So says the slightly portly Charlie Cook, political prognosticator extraordinaire. He also says that John McCain has a 60 to 65% chance of being the Republican nominee in 2008.
I think he's right on both counts.
As to McCain, Republicans tend to operate on more of an "it's their turn" mentality when picking nominees. In 1980, it was Ronald Reagan's turn after he was defeated by Gerald Ford in their 1976 nomination fight. In 1996, Bob Dole was given the nod following his 1988 loss to George H.W. Bush.
In 2008, it's McCain's turn, although there will certainly be other challengers who'll want to have some say about that. But one can only wonder if the nomination that year will prove to be as valuable as it did for Dole in '96?
As to Giuliani, he is far too liberal to pass muster with a plurality of GOP primary voters, no matter how many candidates are in the field diluting the conservatives' numbers when things start in Iowa.
What about conservative Mitt Romney, who earlier this year creatively pioneered a bipartisan, market-based solution for health insurance coverage for all of his state's residents?
ReplyDeleteRomney's candidacy seems to be gaining traction, as evidenced by the non-endorsement endorsement he recently received from Jeb Bush.
ReplyDeleteBut so far, I've found it difficult to take his run very seriously. Although he appears to have been an interesting governor, his woodenness on the stump is off-putting. He appears to constantly be playing it safe. I'm sure part of that is paranoia about "blowing up" as his father did prior to the 1968 New Hampshire primary. Then, George Romney's campaign for president crashed as the result of his "brainwashed" statement about meetings he had with Pentagon officials on the Vietnam War.
Romney's lackluster personal presence makes it difficult for me to see how he's going to connect with people.
Mind you, this isn't a policy judgment...just a political one. (To reiterate: I don't do endorsements around here.)
Mark