At this point, the pending 2008 Republican nomination contest looks like it will eventually be a battle between two candidates: John McCain and the “anti-McCain”.
To some degree, McCain still has some work to do in locking up his end of the party, such as it is. He’s still being stalked by Rudi Giuliani, who keeps popping up right along with McCain at or near the top of early GOP horse race polls. The problem for McCain is that they both seem to be fishing in the same pond, so he will have to nail down his left flank before he can look to his right, which is where the vast majority of Republican primary voters are. But given that, it’s a virtual certainty – as sure as his ego is large – that McCain will be one of two serious contenders left standing by the time the primaries and caucuses are in full swing.
The real contest will be the “anti-McCain” primary – the preliminary battle among conservative candidates to convince the party base that they can 1) beat McCain and 2) beat the Democrats in the general election.
The list of candidates in the anti-McCain primary is large and growing. There’s Virginia Senator George Allen, (who must first win re-election this fall), Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, (who currently chairs the Republican Governor’s Association), Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Kansas Senator Sam Brownback, Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, (who would certainly make any debate more interesting), New York Governor George Pataki, Congressman Mike Pence and Congressman Tom Tancredo, (of anti-amnesty fame), just to name a few.
That list is no doubt overly exhaustive, and the mere march of time as well as pending events will trim it considerably.
For example, the South Carolina Republican Party will host the first nationally televised GOP presidential candidate’s debate in May of 2007, just five days prior to its state convention which will feature a presidential straw poll of the delegates. This will provide an early glimpse of candidate strength with a representative sample of the party base, and the people most likely to do the work in the coming campaigns. The Iowa GOP and a few other states will likely follow suite with other straw polls later in the year.
Then there’s the contest for staff, and there are only so many good local operatives in early primary and caucus states to go around. Some hires are already being made, but this will pick up in earnest when the 2006 elections are over next month, as the candidates will officially “come out of the closet”. For now, most people are being less anxious than the candidates as they try to evaluate who has the best chance of becoming the “anti-McCain” alternative.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Arch Conservative
Two words.......
Mitt Fucking Romney.......
OK that's three words but this is the guy in 2008.
I've heard that Chrisitan evangelicals and other conservatives won't vote for Romney because he's a mormon.
Well recent news has shown that Romney has very strong support in NH and IA, more so than mccain. Two states that have early primaries/caucuses that go a long way in determing how the rest of the primaries will go.
Also........if Romney wins the GOP nod and then faces someone like oh say......... Hillary......... does anyone really think that evangelicals and conservatives will have a problem voting for romney in the genral election?
Mitt Romney is going to be the greatest president since Reagan.
I don't know why where even on here talking about it. Ann Romney might as well call up Laura Bush this weekend and ask if she can come over and measure the drapes in the fucking Lincoln bedroom.
THAT'S RIGHT HILLARY! YOU WILL NEVER GET NEAR THE WHITE HOUSE AGAIN! NEVER! EAT YOUR FUCKING HEART OUT AND DIE BITCH!
2 - Baronius
Drew, nice job. Thorough, detailed, with none of the erroneous assumptions that many other forecasters make. OK, almost none. It seems like George Allen's problem isn't so much winning re-election as ineptitude in running a closely-watched campaign. Even if he wins in 2006 he's going to look very weak for 2008. (Two months ago I would have been printing invitations to the Allen inauguration. Silly Baronius.)
I know little about Huckabee, but nothing bad. Brownback doesn't seem bright enough for the job. Pataki should have been in the spotlight for nearly a decade, but has never captured the public's imagination. Unless the image consultants have rebuilt Frist, I don't see him making it. It makes sense that the first strong anti-McCain will have an advantage, but I wouldn't be surprised to see some bright young conservative emerge from nowhere.
3 - Donnie Marler
Good point, Baronius. Not unlike a relative unknown from Arkansas did not all that long ago?
4 - Donnie Marler
Forgive me, Drew. Nicely done!
5 - Dave Nalle
I'm afraid I have to say 'nice try' instead of well done. The assumptions here are too flawed to take at face value.
I don't see how Allen or Romney can even be considered viable national candidates. They both have too much negative baggage for people of their relatively low level of positive national recognition. I'd be surprised to see either of them in the top 5 after the first few months of a primary.
And your writing off of Giuliani is inexplicable. He's the guy to beat, not McCain.
McCain is the new Bob Dole. Everyone knows who he is and respects him but no one wants to vote for him. First off, he's a Senator, and that automatically makes him both corrupt and unqualified at the same time. Second, his name is on campaign finance reform legislation which most traditional Republicans consider an abomination. Third, he's too liberal for the religious right and too pro-life for independents. McCain is a different candidate for every interest group, and none of them like the face he's showing them.
Giuliani, on the otherhand, has a more unambiguous record and most importantly hasn't got a single piece of legislation you can hang on him that people don't like - the benefit of never having been a Senator. Giuliani may be socially liberal in some ways, but he's tough on crime, tough on terrorism, and good with a budget. He's also a genuine outsider and he'll draw independent voters like crazy.
If the GOP nominates McCain they'll lose. If they nominate Giuliani they have a real chance.
Dave
6 - Arch Conservative
Nalle you couldn't be more wrong.
You claim Mccain is too liberal and then say Guiliani is the guy?
You're kidding right?
Guiliani is about as liberal socially as you're going to find in the GOP. Plus he's from New York city.
it's because of this he will not win the ticket. End of story.
I'm telling you it's gonna be romney. I don't know what negative baggage he has other than being mormon but he will be the guy unless someone better emerges.
7 - Dave Nalle
Arch, all the polls which assess the preferences of conservatives show them supporting Giuliani more strongly than McCain. Even polls of the west and of social conservatives rate Giuliani higher than any other candidate. He's not as socially liberal as you think, plus he's such a hardass about crime and terrorism that it scores him points which counterbalance his socially liberal leanings.
Current polls don't even show Romney as a blip on the radar. He gets 1 or 2% compared to 40% for Giuliani. And Romney has the Big Dig hanging around his neck as baggage. I suspect he won't even make it to the first formal primary.
BTW, I've got an article on the polls in the politics section.
Dave
8 - Nancy
Good article & summation of the various GOP candidates in 2008.
I agree with Dave, I think Allen is out; at the moment he's barely hanging on in the VA election - not a good sign for chances in a national election - and his name has become a sort of joke, synonymous with good ol' boy neanderthalesque redneck racism.
Wishful thinking on Arch's part or not, Romney isn't well known outside of New England - & then there's the Mormon thing. A lot of people, an awful lot of people, like me, view any Mormon with suspicion, because the iron fist of the LDS church notoriously requires absolute obedience to the ruling junta of the Salt Lake City triumvirate of the current "Prophet" & his two top co-rulers - and that is exactly what they are. I will not be ruled by ANY religious puppetmasters, whether in Rome or Utah, and most non-Mormons are of the same mind. Arch can bluster & curse all he wants, but Romney has no chance in a general election, and the GOP leadership is smart enough to know it. They won't waste their time tilting at windmills with a candidate with this much baggage.
I don't know the others well, which doesn't augur well considering I'm pretty informed generally about political things - certainly more than the average idiot on the street who can't tell you who their own senators are. If I don't know much about them, chances are their names will be met with blank faced stares by the "average" voter. At the moment, of all of them, Tancredi has the most name recognition, but only on one issue. He'll have to diversify a lot more before he has a chance in a general election; otherwise he's a one-issue candidate.
Frist is the one I see as the probably RNC choice: he's malleable, he's a reliable Bush lapdog, and a first-class RNC syncophant to the religious reich & the neocons: witness his disgraceful performance in the Schiavo affair. Most definitely the neocons are not going to easily relax their claws on control of the WH if they can help it by ensuring the GOP nominee is their puppet. On the other hand, he's also a part of the currently disgraced and disgraceful GOP congressional leadership, even if he had nothing to do with the Foley matter; he's just too good a buddy to Hastert & the other scumbags currently in bad odor with the public, but that can possibly be fixed by the time 2008 rolls around, and the voting public has a famously short term memory & attention span which may be to his benefit.
It will be interesting to see which one the RNC selects to back against McCain/Giuliani.
Now THAT would be a running ticket, wouldn't it?! McCain/Giuliani... probably a winning combination with everyone except the religious reich & hard-core partyliners. For the most part, everyone knows both of them by name. Both have "good" recognition, and overall "good" reps. How much senatorial experience will taint McCain, if at all, will remain to be seen. I don't think it will. He's widely perceived - especially by the all-important swing & moderate voters - as not only a maverick who votes his conscience (and in today's atmosphere of disgust with partyliners & the GOP leadership, that's a HUGE plus) but also as a bit of a paladin, as well as a well-known genuine war hero. No problems or questions about HIM having served or cut & run/deserted, whatsoever, and he'll certainly never bear the epithet of "chickenhawk" or any other less than flattering term, just because his experiences are too well known. Even liberals like me are attracted & awed by his service record & willingness to buck the system & leadership, damn the consequences. BUT, for exactly those reasons, I doubt the GOP will back him. He's no puppet, and that's what they want above all else: a malleable, easily directed candidate like Dubya amenable to continuing to take orders from the big business consortiums - especially Big Oil - who rule behind the GOP throne. Then there's the fact that McCain compromised some of his independence in 2004 by finally coming round & campaigning for Bush, who probably would have had to steal a lot more votes than he did had McCain not yielded & thrown in a few good words for him. That McCain would prostitute himself to the lying bastard who smeared him so savagely in 1999/2000 IS a taint, indeed - plus I think the RNC is going to pull the ball away from him & renege on their promise of 2008 endorsement, & he was a bit too much of a desperate fool to believe them; they cannot be trusted, and unless he utterly trounces their "anti-McCain", they won't be supporting him unless they have no choice. In any event, he's still the GOP's best hope to keep the WH, and it may be the neocons & multinationals/Big Oil will find a way to get their meat hooks into him yet. Plus the Dems currently don't have anyone worth rallying behind at the moment except Hillary, and her only because of her name recognition value; and if they keep on as they have for the past 6 years, they'll be too disorganized - as usual - to really coalesce behind any one candidate.
9 - Dave Nalle
You can't put McCain and Giuliani on the same ticket. They're both getting old and they're both first-stringers. It's got to be one of them with a younger up-and-comer from a different part of the country. McCain/Romney would work or Giuliani/Tancredo - those are more logical combinations.
Dave
10 - Nancy
Wasn't Reagan's VP Bush I? If that wasn't two old men, that what was? & Cheney isn't exactly a spring chicken, either. If you check it out on www.vicepresidents.com, it seems to me MOST of the VPs were as old if not older than the presidents. Lots of old crocks doubling up, as it were.
11 - True American
When will all you right wing wacko's wake up??? The republicans only favor one type of person, the rich!!!! Are you rich? Probably not. Then why do you favor a party that wants to destroy the middle class and go back to only two types of classes. The rich ( which 99% of America isn't ) and the Poor. Who do you think all these tax cuts favor. The rich! You and I don't get a cent from them. What does the rich do with the extra money they have? They build factories yes, but in China or Mexico! Unless you move there, your not getting anyting out of it. So when will people wake up???
12 - Nancy
LOL - I'm no right-wing wacko, that's Arch & Big Dog!
13 - Donnie Marler
Arch, you're dreaming. Romney won't be the guy. Few people even recognize his name when asked.
Here's a game for you to play. Walk up to anyone and ask them to give you the first word that comes to their mind when you say a name.
Guiliani: You might hear; Mayor of New York, strong, tough, leader..etc. etc.
Romney: The leading answer will be 'who?'
14 - Dave Nalle
When will all you right wing wacko's wake up??? The republicans only favor one type of person, the rich!!!! Are you rich? Probably not.
Wrong. GOP policies are tailored to favor anyone who wants to make money and keep it. That means the rich, the middle class and anyone who wants to move up into those groups.
Then why do you favor a party that wants to destroy the middle class and go back to only two types of classes. The rich ( which 99% of America isn't ) and the Poor.
Because they seek to expand the 'rich' to include the middle class, and they've been remarkably successful at it in the last few years, with more people than ever moving up into the top income brackets - more millionaires and more people with assets over $500,000 than ever before. If you consider that rich, then you're now talking about almost a third of the population.
Who do you think all these tax cuts favor. The rich! You and I don't get a cent from them.
This is just a lie. The tax cuts returned money to people in every income group, except the lowest group, which pays no taxes in the first place - and the cuts included an expansion of that group so that more people pay no taxes than ever before.
What does the rich do with the extra money they have? They build factories yes, but in China or Mexico! Unless you move there, your not getting anyting out of it. So when will people wake up???
And every job they create in Mexico or China creates 1.1 higher paid jobs here in the US at the same time.
Sorry, no one is buying your leftist propaganda anymore.
Dave
15 - Nancy
Dave, I keep telling you that while you're a great writer on politics, you live in a fairytale world of your own when it comes to economics. The GOP has been the party Of The Rich, For The Rich and By The Rich for 100+ years now. Their only interest in the non-rich is to grab even more of their meagre resources than they already have, and make sure they (the non-rich) remain a permanent peasant underclass to be exploited by The Rich for cheap labor with few or no benefits. They also aim to deplete the middle class & reduce them to the level of the peons, again for the increased benefit of The Rich, and nobody else. And trickle-down economics NEVER worked, not for Reagan, and not now. The middle class is increasingly sliding downward as far as lifestyles, income levels, and benefits go. People & families that a generation or two ago would be considered solidly middle class are now only a paycheck away from being homeless, and are already without access to affordable health insurance. This is & has been well documented by a myriad of concerns & studies. Stick to politics, Dave; you're clueless when it comes to Real Life Economics & how The Rest Of Us live.
16 - Arch Conservative
Donnie ......... no one outside Arkansas knew who bill clinton was 2 years before he won office.
Guiliani is too liberal.
You're misunderestimating Romney and his people and you WILL be proven wrong Donnie.
17 - Silas Kain
Mitt Romney - the anti-Governor of Massachusetts. The moron (not Mormon) swept into the state and swiftly axed acting Governor Jane Swift from the opportunity of gaining the governorship on her own merit. He's a conniving, calculating, opportunistic piece of work. Since the day he became governor he has done nothing for the Commonwealth except use the State House as his bully pulpit on the way to the White House. The gubernatorial election in Massachusetts this year is about giving Kerry Healey (the current Lieutenant Governor) another 4 years. She has been acting governor more often than not as Mitt parades around the country gathering followers to the Romney for President cult.
It’s ironic that years before Romney was crowned governor, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) erected a huge temple in Belmont, Massachusetts amidst controversy, public protest and community skepticism. The temple to Mormonia is located within minutes of Romney’s residence. Is this coincidence? Nope. Nothing Romney or the Mormons do is coincidence. America has had enough drama thanks to religion. The election of Mitt Romney as President sends a confused message to the rest of the world. Religion will play a major role in my ballot in 2008. The Presidential candidate who invokes the Deity the most is the person who should get the least â€" votes, that is.
P.S. By the way, I voted for Deval Patrick in the Primary and will do so in the general election. For the first time in my life I voted in a Democratic primary. Mr. Patrick is the best hope Massachusetts has of turning things around. Romney is going, Healey must go. I also wrote a vote in against Ted Kennedy for U.S. Senate. I cast my ballot for Barney Frank!
18 - Donnie Marler
"Donnie ......... no one outside Arkansas knew who bill clinton was 2 years before he won office."
True, but William Jefferson Clinton had the rarest of gifts for a politician, charisma. Clinton had a way of relating to damn near everyone and appearing empathetic. Very few people could follow his path to the White House.
"Guiliani is too liberal."
According to what standards? The more stringent conservatives would certainly find him too liberal. The majority of moderate conservatives would not. No candidate is going to be everything to everyone. I think Rudy appeals to a wider swath of voters than anyone else.
"You're misunderestimating Romney and his people and you WILL be proven wrong Donnie."
We shall see, my friend. If nothing else you've caused me to look at Romney closer.
19 - Dave Nalle
no one outside Arkansas knew who bill clinton was 2 years before he won office.
Clinton was head of the DLC for a number of years before the election and anyone who was politically informed knew who he was.
As for Massachusetts governors running for president, Weld would be a better pick than Romney.
Dave
20 - Silas Kain
Damn. Dukakis would be better than Romney. How about Rick Perry, Dave? He'd make a real pretty President, but can he lead?
21 - Clavos
Silas #20:
Obviously you haven't read Dave's Kinky Friedman articles...
22 - Silas Kain
I'm being facetious, Clavos. The only think Perry could lead is a gay pride parade in Amarillo. I like to feign stupidity and crack dumb questions.
23 - Arch Conservative
You voted for Devall Patrick and you're proud of it?
That tells me all I need to know about you Silas.
I was born in MA but thank my lucky stars I don't live there anymore.
When Devall gets elected you're going to get nothing but higher taxes, in state tution for illegal aliens, softer penalties for criminals and yes even more people leaving the state in than the current ongoing mass (no pun intended) exodus.
You do realize that Massachusetts is the laughing stock of the nation don't you Silas? Oh wait you probably don't.. you're one of the pinheads voting for Patrick.
Romney is the only thing good to come out of MAssachusetts in recent years. From day one he's been been calling for accountability on the big dig but all the dems on beacon hill, the turnpike authority and the union thugs that own the state have stood in his way. Let's not forget that there has been a billion dollar budget surplus under Romney the past seeveral years, good luck trying to get that with Patrick, he's going to tax and spend the state into the poorhouse.
Oh and when was the last time Romney invoked a diety in his political dealings? When has he ever?
I am going to laugh my ass off when Patrick wins and ruins the state. Well it's already ruined but hey Patrick just going to take a really bad thing and make it even worse.
Here's to Willie Horton and Mike Dukakis.. er... I mean Deval Patrick and Ben Leguire. The voters of Massachusetts and Devall Patrick deserve each other.
24 - Clavos
Point taken, Silas. I have a friend who likes to do that.
He has a phrase in Spanish (he's Mexican) about it which, loosely translated, is: "sailing under the flag of a dumbass."
You'd be surprised (or maybe not) at how well that works for him.
And I'm not being facetious..
25 - Silas Kain
You voted for Devall Patrick and you're proud of it?
Yep, P-R-O-U-D!!!!!!!
That tells me all I need to know about you Silas.
I was born in MA but thank my lucky stars I don't live there anymore.
Imagine my sentiments, darlin'!
When Devall gets elected you're going to get nothing but higher taxes, in state tution for illegal aliens, softer penalties for criminals and yes even more people leaving the state in than the current ongoing mass (no pun intended) exodus.
Delusion, the sign of a true arch conservative.
You do realize that Massachusetts is the laughing stock of the nation don't you Silas? Oh wait you probably don't.. you're one of the pinheads voting for Patrick.
Why? Because we sent the first BLACK senator to Congress who happened to be a Republican? Because we are about to elect a black governor for the first time in the Commonwealth's history? We're not a laughing stock, my friend, we're held in awe.
Romney is the only thing good to come out of MAssachusetts in recent years. From day one he's been been calling for accountability on the big dig but all the dems on beacon hill, the turnpike authority and the union thugs that own the state have stood in his way. Let's not forget that there has been a billion dollar budget surplus under Romney the past seeveral years, good luck trying to get that with Patrick, he's going to tax and spend the state into the poorhouse.
Romney is NOT a Massachusetts native. His political power machine targeted the state with the best chance of giving Mitty a governorship. They stole the office from Jane Swift - it's that simple. Mitt Romney is a Yankee Carpetbagger.
Oh and when was the last time Romney invoked a diety in his political dealings? When has he ever?
Well, Salt Lake City is prepping for a Moronic Presidency.
I am going to laugh my ass off when Patrick wins and ruins the state. Well it's already ruined but hey Patrick just going to take a really bad thing and make it even worse.
Imagine my joy when Patrick and his Administration make history. Mark my words, it will happen!
Here's to Willie Horton and Mike Dukakis.. er... I mean Deval Patrick and Ben Leguire. The voters of Massachusetts and Devall Patrick deserve each other.
Spare me. Is that all you have to dish out? Sweetie, the voters of Massachusetts deserve better and as a result Deval Patrick will be our next Governor.
Clinton-Obama 2008!