The national conventions are becoming increasingly irrelevant to the US political programme. Whereas once floor fights and back room dealings would yield each Party’s nominee, now the protracted primary process renders the gathering of the party faithful little more than a formality. Year after year, the networks cut down their coverage as an apathetic public collectively zone out; even the post-convention bump now lies neatly within the margin of error. It would seem the only remaining role the conventions now really play is in introducing the next generation of party leaders.
As with the likes of Kennedy in ’56 or Obama in ’04, so it has been here in Tampa, Florida. Assuming that Romney loses in 2012 – and there is a quiet sense that the GOP don’t quite believe their man will ultimately pull through – then what we have witnessed over the past three days is essentially the beginning of the 2016 presidential race.
Senator Marco Rubio, in his native state of Florida, rose to the occasion, dampening doubts about his readiness for the national spotlight. Both Hispanic and a Tea Party favourite – a combination riddled with paradox – he will almost certainly be running for the top job in four years’ time.
Bound to be running against him for the Republican nomination will be New Jersey Governor, Chris Christie. But whilst Rubio sparkled, Christie flopped. Delivering the keynote speech on Tuesday evening, he took an entire sixteen minutes to mention Romney once. Even by the end he had only managed to rack up a grand total of seven references to the official nominee, choosing instead to spend the majority of his speech talking about himself. Salon ridiculed Christie for accepting the nomination ‘a bit early,’ whilst Rachel Maddow described his address as ‘the single biggest act of political selfishness’ she had ever seen. This perception was not aided by a well-publicised story in the New York Post reporting that Christie had refused to even be considered for the Vice Presidential nomination.
Yet, although the echo chamber of political journalism settled on the consensus that Christie had failed to shine, the Governor ought not be too worried. The big man can take solace from the example set by the Big Dog. When Bill Clinton nominated Michael Dukakis in Atlanta 1988, he drawled on for over half an hour. His speech was so dreary that television cameras caught numerous convention-goers restlessly talking amongst themselves. This young Governor from Arkansas, hailed as the future of the Democratic Party, turned in a dreadful performance. He, as Christie will note, suitably recovered.
As stated above, these gentle predictions all hinge upon a Romney loss in November. This is by no means inevitable, but it is more likely than not. The Electoral College is stacked in Obama’s favour, and, barring any dramatic turn of events, he will probably squeak across the finish line. If that does end up being the case, then we ought to add the name of Paul Ryan to our list. Despite his radical agenda, he is nonetheless the intellectual leader of the House Republicans, if not the Republican Party outright. But whilst his ideas now firmly occupy the mainstream of the GOP, he is nonetheless able to gain plaudits from across the political spectrum, thanks both to an honest intelligence and the fact he is happens to be a genuinely nice guy.
The last two potential 2016ers have the significant handicap of being inextricably tied to the last Republican president. The first, Condoleezza Rice, who was Secretary of State under George W. Bush, gave a brilliant speech on Wednesday evening which was described by some as the best speech given by a Republican this election cycle. Whilst she has asked to be counted out, she may be dragged back by popular appeal. A black woman with a formidable intellect would undoubtedly eat into some of the Democrats’ core voters making her a force to be reckoned with. Whilst her protestations that she is quite content with her teaching job at Stanford may be genuine, in politics it is nearly impossible to tell.
Finally, there is Jeb Bush. It may seem to many ludicrous that he can even be considered a potential candidate after both his brother and father have occupied the Oval Office, and neither with overwhelming success. Yet this was the Bush it was meant to be: smart, engaging, and, most importantly of all, a leader who can potentially drag the GOP away from its inevitable Tea Party induced implosion. His running is probably a long-shot, but a Clinton vs. Bush match-up is not yet entirely off the cards.
Out of all of this, the point that strikes one so profoundly is quite simple: the Republican field in 2016 could potentially be an incredibly strong one. Bush, Rice, Rubio, Ryan and Christie, all, in their own ways, are heavyweights. The comparison with this year’s crop could not be more unflattering: Cain, Bachmann, Perry, Santorum – even Romney – all ring horribly of mediocrity.
So whilst it remains unuttered, quietly, one speculates, there will be some in the GOP who hope Romney falls short this year so as to allow for a real presidential contender to step forward in four years’ time and give the Grand Old Party a nominee it deserves.