Giuliani will submit, and win. Then lose please please please then lose.

There's always the bone-chilling visage of Ron Paul looming in the background.

I just hope that most of them, at least the supposed top four, stay past NH simply for entertainment value and the fact that the longer they are all in the running, the more they'll have to savage one another. But, gawd, what a bunch of losers.

No one has cast a single ballot or attended a single caucus. I agree they seems like a crop of losers, but it's too soon to predict anything.

It is baffling. An unknown guv of Arkansas rides to the rescue? It has happened before...

And you gotta admire Ron Paul -- man, does he have guts.

Isn't Dick Cheney available?

I was reading about what these potential, presidenses were debating, both want to cut taxes while increasing military spending.

Is it just me or is that just plain fecking looney?

Liberman: "When you have no man, Vote Lieberman!"

Wouldn't surprise me if Romney, Giuliani, Thompson end up with 20%-25% each with the remaining 30% divided between McCain, Huckabee, etc. A real disaster for the Repubs.

Romney: Lets cut taxes Rudy, borrow more money from China, then supply billions of dollars in arms to foreign countries to fight asymetrical warfare.Shock and awe Rudy..Shock and fecking Awe!!!

Rudy: Sounds like a great plan Mitt, It worked so well in Iraq with all these high tech devices!

Kate O'B at the Corner has the perfect solution:

Cheney '08 - Kate O'Beirne - The biography is out in time, the political skill, resolve, and clear thinking have long been there....

Last I looked, Dick's poll numbers were in the teens. And he's going to save them? Right. These people are in deep denial. Keep hoping Kate!

it sure seems as the Republican Party is heading for a brokered convention this year.

I think you're unduly pessimistic. We don't even know if all of the GOP candidates have thrown their hat in the ring yet. There was some talk earlier in the year of General Petraeus running for President. I think he would make a wonderful President. Retired General Peter Pace would also be a good choice. I think a combination of General Petraeus as Presidential and General Peter Pace as Vice-Presidential candidate would be unbeatable. With two generals on the GOP ticket, the American people would know which side the military has the most confidence in and would almost certainly lead to a Republican victory in 2008 because the American people want to win in Iraq.

david on October 11, 2007 at 6:19 PM: Giuliani will submit, and win."

Heh. The GOP candidates have submitted to the right-wing religious fundies already, backtracking from previously-held positions...It's just that the right-wing fundies' pet issues - homosexuality and reproductive rights - aren't major issues in this election cycle.

Dobson and Robertson and their ilk aren't getting the attention they feel they deserve, and they are whining...all in the name of the Lord, of course...

That's right Al, we want to win even if we have to lose to do it.

ever wonder why the call it "al"-Qaida

Newt had it right: "intellectual pygmies", the lot of 'em.

Run Newt run! Or, splinter Republican Party splinter. Either one is good.

RUDOLPHUS GIULIANIUS CANNOT BE DEFEATED....in any way, by any body, by any force in this universe. Ever. He has attained supreme anointment to lead this God Chosen Nation.

He is magnificent. He singlehandledly saved the USA with the greatest press conference performance in human history. You haven't seen nothin' yet.

You haters will be vanquished. Glory is our destiny.

Given the environment that Kevin just described, I'm astonished and relieved that Huckabee isn't getting more traction. Astonished because I really do think he can satisfy all the various factions of the party, relieved because I think that, with a unified GOP behind him, he'd be a formidable electoral component, more so than anyone else in the Republican pack. Like 2000-vintage George W. Bush, Huckabee is a southern conservative who seems inclusive and moderate.

Part of the resistance to Huckabee, I think, is entirely down to the facts that he raised taxes in Arkansas, and he appears to care about the poor. I saw Ann Coulter on a news channel the other day spewing vitriol about Huckabee and comparing him to John Edwards, entirely because Huckabee sometimes talks about poverty.

I think also that referring to him as a "second-tier candidate" is a self-fulfilling narrative. This whole media narrative of different candidate tiers will cost the GOP the White House in 2008.

Kevin,
Maybe you should get INKBLOT to run FOR GOP PRESIDENT. That way we would have a spy in the camp. Even if all he did was lay on the kitchen tablecloth and proffer his belly for tubby rubbies the republicant sheeples could easily see he is a far better candidate than Rudy, Mitty and Freddy.

Huckabee is a decent man. A through-and-through conservative, it is true, but a decent man.

I heard one right-wing pundit (from the Independent Women's Forum) both praise Huckabee and explain his dilemma. Huckabee, she said, is not "a hater."

This, in short, is what the GOP has come to. It will flock only to haters and war mongers.

Dick Cheney/Jeb Bush 2008: Twilight in America.

Seriously, though, the GOP would lose in a landslide if this thing went to a brokered convention. The Dems will have it sorted out by Feb. 5, and going seven months without a standard-bearer while the other party has one--and one that is putting out ads, stumping states, and so on--for seven months...I just don't see how you come back from that. I don't think the pooh-bahs of the GOP will ever let it come to that, but when the pooh-bahs are as divided as they are now, it might make sense.

Huckabee might well find himself to be the compromise candidate, and all the better for America, since he and McCain are probably the only Repubs that would make okay presidents.

Huckabee vs. Clinton?! That would be really amusing here in God's country, Arkansas!

It can't be bloody enough for me. I hope they destroy each other. Bunch of total assholes.

Hey Al, great idea. Only one problem, in order to run for President, Petraeus would have to quit the army, in wartime. Surely that will inspire the troops in his leadership! What a slogan 'we fucked up Baghdad, you know we can fuck up Washington!' or maybe 'we came home from Baghdad so your kids can spend more time there!' and let's not forget the 'waah, waah, MoveOn called me a bad name!' bring that shit on, I would LOVE to watch that campaign.

nutty little nut nut:

The Repubs draft Lieberman and the Dems draft Gore! That would finally resolve the 2000 Florida debacle, unless of course Nader runs ... and Nader wins.

1920. Who's Warren Harding?

If it goes to a brokered convention, don't rule out the Jebster. I don't think it will go that far. The Rethuglicans have too much to lose by doing that.

i think that Huckabee could well be the sleeper here, but I'm frightened about the support Ron Paul has here in my neck of the woods (North Alabama).

Ah, Kevin.

I've got the unbeatable GOP ticket:

Rice / Dole, '08!

Two formidable women. Immediately they negate the "female" gimmick the Dems are pulling out this year. And the balck gimmick. They couldn't use!

Oh, yeah, and if it goes beyond a single round of a convention people can be nominated from the floor. That's how Cheney/Bush is going to happen. I'm only half-sarcastic here.

Actually, Al sorta has a point: drafting Petraeus would probably be the best choice the GOP could make right now from their perspective, although not so much Peter Pace, who was a rather poor JCS Chairman. Still, sitting generals with no political experience don't tend to do well as Presidents--Grant and Taylor are the most obvious examples, but there have been others. Ike and Jackson were pretty good, but Jackson's last job before the Presidency was in the United States Senate. The one general who would have been great but never won was Winfield Scott Hancock, who was the only Union General worth a damn.

Remember Dole in '96!

Oh please, there's still plenty of time for the scientists working at the secret Cloning Laboratory deep in the Texas Hill Country to perfect their Ronald Reagan Clone before the New Hampshire primaries!

>>Two formidable women. Immediately they negate the "female" gimmick the Dems are pulling out this year. And the balck gimmick.

This says a lot about egbert's mindset. When a non-white, non-male runs for president, it's a "gimmick." I guess the GOP is tyring a Mormon gimmick and a cross-dressing fascist gimmick this time out.

Nah. It'll be Romney. Watch it happen.

i refuse to concede that newt isn't in this, and i still regard him as a real possibility.

my consulting work has brought me into contact with a wealthy family with a long heritage of republican giving, and the only potential candidate they like is newt.

i do, of course, know that the plural of anecdote is not data.

The Christian Right seems to be gearing up for a full-scale war against Rudy Giuliani, and it's hard to believe he can win the nomination in the face of this onslaught. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, still has his whole Mormon problem, and it doesn't seem to be going away.

Duh, I guess Steve was right after all.

And really, the word is that Rudy lies sort of like Bush lies too - another Bushie in the flesh, yuck.

Anyway Rudy equals himself to those firefighter, those police officers that gave their lives for their fellow man - and what is it that the good book says about how no greater love is there than a man that lay down his life for his fellow man?

Rudy doesn't even have a slight cough from breathing the poisness air in the aftermath, so what a jerk, that Rudy would try to compare himself with the 9/11 dead. What a what a sacrilegious, pompous a-hole.

AND I do remember saying so, that the Judge Roy crowd would NOT follow Rudy. Rudy can't talk redneck, doesn't know how, that is always a minus for the Red State folks. Rudy is damn sure no Huckbee, and NO Ron Paul either and doesn't speak the language, I mean really, what was the RNC thinking? Who do they Bushize the GOP? But wait, isn't Bushie at 29%. If you can't win, pretend that you don't care.

Okay, whatev...why is Bushism so powerful that lossing is everything?

AND I do remember saying so, that the Judge Roy crowd would NOT follow Rudy.

You did say it; I remember it, and now I'm watching events unfold with great interest.

I really hope Huckabee is not the dark horse here. That could present some problems. Otherwise, the popcorn machine is in permanent "on" position.

Huckabee?

But he's got too much humanity to be the GOP nominee.

Maybe if he ups the hate the base will support him.

Who runs the Republican Party? At at a deep level, who is the William Costigan who makes the decisions and orders the hits? If we knew that we would know what the plan is and who the candidate will be.

IF there is going to be an anointed candidate this year - and that is the nub. I suspect the controllers have decided to throw this one to the Democrats and plan for a comeback in 2012.

Cranky

The condensed primary schedule does seem to make a brokered convention possible. When primaries were stretched out, the party tended to unify behind the early leader. But, there may not be time to do that, so there really might be no candidate with a majority going into the convention.

A brokered Rep convention would be good news for the Dems, of course.

david had it right off the bat. Abortion, gays? Who gives a crap? All any of them is interested in is power.

Rudy has been chosen by the neocons as the next terrorist slayer extraordinnaire like GWB. He even has a Straussian as the Chief campaign strategist for statecraft and human rights.

Underestimate him at our own peril.

Or, Gingrich will be carried in on shoulders.

Reagan's body is being mummified and will become the Republican nominee. A small speaker has been inserted in its mouth so it can deliver speeches and appear to be thinking for itself, like any good Republican president.

I'm pulling for Willard the Mormon. There's a better chance of Brittney Spears winning the Nobel Peace Prize than Willard the Mormon becoming president.

I disagree with your tone and characterization, Kevin.

Of course somebody will win, and these guys nicely represent the state of Republican politicking.

Just as with the 12 Democratic nominees in 2004, the field nicely represents the partisan constituency. The 12 Democrats ranged from pretty liberal to extremely conservative, giving Americans a pretty broad choice of contenders for the Presidency. Almost all of them were fine people, with varying degrees of capability.

The various Republican nominees at least _act_ bat-shit crazy. They're scrambling over how ruthless they are, how much they hate terrorists, how much Jesus is good and abortion is bad. There's a fair amount of bat-shit crazy economics in there for good measure.

Just a thought....has anybody noticed that the religion-family values-social values- wedges these guys ponded into the Democrats are precisely what is dividing them today. I doubt it dawned on them that setting up criteria for candidate acceptance that NOBODY can meet was a smart thing to do. What a pleasant irony!
Richard

We should allow foreigners and illegal aliens to run for president to get a better choice. I could go for Putin or Kofi Annan as they are head and shoulders over any domestic candidates.

There would be no need to change the Constitution or any laws as Washington has a de facto policy of ignoring illegal alien job holders in the U.S. Rudy was a prosecutor and he informs us that illegal entry is legal, and not only is it legal, but it should be legal.

....A brokered Rep convention would be good news for the Dems....ex-lax at 9:10 PM

Cranky has a point. Except for the Bushies, who want someone like Ghouls to protect them from the law, why would anyone WANT to be president next year? It's a clusterfuck requiring a lot of work and a lot of luck. Why do it, let the dems clean up the mess, as usual, then get back to it in 12

"Ike and Jackson were pretty good"

Yeah, Jackson was great! Especially his enlightened policy of sending the entire US Army to drive people out of their homes at bayonet-point, herd them into disease-infested concentration camps, then march them in the dead of winter cross-country before abandoning them in the wilderness all because they had the temerity to be living on land white people wanted. What a guy!

Just a thought....has anybody noticed that the religion-family values-social values- wedges these guys ponded into the Democrats are precisely what is dividing them today. I doubt it dawned on them that setting up criteria for candidate acceptance that NOBODY can meet was a smart thing to do. What a pleasant irony!

Yes, and doesn't it feel so good to be right about these creeps? I love being able to say, "I told you so" to my good Christian friends...

I suspect the controllers have decided to throw this one to the Democrats and plan for a comeback in 2012.

- Cranky

Interesting thought.

"The controllers" have enough leverage on the Supreme Court and in Congress to get what they want - control, mainly, plus a complete surrender on economic issues to the aristocracy of wealth.

If they get another successive Presidential term, it's going to be hard to string along the religious extremist voting base that makes the whole thing possible. They'll expect RvW to be overturned, which would piss off enough of the rest of the country that the'd lose some control. Given that control is the main thing controllers care about, my suspicion is that they may take a pass.

Given that, who is the sacrificial lamb that would help them the most in making the sacrifice?

Probably not a Guiliani, the nomination of whom would threaten to split off a large chunk of the voting base. Unless they figure he's charismatic enough to positively influence some swing state congressional races in the Repubs favor, he may well be out.

McCain is no longer relevant, and they don't want to give him a platform in case he decides to do more than pretend to be a maverick once he realizes he's not going to be President. He's so close to the war as well that he might tie the Republicans closer to it at a time when they'll want distance, which could hurt the races lower down.

Ron Paul? He has two vital flaws - streaks of honesty and batshit crazy.

Romney? Maybe. He close enough on abortion/gay rights to avoid angering the base, far enough away that they can blame his defeat on not being pure enough.

Frederick of Hollywood? Possible, but only if he shows he can work the stump better. He's a Daddy/charisma play all the way, but if it won't show up on TV when he's playing himself, he could be a liability. He benefits from the soft bigotry of low expectations on the policy front, but that TV star charisma better show up soon...

Huckabee? Interesting... far enough from the war to create distance, 'nice' enough to bring back some alienated soccer Moms and possibly some ethnic folks. Plays well on talk shows. Quite disposable.

The key is that in 2012, things won't be pretty for the Democratic President. Exiting Iraq is going to be ugly. The fiscal mess is going to require real work to clean up, and Republicans in Congress are going to obstruct every step of the way. The Manchurian Bureaucrats the Bush Junta has placed in every department will make governing near impossible. The media will be careful to balance actual stories of Republican corruption with as many insinuations about Democratic corruption as possible.

It doesn't matter who it is - the mess Bush has left behind has infected whichever Dem wins.

So, the 2008 candidate may well be whoever can set up as much Congressional control for 2008-2012, and the best Presidential chances for 2012. Any other thoughts?

It's a little early to be getting this celebratory, isn't it? I've seen this race compared to the '88 one, and I seem to remember Dukakis coming out of the convention that year with a big lead. I believe that, to a large extent, circumstances are coloring our opinions of the candidates: could this crop of candidates possibly be worse than the ones they had in 1999, when George W. Bush was considered a strong candidate? People are tired of Republicans, tired of the hypocrisy, the fuckups, the war, the endless sloganeering, the cheap political tricks and gimmickry -- tired of it all. And that, I think, more than anything else, is why we are focusing on the negatives of these candidates rather than their strengths. Romney, for example, probably wouldn't be a bad president, but Romney, viewed by eyes tired of Republicanism, is a flip-flopping Mormon. But peoples' attitudes can change, and there's still over a year left for that to happen.

let the dems clean up the mess, as usual, then get back to it in 12

I have this feeling the GOP doesn't realize just how much ill will they have built up over the past six years. The Republican brand is now associated with lies, fear, pointless war, idiotic gay-baiting, and sucky economic performance in the minds of a whole generation of voters. Whichever gooper runs in '12 will be fighting not only the power of incumbency but also the very long shadow that the chimp's presidency will cast over this country's political life for many years. And that's not even mentioning the stiff demographic headwind blowing against the GOP as the population gets steadily less white and less christian.

Honestly I don't see how the nominee is anyone but Huckabee although I think Ron Paul is going to shake them up a little bit coming out of Iowa & NH. For as unimpressive a field as the Democrats had in 2004, this 2008 class of Republicans is even worse. Rudy is pro-choice, pro-gay rights, anti-gun control and insane. Mitt is a serial liar but has great hair. McCain just looks equal parts lost & pissed off. Freddie just looks bored and on the prowl for chicks. The only ones who stand out even a little are Huckabee & Paul and there is no way the right would accept Ron Paul. And for as bad as it is on the White House side, can you imagine being a candidate for the House or the Senate and seeing what is going to be at the top of your ticket? 2008 is going to be a terrible year to be a Republican or at least what passes for Republicans these days.

When all the dusts settles, Hillary vs. Jeb with the primary issue being who loves Jesus more.

John Judis has already pointed out in the New Republic that -- given the way the primaries are set up this year -- there's a very real chance that the convention could jam up and not produce a first-ballot majority for the first time since 1952. I would imagine that in that case we'll probably end up with something like the 1932 Democratic convention -- that is, one of the contenders eventually agreeing to become the running mate of another one. A small and wicked part of my soul, however, wonders whether they might end up drafting Cheney. (Indeed, another part of me wonders how well he might do in the general election -- he's certainly a vastly better public speaker than Bush, even if he does make a great many people's skin crawl.)

Any takers for an evens bet of $50 against the proposition that at least one major American media property controlled by Rupert Murdoch (NY Post, Fox News, or WSJ) will either endorse the Democratic candidate in 2008 or declare neutrality? John Major for one remembers that Murdoch backed Blair in 1997.

Any takers for an evens bet of $50 against the proposition that at least one major American media property controlled by Rupert Murdoch (NY Post, Fox News, or WSJ) will either endorse the Democratic candidate in 2008 or declare neutrality?

I'm not taking that bet. Everything Murdoch does is for the bottom line, and if he thinks he'll get a better deal out of the Dems he'll switch everybody over, and I'm sure the howling banshees on his payroll will look at their paychecks and play ball.

Remember Murdoch having a big sit-down with Hillary a few months back? He might be trying to cut a deal before the Dems figure out we don't need him. I don't want any of our candidates getting in this asshole's claws.

Jeb Bush.

Or maybe General Petraeus

Hard to see how anyone wins? The nation does. There isn't a Republican in the nation worthy of sitting in Thomas Jefferson's and Abraham Lincoln's seat.

We were kind of hoping Sen. Larry C would make a splash.

Correct about no one of Lincoln's stature, but Republican in 1801 and Republican in 1860 were two different animals. Heck, I don't believe that the Jeff Davis-Nathan Bedford Forrest type "Republicans" of today, could even fill General Fremont's seat, the true Republican's first candidate.

it sure seems as the Republican Party is heading for a brokered convention this year.

I'm sure they'll all agree to mock wounded veterans with purple band-aids again this convention season.

Why not Ron Paul? He has more money on hand than most of the candidates. Paul supporters have raised in a week and a half more money than Huckabee raised in three months. He has over 50,000 volunteers. He has money to compete in the cheap medai early states to build momentum for himself.

Ask yourself this question, why is there more grassroots enthusiasm for a man polling at 4% nationally than all the other first tier candidates?

I think that sums up the GOP field in a nutshell.

The Bush regime didn't grab so much power just to give it up without a fight. We're one (faux) attack away from martial law, and no 2008 election.

I heard one right-wing pundit (from the Independent Women's Forum) both praise Huckabee and explain his dilemma. Huckabee, she said, is not "a hater."

This, in short, is what the GOP has come to. It will flock only to haters and war mongers.
Posted by: paxr55 on October 11, 2007 at 7:03 PM
-------
I think the era of "hate noise" coming from the GOP and especially right-wing media passed its zenith several years ago and Huckabee knows this. I bet there are a lot of conservatives that have been growing weary of it all. The media has milked all the $$$ they can out of the phenomenon and the more they continue recycling the same formula the more fake and faded it seems to more prospective conservative voters. The irritable, stern Daddy thing is starting to get shopworn. I think the voters are starting to crave a caring and nurturing type. If Huckabee faces Hillary in the general election it could be close if Hillary comes across as too strident and screechy.

Whoever the nominee Dobson and Perkins will get on board. Explaining why the flip flopped to their constituents will be the easy part.

Giuliani's tough guy personna will no doubt make the base swoon but Rommney has a real problem. Mormonism does not play well in the South. I think people will stay home in droves and conservative democrats will come back to the dem party en masse if Romney wins the nomination.

*

I'm totally with ANM. Thank GAWD the Repulsivecan'ts aren't looking closely at Huckabee.

Barnett wasn't being goofy when he picked him as the best candidate. He WAS a little "inside the Beltway" when he complained about him being from Hope, Arkansas. The voters that DO remember Clinton came from there will probably more inclined to vote FOR Huckabee for that reason.

And as to his name, America eats at Applebee's, why wouldn't they vote for Huckabee?

"Bush," now there's a funny name. It means, you know, a dirty bit.

If Rev. Huckabee pulls off a win, or even a close second in Iowa, which is totally possible given his success, after spending NO money, in the Iowa straw polls, look out Democrats.

I wonder if Huckabee has been called Hickabee yet? It might just work: "Hickabee the kindly hayseed"

Have you all forgotten, the election is rigged ?
The re-thuglicans can't lose , O. J. Simpson could run on the re-thug ticket and have diabolical Newt as his running mate and get in. Wake up "pimples" and smell the corruption !!!