him.

I don't believe this for a second.

He is also unlikely to fire up tea-partiers. “Didn’t somebody say in a different context, ‘Anger is not a strategy’?” he asked your correspondent over a rare plate of steak and chips.

+1

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Yep. I think he would be a good candidate, but the Democrats will castigate him ...

By the time the GOP's noisy right wing is done with this fella, there won't be anything left to castigate. Trust me, the biggest obstacle to the GOP putting a good candidate on the ticket is, well, the insane faction of the GOP.

[^_^ 5,021]

By the time the GOP's noisy right wing is done with this fella, there won't be anything left to castigate. Trust me, the biggest obstacle to the GOP putting a good candidate on the ticket is, well, the insane faction of the GOP.

A popular Governor of a state with a large media market won't need to kowtow to the crazies to build name recognition.

Edited August 23, 2010 by Legacy member

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

A popular Governor of a state with a large media market won't need to kowtow to the crazies to build name recognition.

In this day and age, the crazies will defeat any such candidate in the primaries, however.

[^_^ 5,021]

In this day and age, the crazies will defeat any such candidate in the primaries, however.

I'm not sure I buy that. Sure, when there's a vacuum then nuts like Palin have air but bring in the heavyweights and she will fade into the sunset.

[Dan J 277]

I'm not sure I buy that. Sure, when there's a vacuum then nuts like Palin have air but bring in the heavyweights and she will fade into the sunset.

With the winner takes all format of the Republican primaries, its possible for a early candidate to win without anywhere close to a majority of the votes, especially with a lot of contenders.

[alienlovechild 75]

By the time the GOP's noisy right wing is done with this fella, there won't be anything left to castigate. Trust me, the biggest obstacle to the GOP putting a good candidate on the ticket is, well, the insane faction of the GOP.

You've got to be kidding. The last GOP candidate, McCain, was selected, in part, because he was a moderate that was supposed to appeal to many Democrats and independents. The irony is that Palin was the only interesting element in his lackluster campaign and she remains so to this day.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

The GOP has a lot of top-notch talent who are governors.

I haven't seen much of this guy before but on first blush I like what I see. TBH I like NJ governor as well. I long for a real candidate that actualy says what he means and means what he says. To many on both sides are just a load of hot air.

[The_Dude 1,142]

You've got to be kidding. The last GOP candidate, McCain, was selected, in part, because he was a moderate that was supposed to appeal to many Democrats and independents. The irony is that Palin was the only interesting element in his lackluster campaign and she remains so to this day.

McCain won because he carried most of the establishment republicans and moderate republicans. Huckabee carried the crazies and religious zealot wing of the party. Turns out there were more moderate and establishment republicans than teabaggers.

I haven't seen much of this guy before but on first blush I like what I see. TBH I like NJ governor as well. I long for a real candidate that actualy says what he means and means what he says. To many on both sides are just a load of hot air.

The one thing that I wonder about any neophyte candidate is that when elected and upon ariving in Washington, they learn the reality of the situation. Will they maintain their ideals, and fight the good fight to evoke real change, or will they fall to the enormity of the task at hand like Obama has?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You've got to be kidding. The last GOP candidate, McCain, was selected, in part, because he was a moderate that was supposed to appeal to many Democrats and independents. The irony is that Palin was the only interesting element in his lackluster campaign and she remains so to this day.

The GOP of 2008 is not the GOP of 2010. You should have noticed - every pre-schooler has. Since you brought him up, look at McCain and tell me that the McCain that is running for re-election in 2010 is even remotely resembling the McCain that ran for president in 2008. Even if you think he does, McCain himself doesn't.

2008: McCain - the original Maverick

2010:

"I never considered myself a maverick," he [McCain] told me.

2008: McCain Pushes 'Cap-And-Trade' Plan to Fight Global Warming

2010: McCain has brazenly adopted the Republican cudgel of painting cap-and-trade as a job-killing "cap and tax" that raises the costs of doing business and passes price increases onto consumers.

[^_^ 5,021]

I haven't seen much of this guy before but on first blush I like what I see. TBH I like NJ governor as well. I long for a real candidate that actualy says what he means and means what he says. To many on both sides are just a load of hot air.

I like him too. But would he win given that campaigns are waged on TV? He's huge, you know.