Mediocrity begets mediocrity

The incredibly mediocre field of GOP Presidential candidates rates poorly with the American people — even with Republicans:

Three weeks before the Iowa caucuses, Republican voters across the country appear uninspired by their field of presidential candidates, with a vast majority saying they have not made a final decision about whom to support, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

Not one of the Republican candidates is viewed favorably by even half the Republican electorate, the poll found.

~~~

On the Republican side, in contrast, Mr. Giuliani is viewed favorably most frequently, and that is by only 41 percent. Senator John McCain is viewed favorably by 37 percent, and Mr. Romney by 36 percent. Mr. Huckabee is viewed favorably by 30 percent, and 60 percent say they do not know enough about him to offer an opinion, suggesting that he may be vulnerable to the kind of attacks that his opponents have already been mounting against him.

Those are the numbers among those considered likely Republican voters. How can the GOP faithful be so indifferent to outstanding candidates like Mitt Romney, to whom the National Review gave a ringing endorsement as “none has everything ? all the traits, all the positions ? we are looking for. . . . has less foreign-policy experience than Thompson . . . . [and] plagued by the sense that his is a passionless, paint-by-the-numbers conservatism?”

You can make a comment below or link a trackback from your own site. RSS feed for comments on this post.

Comments:

  1. Unfortunately, that headline could be in reference to either party’s candidates.

    I don’t know the Democrats numbers, but I don’t see too many Abe Lincolns on either side of the election.

    Comment by Paul — December 13, 2007 @ 1:37 pm
  2. Actually, the poll showed that Democratic approval ratings among a similar cohort (likely Dem voters) for the major candidates was much higher.

    Comment by Alex — December 13, 2007 @ 2:49 pm
  3. Yeah, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t mediocre and uninspiring … maybe it just means Democrats have lower standards.

    Comment by Paul — December 14, 2007 @ 1:58 pm
  4. Look at what you just said. Then look at George Bush, Denny Hastert, Tom Delay, Duke Cunningham, et al.

    It simply isn’t possible to have lower standards than today’s Republicans.

    Comment by Alex — December 14, 2007 @ 8:56 pm
  5. Alex, Paul,

    I’d submit that it’s impossible to have ANY candidate of ANY party that amounts to ANYTHING but mediocrity.

    The way the system is set up, it’s designed to kill candidates by a thousand paper cuts. No one talks about what they will do, because they know instantaneously, it will be nitpicked to death. Similarly, if they say anything beyond the mealymouthed platitudes (unless they are smacking down another candidate), that quote will come back to haunt him or her.

    We’ve designed a plain-vanilla system for choosing candidates. As Time magazine put it last week, “If Jesus ran, there’d be people who say ‘I don’t like his beard’…”

    The system designs the candidates. It’s not a coincidence that the only candidates to generate serious heat in recent elections have been the ones who fund their own campaigns and run as independents.

    Comment by actor212 — December 17, 2007 @ 7:43 am