With Labor Day already in the rear-view mirror, it's time to assess the state of the presidential nomination campaigns in both parties. This is a unique cycle, the first time since 1928 that no incumbent President or Vice President is on the ballot in either party (no, 1952 doesn't count: Truman was in until he lost the NH primary to Kefauver in March), so the races were considered to be "wide open" on both sides.
For Republicans, the shock of the 2006 midterm losses are just beginning to wear off. The base remains dissatisfied and fundraising lags badly. The poor performance of the congressional party when they held power combined with the unpopularity of the incumbent President form a devastating one-two punch to Republican attitudes. However, the proverbial elephant in the room is still Iraq, and improving fortunes in prosecuting the war may enable force reductions beginning early next year, which might turn public opinion back around (since only the far left really wants America to leave Iraq as a loser).
For my take on the individual aspirants to the GOP nomination, read on:
Rudy Giuliani ~ He was always thought to be a top-tier contender, although his positions on abortion and gay rights were known vulnerabilities. Rudy neutralized those issues with many conservatives by being open and honest about them, and not playing the typical cynical politician by attempting to switch his views to appeal to the base. His record as a crime-fighter and strong position on the War on Terror establish his credentials. While trailing in Iowa and New Hampshire polls, he has built a steady and significant lead nationally, and leads in South Carolina and Florida by comfortable margins.
John McCain ~ As the "next guy in line," he was supposed, by some, to be the nominee-apparent, or at least the strong frontrunner. While he did begin the campaign with the lead, it quickly became obvious that level of support was a ceiling for McCain, not a floor, and that his many years of disparaging the base was coming home to roost. While Giuliani gets away with positions opposing the base's because he speaks of differences with respect, McCain's constant habit is to malign, insult, and ridicule his opponents on any issue, impugning them with assertions of nefarious motives. People don't like that. Without some shocking win like the Michigan theory expounded in a post below, he will be forced to bow out early.
Mitt Romney ~ Lowest of the major contenders in national name recognition from the start, Romney hasn't set the world on fire, but has steadily built an organization in the early states. His management skills come to the fore in that respect. He scared Rudy and McCain and Thompson away from the Ames Straw Poll, which diminished his victory there, but he still leads in Iowa and New Hampshire. He made the most of the time while Thompson delayed entering the race. Romney is still a dark horse, but there must be something about him to have attracted the virulent anti-Mormon slander and libel from the left and press already.
Fred Thompson ~ It seemed almost like a "Draft Fred" movement might succeed this spring, as Republican conservatives fretted over their choices. Thompson had huge momentum and could have ridden it a fair distance IF he had gotten in at the crest, around Memorial Day. His dilly-dallying allowed the momentum to fully subside, while giving Romney and McCain time to prepare for his entry. He could have probably marginalized Romney and forced McCain out, but chose instead to stand aloof while turning in a decidedly mixed bag of performances. Fred could still win it, but he's going to have to do more than show up. For instance, while he will have an audience on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno several times larger than that of his debating GOP opponents, his decision to renege on appearing won't sit well with New Hampshire voters, who are used to being catered to by all candidates.
Mike Huckabee ~ His steady debate performances added to his second-place finish at Ames gives him the undisputed lead in the Veepstakes.
None of the others merit mention.



Comments (8)
It does not matter who the ... (Below threshold)1. Posted by superdestroyer | September 5, 2007 8:02 PM | Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
It does not matter who the Republicans nominate becasue they cannot win. The only thing that the Republicans can hope for is that the Democrats do not win 60 seats in the Senate and make the Republicans totally irrelavent to politics.
Of course, the changing demographics of the U.S. will eventually eliminat the Republicans as a relevant political party anyway.
1. Posted by superdestroyer | September 5, 2007 8:02 PM |
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on September 5, 2007 20:02
2. Posted by ke_future | September 5, 2007 8:15 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
you're on crack, SD. as long as the democrats keep pushing the PC, socialistic, hypocritical crap that they do, the republican party will be relevant.
2. Posted by ke_future | September 5, 2007 8:15 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on September 5, 2007 20:15
3. Posted by Jim Addison | September 5, 2007 10:47 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Oh, don't pay any attention to him, ke_future - no one else does.
Gotta love all these little punks who think they're so tough after winning ONE election in a row . . . they're so cute . . .
3. Posted by Jim Addison | September 5, 2007 10:47 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on September 5, 2007 22:47
4. Posted by Glenn Koons | September 5, 2007 11:30 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
The debate did show tonight that the race is wide open but I do know that unless Fred-boy gives me some real concise agenda points with which to beat Her Highness, I will be sticking with Rudy and perhaps if Fred doesn't improve his ground game, go with the Huck as Rudy's VP. Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, Brownback and unfortunately, Duncan Hunter should now roll up the tarps and go home to campaign in their home states.
4. Posted by Glenn Koons | September 5, 2007 11:30 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on September 5, 2007 23:30
5. Posted by bryanD | September 6, 2007 12:47 AM | Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
"None of the others merit mention.-ja"
You're beginning to enter into Bitter Harridan territory.
Pretend you are a prohibitive choice of our Romulan heirs as prime historiographical link to the distant Earth past.
Then another (equally obsolete) (rival!) post is discovered that mentions the Unmentionable candidates which you ignore.
Lysenkoville for you.
PS: Did Gibbon approve of Elagabalus? Hardly!
Or Tacitus, Sejanus? No.
Movers are shakers and relief comes with sleep.
Otherwise, the Eye.
5. Posted by bryanD | September 6, 2007 12:47 AM |
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on September 6, 2007 00:47
6. Posted by Jim Addison | September 6, 2007 3:08 AM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
bryanD ~ If we could bottle that stuff you use, it would be worth a dollar a quart, easy . . .
6. Posted by Jim Addison | September 6, 2007 3:08 AM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on September 6, 2007 03:08
7. Posted by kim | September 6, 2007 11:42 AM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Bottled already. Ron Paul is all over the net and probably could command a small but dedicated bloc. Most of what he says doesn't outrage, and what he does, outrages most.
==========================
7. Posted by kim | September 6, 2007 11:42 AM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on September 6, 2007 11:42
8. Posted by wavemaker | September 6, 2007 5:34 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Ron Paul is drinkin' what BryanD is sellin'.
8. Posted by wavemaker | September 6, 2007 5:34 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on September 6, 2007 17:34