I can’t avoid the “third time’s the charm” bandwagon any longer. We’re going to have a discussion about whether Mitt Romney will launch yet another bid for the presidency. These stories would be meaningless if it weren’t for the fact that Romney hasn’t entirely ruled it out, yet.

Report from the Des Moines Register:

If the presidential election were held today, and Iowa’s likely 2016 voters had a choice between Democrat Hillary Clinton and a kaleidoscope of Republicans, Clinton beats nearly everybody.

Everybody, except one: Mitt Romney tops Clinton, 44 percent to 43 percent, the new Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics Iowa Poll shows.

Romney answers the “would the third time be the charm?” question a little differently each time, but it’s always a version of no. Clinton is open about the fact she’s considering a second presidential run, but for now, she’s living life as a newly minted grandmother.

Despite her polling power over the Republicans, Clinton remains a polarizing figure in Iowa. Her favorability rating is upside down: 49 percent of likely 2014 voters have a negative view of her, 2 percentage points more than those who view her favorably (47 percent).

The fact that Hillary beats every Republican except Romney is meaningless at this point, many voters don’t know which Republicans may or may not be running. However, the fact that Romney is still a viable option in the minds of many voters tells me that he has a lot of lingering support. At least, in Iowa.


  1. I wouldn’t be surprised. Why should someone take themselves out of the race? As long as you’re a
    “prospect,” you get all that attention, and nobody NEEDS attention as
    much as Willard.

    But as I noted in a previous thread, NO loser since 1840 has won in the following election (except Grover Cleveland, who won the popular vote all three times).

    Adlai Stevenson was the last one to try, more than 50 years ago, and that was just because Dems knew they couldn’t beat Ike. Just depends on whether the GOP wants to win. . . .

    • And, Bob, by “the following” election, I mean, the very next election–the one right after it, no election in-between, four years later, no other nominee in the meantime. . . .

    • Since 2000, the field has been littered with dynasty candidates whether Bush or Clinton..

      Romney, despite running twice prior, is new blood in the presidential stream as silly as it sounds.

      Seriously, 2016 could be Clinton vs Bush also. It’s becoming the Hatfields and McCoys played out in presidential politics.

      • Yes. I heard last week that George said Jeb should run.

        Clinton v. Bush would really put the “nasty” in “dynasty.”

        But I disagree that Willard is new blood. He tried to tie himself to his father, who ran in ’68. His mother also ran for senator.

  2. Having already lost 2 out of the last 3 presidential elections, it would be suicidal insanity to run someone who has already lost once, yet of course that is what the DNC would love to get away with pushing upon Republicans with contrived poll results just as they already tried to get us to accept the candidacy of RINO Christie besides Jeb Bush (they’d have a ball labeling it a dynasty and “whatck the bush” there) because those are about the only Republcans they could hope to beat at this point. If the party with which I have been voting these past forty years has any sense at all remaining, they will resist the promptings of establishment moderates and instead nominate a conservative winner sich as Senator Ted Cruz who could then go on to become our first American President of Hispanic descent as well. They would shore up a strong Hispanic base and finally win back the Presidency for a change to boot. Who could ask for anything more? Get either Dr. Carson or Indiana Governor Mike Pence on there for the VP on the ticket, and they would undoubtedly blast Hillary’s candidacy completely out of the political waters! We’ll soon find out whether or not they have the spinal column to nominate true conservatives again. If they select yet another loser, it may have to be as Sean Hannity has implied more than once in recent years in that the rise of another party such as the Constitution Party to replace them may become essential as a winning new home for conservatives. It would be sad to see the formerly outstanding party of Lincoln and Teagan end up in the ash heap of history. It’s their call for 2016 and the bottom line is either start nominating real conservatives or be replaced, period.

      • Sorry. You kids will have to look up “Harold Stassen.” Look up Tom Dewey, while you’re at it. He was actually the candidate twice, like Adlai Stevenson.

        “Hang down your head, Tom Dewey, hang down your head and cry. . .”

Comments are closed.