Perot? No, but...
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
Poor Skip-- while caught up in the "moment" of Fred Thompson, if we can characterize it as such, he forgets that beyond primaries in a few early states (NH- 2628 votes for Fred), a candidate must be viable nationwide, and take the fight to the motivated Democrats this summer and fall. While I greatly appreciate Fred's stands on the issues, and his plain spokeness, I just don't see him getting the job done for the Republicans.
.
Here's the problem we face as I see it. First, let me share an email regarding Sen McCain's win here in NH that I received a couple of days ago from an occasional corresponder to sort of set the table for my theory:
"CONGRATULATIONS"!!.
I'M SITTING AT MY DESK WITH MY "BARF BAG" IN HAND. ACTUALLY,IT'S MY FOURTH BAG!!.
GOD BLESS AMERICA....THE NIGHTMARE BEGINS!!!! "LIVE FREE OR DIE"..WE'RE
ALL GONNA DIE!!
You see where he's coming from. He's also someone who often rails against the two major political parties, prefering the "Independent" route.
.
In response, I wrote
Only feel bad if a Dem wins in November.
His reply back?
THE NIGHTMARES AND BED WETTING HAS STARTED !!! WHERE IS "ROSS" NOW THAT WE "REALLY" NEED HIM ??!
Ordinarily, I'd just let this go at that and chalk it up to my friend's long-time dislike of John McCain, of which, as is the case with all leading figures, he is one of a few that are out there. But the Ross Perot mention grabbed me. "Yeah, but Doug, is Ross Perot even still alive? He certainly represents yesterday's news. What harm can he possibly cause?"
.
It's not about Ross Perot. It's the Ross Perot-like effect. Remember, Bill Clinton did not win by an actual majority by gaining more than 50% of the votes cast. He simply got the most votes. If Ross Perot's votes had instead gone to George Bush, the Clinton years might still be just a fantasy of the boy from Hope.
.
With the prospect of an Independent presidential run by NYC Mayor Bloomberg, we see the potential of a similar situation for the 2008 election. With boatloads of money and many media tools at his disposal, make no mistake about it- a Bloomberg run will alter convention as we head into the final stretches of the presidential selection process. Is it possible that a second Clinton could gain the White House, the Lincoln Bedroom/Fundraising Suite, and everything else in a rerun of the first?
.
Oh, the Horror!
.
When you consider that situation, it becomes a battle of turnout for the Party bases, and getting the confidence of so-calloed "Independent" voters-- my emailer friend notwithstanding. When thinking about the various possibilities, you have to consider which Republican candidate makes the best case to both the base and the Independent voter.
.
As I said at the top of this post, I don't think Fred cuts it, and neither does Huckabee. In a general election featuring the former preacher, the mainstream media will cast the "religion thing" front and center. I don't think this sells in a winning way nationally, unfortunately. But such is the reality of the present time.
.
Mitt Romney certainly will turn out the base of the GOP, but doesn't have a prayer beyond that group, with or without a Bloomberg in the picture. I don't see the Reagan Democrat types turning out for him, either. Given a choice between Hillary and Mitt, my guess is the Democrat base, along with a fair number of Independents choose Mrs. Clinton.
.
That leaves McCain and Rudy Giuliani-- my number one and two choices for the nomination, respectively.
.
For McCain, the draw he still holds for enough Party regulars and Independents was demonstrated by his NH win. And it withstood the onslaught of the Obama-mania that undoubtedly swept up a fair number of young, and other non-affiliated voters into taking Democratic ballots. In a head to head, with Clinton, McCain provides a safe refuge for some who are OK with his "maverick" ways in opposition to President Bush on some key points. (While I might have been PO'd at McCain for some of these, with the reality of the current political climate, this will most likely help him) Given the Bloomberg offerings that will include such items as mandatory fat-free restaurants and other nanny-state goodies similar to that of Hillary Clinton, without the benefit of the dragon lady herself and all the family baggage, my guess is he draws the single liberated woman votes from Hillary. Dittoes for Obama. For Republican-hating Democrats uneasy with the two-year Senator's lack of executive experience, Bloomberg represents "experience" at executive management.
.
All of the above points could be made, in a similar way, about Rudy Giuliani in the place of McCain. The major difference is that the Mayor is edged out by the Senator in the pro-life department while the advantage goes to Rudy in the potential for last minute "smoking gun" baggage being dug up by determined Democrats looking to take our guy out in the eleventh hour.
.
Given the possibilities, these scenarios demand a rather unconventional Republican that appeals to conservatives, moderates, and Independent voters if we're going to beat the Democrats coupled with a potential spoiler in an Independent Bloomberg run. McCain appears to be the only guy that fits the bill. He brings the "change" demanded by a Bush-weary Nation while still staying the course on the single most important cause of our time-- the war. But I'm sure there's some out there who will tell me why I'm wrong...
Comments
Posted by: Jeff Little | January 11, 2008 9:51 PM
Posted by: Run Mike Run | January 12, 2008 6:24 AM