But while past short-time front runners like Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann have been relegated to the back of the field when their bizarre behavior distracted voters from their politics, Cain seems to have survived both a horrifying scandal and countless gaffes.

It seems like Romney is also buried in the numerous “gaffes” he made, but they look a lot different than those made by his often hilarious opponents. Romney’s mistake of governing one of the bluest states in the country as a political moderate is more forgivable, or even seen as a plus to most independents, as opposed to Bachmann’s random alarmist cries of vaccines causing mental retardation.

Cain’s gaffes have been both consistently strange and intentional, with the exception the discovery of two decade-old sexual harassment suits which, based on how much one of women was able to settle for, seem to have some merit. Luckily for Cain, Gloria Allred’s involvement in the case will make it incredibly difficult for anyone to take his accuser seriously.

As a point of reference, the most embarrassing thing reporters have been able to dig up on Romney is that he fired a company for sending illegal immigrants to work on his property, in part because he didn’t want to run on something and not follow through with it himself.

The two have also adapted completely opposite strategies for dealing with the news media. Romney has spent his time on the campaign trail, often lending support to Republican candidates for local offices, and has taken advantage of the endless stream of primary debates, where he tends to perform relatively well. He’s raised money and spent time reaching out to voters in primary states, just like every other candidate before him.

But if Romney’s strategy is to appeal to consumers of the mainstream news media and make connections through traditional politics, Cain’s strategy seems to be the opposite. By expressing interest in suing Politico, and by complaining about his unfair treatment, Cain is showing that he’s not interested in dealing with any criticism, legitimate or otherwise. The victim narrative didn’t work for Bush, and it won’t work for Cain.

Trying to wade through Cain’s logic verges on impossible. On the one hand, he believes that journalists can be sued for reporting something that actually happened. On the other, he thinks that it’s okay to randomly accuse Rick Perry of uncovering the story.

In an ideal world, the potential President of the United States would hold himself to at least the same standard that he held other people to just a couple of days earlier. Also, he would put less energy into offending the people of Uzbekistan.

The only person Cain has been friendly with is Newt Gingrich, a man who shut down the government in the ‘90s by refusing to compromise. When they debated on Saturday, Cain had nothing but compliments for Gingrich – not to mention a hint that he’d choose the former speaker as his running mate.

As much as Romney wants to ingratiate himself with the Republican base, there are no indications that he’d be willing to become as destructive as Gingrich was. And in this primary season, that’s enough to set Romney far apart from almost everyone else.

Republicans promptly made it impossible for compromise to take place, then went on to use Obama’s words against him. Unless the president conceded in every possible way, he wasn’t compromising.

So when the Republicans went looking for a candidate who could get things done, it’s no surprise they chose someone who was good at making his points loud and clear, rather than a successful moderate. And no Republican is quite as loud as New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.

Perhaps inspired by liberals’ hopes for a tougher Obama or by the success of Republicans in the Senate, many conservatives have become convinced that playing rough and telling people to “Get the hell off the beach” is the best way to go.

I’m just glad a major political party has finally come to embrace gaffe-prone as a positive trait.

And while Christie’s tough talk has won him a few battles in a traditionally liberal state, it hasn’t exactly earned him broad based support. For example, Christie wasn’t able to sell Democrats on attacking teachers’ unions. He had even more trouble convincing the students who walked out of school to protest his budget back in 2010.

Meanwhile, one state to the north, Andrew Cuomo passed a budget full of spending and tax cuts and walked away with much higher approval ratings. He made his cuts without putting ideology first and somehow managed to get a number of Republican votes for same-sex marriage.

And once upon a time in Massachusetts, a Republican governor used the same strategy to pass a revolutionary new healthcare bill and win approval from one of the bluest states in the nation.

That governor now faces an endless string of primary candidates recruited specifically to beat him. Christie is the latest of these candidates, and he certainly won’t be the last, because the recruiters are looking for someone who doesn’t exist.

It turns out people like moderate executives with equally moderate legislative branches who can collectively get things done. They don’t like partisan gridlock or single party domination.

Republicans seem to equate any legislation passed under Republicans to the people’s will or actual compromise, or at least they try to sell it that way. They don’t consider any bills passed by President Obama to involve fair compromise, even if members of both parties work together to produce them.

Christie has been recruited as both a dynamic, partisan go-getter and as a skilled compromiser who can unite Washington under his agenda. That won’t work. If either party wants to end the divide in government, they don’t need one outspoken ideologue in the White House. What they need is 535 of the opposite in Congress.

If you shudder at the thought of any of the above sitting behind the Resolute desk in the Oval Office, you’re not alone. Turns out, they scare a lot of people at Powershift 2011 too.

So that’s why I took a reverse straw poll in which a convention chock full of Democrats and liberals were asked to select the scenario that terrified them the most: any of these nutjobs—with the full support of “Real America™”, corporations, and fundamentalist churches—on their way to the White House.

I asked 50 people which potential Republican presidential nominee scared them most at this point. The results are as follows.

Palin- 48%

Trump- 20%

Bachmann- 12%

Romney- 10%

Huckabee- 4%

Santorum- 4%

Other- 2%

Even though I asked for a one name answer, I got plenty more insight from Powershifters who were eager to talk.

Palin, the fan favorite, received quite a few votes for her “drill, baby, drill” campaign. She was referred to as “stupid and proud of it” and disparaging comments were made about her half-term governorship. Others remarked that she was the only potential candidate they’d heard of, and therefore the automatic winner.

People were afraid of Romney for the exact opposite reason. Most people who mentioned his name –– even those who eventually selected someone else –– saw him as Obama’s most serious threat to re-election. “People actually take him seriously,” said one concerned Democrat.

Bachmann, current tea party favorite and climate change denier, was largely ignored by Powershift attendees in favor of her sound-a-like from Alaska. But some respondents saw her as more of a threat. “She’s the only person I know who would deny the existence of dinosaurs and then tell people to go drilling for their remains, regulation free,” said one attendee.

Trump got a few of the most immediate and loudest responses, and even elicited a few moans after his name.

He got my vote (not counted above) because he’ll be the one to keep crazy in the conversation the longest. He’s also finishing towards the front of most early polls, which is way better than anyone could’ve expected from him. And if he does somehow become president, citizen Obama will probably be deported, evidence be damned.

After huge losses in the last two elections, could it get even worse for the GOP?

Whose left?

It’s a question that a lot of Republicans will be asking (or avoiding) in the coming months. Since President Obama took office in January, his approval ratings have remained astronomically high compared to his predecessor and the Republican members of Congress, while several prominent figures on the right have taken a beating. First was the admission of an affair by Nevada Senator John Ensign, then came the bizarre case of South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, and just this past Friday, news of Sarah Palin’s resignation as governor of Alaska have left the once-vibrant field of possible 2012 candidates much thinner.

Palin of course has not ruled out a run for the presidency, but resigning from an elected position a full three years ahead of the 2012 election could hardly be considered a shrewd political move. And NBC’s Andrea Mitchell has reported that sources close to Palin say that her political career is over, less than one year after it really began.

Sanford was also considered a possible candidate for the next election, but a bizarre series of events involving his disappearance, the Appalachian Trail, a rendezvous with an Argentinean mistress in Buenos Aires and the subsequent unanswered questions that surround the whole episode has left his career in shambles.

Other candidates include former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, who finished the 2008 Republican primary in third place, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and 2008 candidate and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.

But of those four candidates, only Jindal would be a break from the old school GOP that has lost 54 seats in the House of Representatives and 15 in the Senate since 2006. And if the elections in 2006 and 2008 have taught us anything, it’s that looking backwards doesn’t win you elections.

There are a whole host of other potential nominees who have yet to step forward, and they certainly have plenty of time to do so. But if the Republican Party wants to remain a truly national party capable of winning elections in all 50 states (Democrats have at least one Congressperson in every state but Wyoming, Republicans will have none in all of New England when Judd Gregg retires next term), they need to stop putting their worst feet forward.