WHAT I THINK.....DAVID KUHN

The political axiom is familiar today. Republicans nominate the next in line. So it's been from Richard Nixon to John McCain.

The next presidential cycle could prove otherwise. The GOP establishment no longer rides herd over today's elephants. Conservative activists are both exceptionally galvanized and autonomous. It's a unique mix unseen in decades. And critically, the establishment's early favorite has an Achilles heel.

This conservative milieu begs the question: is 2012 the year of the Republican dark horse?

Mitt Romney should be the next Republican nominee. No less than 81 percent of Republican "insiders" say that Romney is the "most likely" to challenge Barack Obama in 2012, according to a January National Journal poll.

"If you look at our tradition in the party, our frontrunner should be Mitt Romney," said Charlie Black, who has advised candidates from Ronald Reagan to George H.W. Bush to McCain. "But I truly believe it's way too early to tell."

Romney's vulnerability is one reason it's too early to tell. Half of all Republicans are "angry" about the healthcare overhaul. Most other Republicans are "displeased," according to a late March CNN poll. And therein lies Romney's problem.

Romney signed a universal health care plan as the Massachusetts governor. It too mandated coverage (a central focal point of conservative anger today). Romney has managed flip-flops before. He nearly won the GOP nomination despite his past support for abortion and gay rights. But this is another matter. Romney took trailblazing action on the same issue that most-rallies today's conservative grassroots. In 2008, John McCain's primary campaign ran an ad that declared: "Mitt Romney's state health-care plan is a big-government mandate." GOP rivals will offer that message on steroids in 2012. Politico aptly compared Romney's problem to Hillary Clinton's 2002 Iraq war vote.

But if not Romney, then who? The survey of Beltway insiders offered one early picture. Tim Pawlenty placed a distant second (46%). Followed by John Thune (38%) and Haley Barbour (28%). Tied for fifth were Mitch Daniels and Sarah Palin (25%). Of the group, only Palin is widely known by the public. But Palin remains a long shot in 2012. The field is open. And many other Republican dark horses stir.

The senior man has, however, taken the GOP race since 1968. The "new Nixon" is remembered for his remarkable comeback. But Nixon commanded the field by election year. In spring, among Republicans, Gallup placed Nixon ahead of Nelson Rockefeller by more than a 2-to-1 margin. He was the former vice president and almost-was president. But Nixon's nomination also heralded the new emerging GOP establishment -- more southern, more western, less blue blooded and more blue collar.

Thereafter, the GOP establishment got their man. The seniority rule became more settled (perhaps ironically) with the advent of the first contested, and modern, GOP primary race in 1976. There were setbacks -- Reagan losing in Iowa or George W. Bush losing in New Hampshire. But from Gerald Ford to George W. Bush, as Harvard political scientist William Mayer tracked, the Republican who led the final Gallup national poll before the primaries won the nomination.

The rule dulled with McCain but endured. McCain followed the path of Reagan, H.W. Bush and Bob Dole. He was the once-thwarted candidate who earned his turn. And McCain worked for that turn. He was among Bush's most effective advocates during the 2004 campaign. Then he went from 2006 frontrunner to late-2007 long shot. Mike Huckabee narrowly led McCain in the final national polls before the Iowa caucuses. But McCain soon regained his frontrunner status and won despite the vocal opposition of conservative activists like Rush Limbaugh.

Romney attempted to follow this same game plan. He dropped out in 2008 and soon became a strong advocate for McCain. He is currently campaigning and raising money for 2010 Republican candidates.

The seniority system might still work out for Romney. The GOP establishment still reigns, despite its wounded authority. The Republican Party refused to seriously consider a conservative "purity test" early this year. The result would have excluded moderates from RNC support.

Many rising GOP stars are also establishment figures. There are the popular conservatives like New Jersey's Chris Christie or Wisconsin's Paul Ryan. There is Rob Portman's Senate bid in Ohio or Marco Rubio's Senate bid in Florida. All four have followed traditional GOP paths to power and could be considered dark horses. Both Portman and Rubio achieved their prominence with the assistance of the Bush family.

Nonetheless, Rubio's rapid rise captures what's different today. In 2008, Charlie Crist was a popular Florida governor, veep contender and leading Republican moderate. But Republican momentum is rightward. And Rubio quickly overtook Crist from that right. The conservative grassroots, including Tea Party activists, are the gasoline powering Rubio.

Goldwater's day was different. The establishment ran away from "grotesque burlesque of the conservative," to quote The Saturday Evening Post. Today's Republican establishment is running towards its conservative wing. In recent weeks Dick Cheney, Eric Cantor and Romney have all endorsed Rubio.

The establishment's move nearer to its grassroots has paid dividends within the party. Only 63 percent of Republicans favorably rated their party in spring 2009. That rating rose above 80 percent by autumn and has since steadied.

Yet rank and file Republicans remain disconnected from the institutional Republican Party. Three in four GOP voters continue to believe Republicans in Congress have in recent years "lost touch with Republican voters from throughout the nation," according to Rasmussen polling.

That disconnect is one explanation for the Republican National Committee's thin coffers. The RNC had more than $30 million in the bank at the close of 2001 and 2005. The RNC closed 2009 with less than $9 million. And this was before the latest RNC fundraising scandal.

The Tea Party is especially detached from their political leadership. They are largely traditional Republican voters. Gallup found that 83 percent of Tea Party supporters identify as or lean Republican. Seven in 10 identify as conservative. Politico surveyed activists who attended a Tea Party rally in Washington on April 15. It found that more than seven in 10 voted for both McCain in 2008 and Bush in 2004. Only about one in 10 voted for Obama and John Kerry.

But when the CBS/New York Times poll asked them what living U.S. political figure they most admire, half of the Tea Party supporters declined to select any of the prominent Republicans listed. Only 5 percent said Romney. Newt Gingrich led the list at 10 percent. This is a conservative grassroots movement with little reverence for the Republican establishment.

The two Pauls illustrate the resonance of an antiestablishment-appeal on the right. Ron Paul versus Obama polls a dead heat, 41 to 42 percent respectively, according to Rasmussen. Twice as many conservatives view Paul as "representative of a new direction for the party" than view him as a "divisive force in the Republican party," Rasmussen finds. Paul's son, Rand Paul, is winning a contentious Kentucky GOP Senate primary -- despite the Republican establishment, like Cheney, backing his opponent. Rand flaunts one popular Tea Party conservative's endorsement, Palin. Both Pauls carry echoes of Goldwater-like libertarianism.

Today's activism does not approach the political significance of its 1960s counterpart (one reason: the modern GOP establishment is far nearer to Goldwater than the midcentury Republican old-guard). There is no great political realignment underway, as there was in Goldwater's time. But the force on the current political right is more bottom-up than top-down. And that has the potential to win the top.

Yet it's too early to say if someone could pull a Goldwater. And that question evokes other points. LBJ trounced Goldwater. But not all dark horses are such poor general election candidates.

Goldwater's earlier victory still shapes today's GOP. He defeated Nelson Rockefeller and with him the moderate-northeast GOP establishment. Reagan's groundwork was Goldwater. "In your heart you know he's right," read the Goldwater slogan. One could say conservative activists are still fighting, and winning, to prove Goldwater is right.

But Goldwater was never a foregone conclusion. Congressional Quarterly polled 1960 delegates and found they presumed Rockefeller would be the nominee, but they greatly preferred Goldwater. That era's dean of political pundits, Walter Lippman, declared that Republicans would nominate Rockefeller "barring miracles and accidents." Lippman also captured the establishment's view of Goldwater. "He appears to be totally without the essential conservative respect and concern for the social order," Lippman wrote, "He is a radical reactionary." Sounds like David Brooks' criticism of the Tea Party.

Goldwater's supporters began as early as 1961 to win precincts and win over conservative activists. The Tea Party is following a similar trail. But they work for a stricter conservative establishment, not a singular conservative challenging the moderate establishment. A Republican dark horse will likely only emerge if he or she can become that singular conservative.