The prospects of an Elizabeth Warren v. Mitt Romney all-Massachusetts presidential smackdown in 2016 are setting Bay State hearts aflutter. Such a showdown may be a bit farfetched at this point but we can dream, can’t we?
Yet signs abound that Romney is in fact keeping open the possibility of a third run—intriguing indeed. Why would he do it? Is it a case of “I can’t believe I lost to this guy [Obama]”? Or is it because he is so unimpressed with the potential GOP field (Jeb Bush, Jindal, Christie, Portman, Carson, Paul, Ayotte, Bachmann, Cruz, Rubio, Daniels, Graham, Haley)?
Either way, Romney has made the necessary noises to be talked about as a third-time candidate. And he’d be making a bit of history. Only twice since the 1800s has a defeated major party candidate for president come back to win the office. Most recently, the estimable Richard Nixon did it (losing to John F. Kennedy before coming back and winning in 1968) and nearly ruined the country in the process.
Romney is already facing a backlash for even considering a third run.
Meanwhile, Sen. Elizabeth Warren doesn’t need to make noise about running, everyone else seems to be doing it for her. The Boston Herald has launched a “Warren Watch” column, the first of which was about a possible matchup with Romney.
Two national liberal organizations are setting up shop in New Hampshire to try to draft her into the race. MoveOn.org and Democracy for America say they have some 200,000 signatures urging her to run.
Warren is clearly the anti-Hillary candidate, successfully turning back her own president’s nomination for a key treasury secretary position because she thought he was too cozy with Wall Street—one of her signature issues.
Either way, between the bid for the Olympics and a possible Warren-Romney showdown, it should make for some fun politics in the birthplace of our nation.