The Most Likely Nominees For 2008 In Order + Condi Analysis
Here are the candidates — in order — who are in my opinion, most likely to win the Republican nomination in 2008. Do keep in mind that we’re still more than 2 1/2 years out, so this line-up can & most certainly will surely change (Especially if some of the low profile governors start to pick-up momentum or if Rice, Jeb, Cheney or some combination thereof were to throw their hats in the ring).
1) George Allen
2) Bill Frist
3) Rudy Giuliani
4) Bill Owens
5) John McCain
6) Tom Tancredo
7) Mike Huckabee
8) Mark Sanford
9) Mitt Romney
10) Sam Brownback
11) Tim Pawlenty
12) Newt Gingrich
13) Tom Ridge
14) Ernie Fletcher
15) Haley Barbour
15) Bob Ehrlich
16) George Pataki
17) Rick Santorum
18) Chuck Hagel
Not Looking Likely To Run At This Point
*** Update #1 ***: In the comments section, TheVirginiaWolf says:
You are all about Condi not running, aren’t you? Ike was drafted, Condi will be drafted as well. It’s unstoppable.
First of all, I tried to keep my feelings about particular candidates out of this list. Trust me, if I were picking the candidates I’d most want to be the nominee instead of who I think will be the nominee, Rudy and McCain would be much, much, much lower (McCain would be somewhere around #2462 behind the girl who checked me out at the super market yesterday).
The reality is that Condi says she isn’t running and I believe her, just like I believe Jeb and Cheney. Were she in the running, I’d have her in the #2 slot, behind Allen.
Which brings me to my second point: Condi obviously has a lot of grass roots support, definitely more than Allen at this point. So why would she be #2? Also, why is it that — and this is probably obvious to anyone who reads RWN — I don’t think much of her as a candidate?
1) She’s pro-abortion.
2) Most of her other domestic views are unknown.
3) She’s never run for office so she’s practically guaranteed to make all sorts of dumb, rookie mistakes in a presidential campaign. Look at the terrible errors made by Ross Perot if you want to see an example of what happens when a very smart, successful person who has no inexperienced candidate jumps into a presidential election.
4) She doesn’t strike me as having the sort of charisma, personal warmth, and ability to connect with people that the most successful pols have.
5) By 2008, it looks like Condi will be a 53 year old woman who has never been married which means the press will be able to successfully portray her as weird, a lesbian, or a weird lesbian.
6) I don’t buy the idea that a Condi presidency will cause a huge shift in black voting patterns. She’s been with Bush since 2000 and as far I can see, she hasn’t helped W. with the black vote whatsoever. So why would she be able to bring in this tidal wave of black support if she were the candidate?
Look, I like Condi personally and love her as Secretary of State. But, that doesn’t mean I think she’d make a great candidate for President. I’m a big fan of Donald Rumsfeldm too, but I also wouldn’t hesitate to tell you that he’d be a poor choice to be the nominee as well.
Now could I get behind Condi or for that matter another candidate I’m not wild about for the top slot — like Giuliani — as veep? That, I could live with (No Hagel, No McCain). But, having Condi as the nominee? She just hasn’t proven she’s ready…