According to Jonathan Weisman of the Washington Post, John McCain is going to win the Republican nomination specifically because every powerful Republican interest group dislikes him. The funny thing is, it might be true. But, really, McCain’s chances seem to rise and fall on whether or not any other candidate can consolidate the anti-McCain vote. Huckabee isn’t ideally suited for that role. Romney is the logical choice, but he can’t do it with Huckabee pulling off a huge chunk of the vote.
Giuliani has his own ideological problems uniting the base. McCain could slip through, but he will be a deeply unpopular choice…except with the press, of course.
Honestly, at this point I will be shocked if McCain is not the Republican nominee. Everyone else has at least one major flaw that rules them out; McCain’s flaws are legion but not deal-breakers.
I’ve watched several McCain events on C-Span over the course of his campaign. Oh my god. This guy is DULL. I used to really respect him until he embraced Bush (figuratively and literally) after what Bush did to him in South Carolina in 2000. And, um, the Torture bill, anyone?
He definitely has the best resume of the Republicans. But now he’s so old and – um – confused (Quick! Somebody ask him what day it is, without looking at his watch.) Although he may win the nomination, I just can’t see him being widely loved as president because he’s not inspiring… unless he were to die in office, then he’d be more legendary than Reagan.
nominating someone not currently running.
Fred Thompson?
Sorry. That joke practically made itself!
Are you thinking Bloomberg gets in on the Repub action, or someone comes out of nowhere?
If Bloomberg runs, it will split the Republican vote. Of course if he runs and Hillary wins the Dem nomination, he will also split the Dem vote and may bey well win with a LARGE margin. That’s my thought anyway.
bingo! we have a winner.
if hillary gets the d nomination; mccain the r; bloomberg jumps in on a unity ticket…all the disaffected dems either stay home or vote unity, RAT’s split…voila: president bloomberg and staus quo congress.
lose-lose.
lTMF’sA
Thanks. That word “bey” was not supposed to appear in my comment qbove but y’all get it.
No matter who wins on the “R” side, Bloomberg WILL break up their support.
If Clinton wins the “D” side, he will ALSO break up HER support. (Who would I have to vote for???)
However, if (ANYONE BUT HILLARY) wins the “D” side, Bloomberg would have a very tough race because there might actually be unity in the Democratic Party.
imo, …if (ANYONE BUT HILLARY) wins the “D” side…bloomberg stays out.
my 2¢
lTMF’sA
I agree. Voters should keep this in mind.
I don’t see this…
Seems to me that most of the unhappiness among Dems is on the left. I don’t like Hillary much but I’m sure not looking for a candidate even more conservative and corporate than she is.
Personally, in a 3-way race between (any republican) and Hillary Clinton and Bloomberg, I would vote Bloomberg. I would be willing to bet that a good portion of Democrats would agree. Hillary is the ONLY Democrat who divides her own party. Other than Hillary, ANY Democrat would get my support.
NO ONE in the Democratic party is “more corporate” than Hillary. NO ONE. If she wins, SAY GOODBYE to NET NEUTRALITY. SAY GOODBYE to any chance of breaking up the corporate media in the interest of independent ownership. SAY GOODBYE to ever having a not-for-profit (or even affordable) health care system, even if there’s universal coverage.
assuming that there’s a desire to do so.
do you honestly belief hillary or obama will abandon iraq?
edwards is the only [creditable/electable] candidate who might do so. and the point made above about hillary being the only candidate that splits the party is spot on. she’s got a overall negative of 40% going in and it hasn’t really gotten ugly yet.
l see no way hillary ever occupies the white house again.
again, my 2¢ ymmv
lTMF’sA
lTMF’sA