National Review’s Jim Geraghty wrote this interesting piece Wednesday:

How dissatisfied are Republicans with the current field of presidential candidates?

Sufficiently dissatisfied to flirt with a long-shot effort to draft Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal, Virginia governor Bob McDonnell, or Wisconsin congressman Paul Ryan into the presidential race, despite the trio’s repeated statements that they’re not interested in running for the office.

The write-in effort would have paralleled something that happened in 1964 that was news to me until now — a successful write-in bid in the 1964 New Hampshire Republican presidential primary election. A group that was not happy with U.S. Sen. Barry Goldwater (R–Arizona) or Gov. Nelson Rockefeller (RINO–New York) wrote in former U.S.  Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge  Jr. (R–Massachusetts), who had been Richard Nixon’s running mate four years earlier. Lodge won with 36 percent of the vote, though he obviously lost the nomination to Goldwater. Says Geraghty:

But to a couple of Republican consultants yearning for better, more unifying options than the current crop of candidates, the Lodge example offered a blueprint for a late entrant. The low expectations for a write-in bid added to the appeal of the plan; if the write-in bid finished with only a few percentage points, no harm was done. But a third- or second-place finish would generate enormous discussion.

Presuming the write-in candidate had finished respectably, he (or she) would still have time to qualify for the ballot in Rhode Island (January 21), West Virginia (January 28), Kentucky (January 31), Indiana (February 10), Pennsylvania (February 14), Delaware (February 24), Arkansas (March 1), Connecticut (March 2), Oregon (March 6), Nebraska (March 7), Montana (March 12), Utah (March 15), California (March 23), and South Dakota (March 27).

The primary states still open to new candidates offer up to 623 delegates, and the caucus states still open to new candidates offer up to 371 delegates. That adds up to 994 delegates, which is less than the 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination. However, a strong performance in the remaining states would greatly enhance the likelihood of no candidate reaching the threshold. And that means, in short, a divided, dramatic, and probably very confusing run-up to the convention. …

The write-in bid was discussed among several prominent Republican officeholders and former officeholders, and the reaction was mixed. Few rejected the idea outright or claimed complete satisfaction with the current options in the GOP field, but even fewer wanted their names attached to a strange, late, high-risk effort that would most likely serve only to irk the eventual GOP nominee and perhaps the next president.

The consultants said the aim was not merely to create mischief, but to create “constructive mischief.”

The plan was to float all three popular non-candidates as options and see if Republicans coalesced behind any of them; if one of the three proved particularly popular, unaffiliated Republicans would begin mentioning the write-in option in the days before the primary.

The first thought is that this would make a great plot for a political novel (note to self: Check schedule for next week), unlikely as it was to happen. It also is, to quote Geraghty, “a warning sign to the front runner of just how much more work he needs to do to quell fears among Republicans that he is the best choice to lead America beginning on Jan. 20, 2013.”

It also demonstrates, whether you support Mitt Romney or not, the imperative that goes beyond the presidential election. Compare the middle four years of George W. Bush’s presidency, when the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, to Bush’s last two years, with Democrats controlling all of Congress. Compare the first two years of Bill Clinton’s presidency, when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, to Clinton’s last six years, when Republicans controlled Congress.

Because I’m a pessimist, I assume Obama is going to win reelection. It is therefore imperative that Obama be stopped from enacting his more stupid and dangerous ideas, which will not happen unless Republicans control at least the House of Representatives and preferably the Senate as well. As a worst-case scenario, four more years of gridlock beats the alternative.