McCain is just out-and-out arrogant. While, on most issues, he is spot on, he has a tendency to make politics personal with opponents of any of his pet projects. I attended a meeting once where he absolutely denied that his amnesty bill was just that. Even after people in the audience pointed it out to him in black and white. He is also not exactly trustworthy on some key issues, and seems to feel it is all about him. Up to the present time, his unwavering support for Iraq has stood him in good stead, but he appears to be waffling on that issue too.

Guilani comes across as an incisive and decisive political leader – which is all to his benefit across the political spectrum. He is a social liberal, which doesn’t sit well with conservatives, but he doesn’t seem to make politics personal as McCain does. While he appears strong in his beliefs, he also seems to believe that men of goodwill can disagree. In light of Bush’s socially moderate positions, I’d say that the socially liberal ones of Guiliani are a dead weight.

Romney appears to talk the talk and walk the walk, although he has flipped his position on abortion. However, most of his other positions have stayed constant. He is a good speaker and doesn’t tend to go off the handle. He seems to avoid ad-hominem attacks and, like Guiliani, believe that men of goodwill can disagree. I don’t think that his flipping on abortion will be that much of a problem, especially in light of his actions as governor of Massachussets. OTOH, his biggest problem seems to be Evangelicals who otherwise pretty much agree with everything he stands for, having an absolutely tough time with his Mormonism.

My call on this one is that McCain probably won’t get much beyond first base in the Primaries because of distrust of him by conservatives and by his unconscious arrogance.

Giuliani and Romney will probably go head-to-head. This is a more difficult one to call, but because of Guiliani dropping out of an almost sure win against Hillary in the NY Senate race, I’d say that Romney has a slight edge, especially since Hillary is a top-tier candidate on the Dem side of the house.

I’d say that this really depends on how suspicious Evangelicals perceive Guiliani and how Romney handles said Evangelicals (many of whom hold Mormons in the same high regard as the Kos Kiddies for Bush).

Senator Brownback, I think has already shot himself in the foot to many times to be considered a really serious contender. Nevertheless, he is a Dark Horse Candidate and may actually do rather well – especially as a V.P. He also could possibly act as a spoiler for one of the other candidates.

Of all the candidates, the one who has worked on his campaign the hardest thus far, has been Romney. But it is early days to tell, and I’d put the current front runners as Romney, Guiliani (a close – very close second), McCain (a close third) and Brownback (distant fourth).

Note that I put McCain a close third even though I don’t think he will even come close when the primaries actually start. That is because I am going by what is happening now when I rate the candidates, rather than what I ultimately believe what will happen.

And what do I believe will ultimately happen? I don’t have enough information for that one. It depends a lot on Guiliani and Romney, the economy and Iraq. Not to mention other candidates that I haven’t mentioned who, due to some event or other, move into the top tier.

Maybe the British model would work here? I don’t know enough about it to see if it actually could.

Hope you do too!

Turst me, after awhile you start liking the taste and collect recipes.

I used to have the same feeling towards Newt that duff65 had. Now, though, I’m in full campaing mode for him. I don’t think there is any other choice.

I also think we should go back to using the nominating conventions for the purpose they were intended. Perpetual presidential campaign’s get tiresome and are weighted far to much to Iowa and NH.

Newtmania!

We’ll see what 2008 brings, asc85. Hope you’ve got your crow traps set.

Editor on January 29, 2007 at 9:09 AM

Hope you do too! I have no problem admitting I’m wrong if what you say happens. No problem at all.

But it ain’t going to happen.

Just like when media pundits jump on the concept of a “brokered convention.” There’s a difference between wanting something to happen versus the likelihood of it happening.

We’ll see what 2008 brings, asc85. Hope you’ve got your crow traps set.

Newt is gaining moment – rapidly… and it’s 8-10 months before he even declares. If Newt throws his hat in the ring he’ll get the nomination.

Editor on January 29, 2007 at 1:24 AM

No way. Sure, you, your friends, and many people who use these Hot Air boards will vote for him, but that’s it. He’d be slaughtered in a general election.

There’s a difference between who you want to get the nomination versus who is electable for the entire country.

I probably could be writing this stuff the next 12 months or so on this board. I’ll just pick my spots when I get sufficiently riled though ;)

I served under Reagan as well and I echo your sentiment. The fact that he gave me a Presidential Citation Award didn’t hurt either!

Guardian on January 28, 2007 at 11:05 PM

I am SO jealous. Bravo.

Hagel and some other Republicans have violated it.

If I were the RNC chair, I’d earmark millions to have Hagel destroyed (not just defeated) in the 2008 primaries for violating the 11th.

- The Cat

We Republicans desparately need someone who speaks English effectively and can communicate political ideas to the American people. Gingrich can do this. I don’t like Mit because he flip/flops on abortion when it suits him. This is a profile in leadership policital cowardice. I say Gingrich/Guiliani for ’08. I know Guiliani is a social lib but he’d be a great attack dog for the Newtster. Not only do we get a cop but we get the classic good cop/bad cop combination.

Number 2: I heard on Rush I think it was a quote about we are sending a “Petraeus” to Iraq, but in Hagel we a Be-trayus. The guy is spineless son-of-a-bastard and does not belong in politics for the conservtives of this country. The Lefties, yeah. Fits right in. Not the Right.

From last May GOP Leaders Lose Control of Congress:

My Dad, Ronald Reagan, proclaimed the 11th Commandment—thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican. He couldn’t have foreseen what a minority of arrogant Republicans would someday do to his party. So, as his oldest son and conservative political heir, I feel entitled to now repeal the 11th Commandment.

Lieberman’s endorsement will influence whose vote? Besides his . . . ??

Labamigo on January 28, 2007 at 9:41 PM

Dems/Reps can’t win on their own. Independents put each over the top.

I believe Mr. Lieberman will be on the ticket in 2008, as VP, either conservative or independent.

Newt said some nice things about Lieberman the other day and suggested, very non-chalantly, Republicans should court him to jump sides. Could there be a Newt/Joementum ticket????

Editor on January 28, 2007 at 11:03 PM

The Newt/Joementum ticket would get my vote so far. Mainly because there is not much to like about any of the current Presidential hopefuls.

“I was fortunate enough to vote for him twice and to serve under him for both of his terms. He really made us proud to be Americans again.”

TugboatPhil on January 28, 2007 at 9:22 PM

I served under Reagan as well and I echo your sentiment. The fact that he gave me a Presidential Citation Award didn’t hurt either!

He’ll never do it, at least not if he plans on running again in 2012.

Respectfully disagree, AP (hey, that rhymes!)

From what I’ve read, Lieberman didn’t much care for all his Democratic colleagues endorsing Ned Lamont. I understand why they had to, but Joe still got pissed off.

He just proved in 2006 that he can win his seat in the general state-wide election by NOT pandering to the Left. Why would 2012 be different? His seat will be safe, even if he endorses McCain or Guliani, or even Romney.

Go Joe Go!!

P.S. To F15Mech, I’m old enough to remember that “11th Commandment.” I think it was phrased a little differently, but I do remember that sentiment.

I’m just wondering what the next campaign adds will be like. Will everyone be wanting Joe next to them, or will they run away?

- The Cat

TugboatPhil on January 28, 2007 at 9:22 PM

TugboatPhil

Have you ever heard of the Reagan 11th Commandment?

F15Mech on January 28, 2007 at 9:36 PM

Disregard I quick search mentions it.

Ouabam on January 28, 2007 at 9:25 PM

I’m not forgetting Ronald Regan was once a Democrat!