At this stage of the last presidential campaign cycle, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney had raised $44 million — more than any other Republican candidate. We won’t know how the current candidates compare with that benchmark until they file disclosure forms with the Federal Election Commission next month. However, it’s likely most of them, even Romney, will fall short.
Slower fundraising can be explained partially by the slower campaign pace. Romney and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani began their 2008 campaigns in February 2007, but Romney did not officially announce his 2012 run until earlier this month.
However, both the pace of the campaign and the amount of money still sitting on the sidelines indicate a much larger issue: a puzzling enthusiasm gap between the Republican Party of 2007 and the Republican Party of 2011.
In June 2007, the GOP had just lost both houses of Congress and was saddled by President George W. Bush’s unpopularity. The party’s prospects for keeping the White House were bleak. Yet 73 percent of Republicans said they were satisfied with their presidential field.
Now the situation is reversed. The party regained the House majority last year and picked up six Senate seats, plus multiple governorships and hundreds of state legislative seats, in the most decisive off-year election victory since before the New Deal.
Disappointing economic news continues to make President Obama look vulnerable. Still, only 45 percent of Republicans are satisfied with their presidential candidates, according to last week’s NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.
That is incredibly low for a party that showed enormous enthusiasm in last year’s midterms. Much of that enthusiasm, though, flowed from grass-roots activists, especially in the Tea Party.
As a result, there is no obvious presidential leader to meld grass-roots activism into a winning electoral coalition.
Republicans have traditionally favored “next in-line” candidates. Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Sen. Bob Dole and Sen. John McCain all ran for president and lost before winning the party’s nomination. While Romney would seem to fit that mold in some ways, there are major differences between him and earlier Republican nominees.
Reagan, Bush, Dole and McCain were more than just previous candidates. Reagan was the accomplished two-term governor of California, America’s most populous state, a visionary leader and famous actor.
Bush was a war hero, ambassador, CIA director, congressman, party chairman, and Reagan’s loyal vice president. Dole served in the Senate for 27 years, was party chairman, majority leader, and survived horrendous wounds from World War II. McCain, also a war hero, served more than 20 years in the Senate before winning the nomination in 2008.
Their accomplishments carried weight with the Republican faithful, even if they didn’t always sway the general electorate. Republicans felt like they deserved their support.
Over the years, that “deserves it” factor has been more important in GOP primaries than ideological purity, campaign organization or electability.
Yet it is absent in the current field, where no candidate stands out as having earned the right to represent the party on the national ticket.
Romney deserves credit for saving the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, but his record there isn’t given much emphasis by the media — or on the campaign trail.
Otherwise, he is the undistinguished former one-term governor of America’s most liberal state. Even though his most significant public policy accomplishment is a health care reform plan similar to Obamacare, he is the default front-runner, which helps explain why Republican dissatisfaction is so high.
This dissatisfaction has left a possible opening for a late-entry candidate like Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who has an impressive resume but hasn’t spent much time in the national spotlight.
Giuliani, who is still revered for his leadership as mayor of New York City during 9/11, could be viable, but he has done little to lay the groundwork for another run.
It’s far more likely that Republicans will go into the primaries next winter not feeling that any of the candidates really “deserves” their votes.
Ralph Smith is an intern with the Commentary Section of The Washington Times
