Petraeus picks up coveted Daily Telegraph endorsement for 2012

Gen. David Petraeus has done about everything he can to dispel expectations that he’s planning a presidential run for 2012, but some are still holding out hope. Toby Harnden, Washington correspondent for the Telegraph, for instance, still thinks the general should give it a go:

Many voters yearn for an outsider, someone with authenticity, integrity and proven accomplishment. Someone who has not spent their life plotting how to ascend the greasy pole, adjusting every utterance for maximum political advantage. In this toxic climate, perhaps the only public institution that has increased in prestige in recent years is the American military. Its officers are looked upon, as General George Patton once noted, as "the modern representatives of the demi-gods and heroes of antiquity".

Where better to look for Obama’s successor, therefore, than in the uniformed ranks? Not since 1952, when a certain Dwight Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe during the Second World War, was elected President, have the chances of a military man winning the White House been more propitious.

Within those ranks, no one stands out like General David Petraeus, head of United States Central Command, leader of 230,000 troops and commander of United States forces in two wars. Having masterminded the Iraq surge, the stunning military gambit that seized victory from the jaws of defeat, he is now directing an equally daunting undertaking in Afghanistan.

The idea that voters would flock to an actual — rather than conceptual — Petraeus candidacy has always seems strange to me. His military accomplishments are undeniable, but Wesley Clark learned, battlefield prowess doesn’t necessarily translate into campaign chops. And while it’s certainly true that Americans respect the military more than their political institutions, that hasn’t really affected their voting habits in recent years. In the last five elections, war veterans George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry, and John McCain all lost to men who had never served in combat.

Who exactly is the Petraeus constituency anyway? It’s hard to imagine Petraeus would make too many major changes regarding U.S. policy in Iraq or Afghanistan, given that he’s already had a fair amount of input. And voters upset with Obama’s handling of the economy or stance on social issues are probably looking for a candidate who has actually said something about those things.