After Gen. Petraeus as made it abundantly clear that he will never run for political office, why does anyone keep pushing the idea of a Petraeus presidential bid? It could just be a lack of imagination, but there may be a few more significant reasons why Petraeus speculation continues long after it should have vanished.

Most of the speculation comes from the right, and my guess is that it is fueled primarily by an awareness of the tremendous weakness of the prospective Republican 2012 field. Once the conversation turns to national security matters, none of the likely 2012 Republican candidates can be taken at all seriously. When Mitt “No Apology” Romney is the relatively well-informed, careful thinker on the subject, the party has a problem. Belittling Obama’s minimal foreign policy experience was a favorite pastime during the election campaign, but even Obama’s experience c. 2007-08 was greater than anything now on offer from the likely GOP field. It is all the more remarkable that Republicans believe foreign policy to be one of Obama’s vulnerabilities, when it has proved to be one of the areas where he wins the most public support. At least at first glance, a Petraeus candidacy would lend the party some credibility in this area.

Another source of admiration expressed in speculation about 2012 is the remnant of the Petraeus cult that formed on the right before, during and after the “surge” in Iraq. Despite the lack of Iraqi political reconciliation, which was the essential measure of the plan’s success, the “surge” has been widely praised as a great success and Petraeus is identified with that. Inside the GOP, the man responsible for “turning around” the Iraq war and thereby somehow redeeming it enjoys enormous popularity. Unlike most other Republican favorites, Petraeus is also widely respected outside the party, which would make him a rather unique political figure. Of couse, all of this is irrelevant for the reasons Alex Massie has given, but I wouldn’t underestimate how important it is for most Republicans to put up a candidate whose election could be spun as an ultimate vindication of the Iraq war. Even though Petraeus will never run, it is what Petraeus represents that many on the right would like to see in the next Republican nominee: someone identified with, but not politically tainted by, the war in Iraq, and someone whom Beltway pundits and national media have already sanctified as more or less beyond reproach.