President Barack Obama has made more than a few enemies throughout his political career both inside and outside his time spent within the Oval Office.
The sheer size and scope of the Republican field of contenders for 2012 is proof. On top of that, analysts speculate the crowd may still grow, as several GOP superstars including Sarah Palin, Chris Christie and even freshman senator Marco Rubio have hinted at presidential bids.
Even those who have publicly refused the idea continue to be tossed around in the media, such as congressional conservative Paul Ryan. This long list of choices can only be beneficial for the Republican Party, which is still struggling to redefine itself, and for the country it hopes to rule again.
Ultimately, the crowded field of candidates gives the independent voters—the ultimate target of a hopeful GOP nominee—several ways of looking at the modern Republican Party. There are two basic camps: the establishment and the anti-establishment.
The establishment candidates are running on their records and their wallets. Benefiting them are pure political experience and connections, exemplified by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, who consistently performs extremely well in debates, and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who, quite frankly, has been in this race since he dropped out of the last one in 2007. These two candidates look, act and sound like presidents, a testament to their time in the public arena.
But they have skeletons in their closet precisely because they have been in the spotlight for so long: Gingrich is working on his third marriage and Romney continues to be hammered by the opposing camp for defending his not-so-conservative health care position in Massachusetts.
On the other end of the GOP spectrum is the media conglomerate's worst nightmare: the anti-establishment. This field is very diverse and, despite including long-term politicians, agrees that the Washington establishment has grown beyond its means and constitutional limits.
Social crusaders Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann have revitalized traditional conservatives, owing much of their popularity to Tea Party activism. Ron Paul, the 12-term Texas congressman running on the same libertarian principles as he has in the past, has performed exceptionally well in the polls despite his animosity with the media. CEO Herman Cain has absolutely no political experience at all, and uses this information as a reason why he is a good candidate. And of course, newcomer Rick Perry has liberals in every establishment scared stiff by sporting mannerisms virtually identical to those of former President George W. Bush.
The anti-establishment has several disagreements, but represents the idea that the federal government's growth has hit a brick wall, and checking the power in Washington is vital to sustaining the country's exceptionalism.
The drawbacks to being in this camp? The media hates it. If you believe Sarah Palin was slighted by the media establishment in 2008, you haven't seen anything yet. The difference for 2012 is that anti-establishment champions have a legitimate chance of winning. Rasmussen and other sources rank Ron Paul, once considered a fringe candidate of the right wing, only a few crucial points behind Obama should the election be held today.
It is essential the Republican Party rediscovers itself in the wake of what could be our generation's Carter administration. Discussion among candidates should involve what will energize our depressed economy, rather than what sort of rhetoric will make Obama seem unpatriotic—after all, he's often done that by himself. Overall, the more competitive the GOP primaries are, the better.