So, Doc, would that not imply that in 2004 he was a moderate candidate?

Doctor Fate wrote:Sorry, but without a date, I cannot tell if this is primary or general election material. I don't remember him running as a moderate per se. Now, he certainly governed as a liberal, but that's another matter.

From Wikipedia entry on the 2000 Republican Presidential primaries.

Bush's campaign focused on "compassionate conservatism", including a greater role for the federal government in funding education and large reductions in the income and capital gains tax rates

Again, these positions sound pretty much like the proposals of McCain, Huntsman and Romney.

Looking back, Bush's early rival was Steve Forbes, a strong fiscal conservative. The other guys who started the primary season were Orrin Hatch andGary Bauer, firmly on the right on social policy.

Looks to me like the Bush-McCain differences were less about policy and more about personality, but Bush was running as a little to the right of McCain (and not for independent and Democrat attractive campaign finance reform), so by the time the big conservative leaning states voted, Bush was the only real alternative. Oh, and there was the Rovian push-polling stuff, which was nothing to do with political position.

Archduke Russell John wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:Sorry, but without a date, I cannot tell if this is primary or general election material. I don't remember him running as a moderate per se. Now, he certainly governed as a liberal, but that's another matter.

From Wikipedia entry on the 2000 Republican Presidential primaries.

Bush's campaign focused on "compassionate conservatism", including a greater role for the federal government in funding education and large reductions in the income and capital gains tax rates

Again, these positions sound pretty much like the proposals of McCain, Huntsman and Romney.

Yeah, wikipedia was done yesterday. I just don't think he would have described himself as a "moderate" and his record in Texas was not exactly middle of the road.

I'll concede. Fine. No big deal.

Here's what I do know: Bush fired up the base more than Dole or Bush the elder or McCain. So, I don't think he was perceived, initially, as a bowl of mush.

Moving on. With the Gingrich ex-wife interview, the non-scandalous-yet-constantly-reported meme that Romney is "rich," Perry dropping out, is Santorum Paul's only competition? Will someone else now have to get in? Or, will Romney still cruise to victory?

I know, I know, the polls show Gingrich charging. However, in a social conservative State like SC, I think the Marianne Gingrich interview will go nuclear. I would not be surprised to see his support cut in half, literally overnight.

Big picture, I think this is depressing for a Republican, frustrating for an independent, and amusing for a Democrat. Romney will get the nomination, but he is going to have to show his stuff to both unite the party and defend capitalism. He's also in a box as it relates to his 15% tax rate and a pledge to not raise taxes on the wealthy or anyone, yet increase defense spending AND balance the budget.

It feels a lot like 2004 where we had 2 very weak candidates. It will be negative, and it won't be fun unless you don't really care about the outcome or the country.

Just as an aside:

Dr. Fate:

Yeah, wikipedia was done (sic) yesterday.

I was more impacted by the shutdown of Wikipedia than I would be by a federal government shutdown. I wonder how many people feel the same way.

Ray Jay wrote:I was more impacted by the shutdown of Wikipedia than I would be by a federal government shutdown. I wonder how many people feel the same way.

For one day, probably. For a sustained period, I'm not so sure.

(besides, it was easy to bypass the Wikipedia blackout - use the mobile version of the site which is visible on a PC was how I did it, but there were about three other ways)

Doctor Fate wrote:Moving on. With the Gingrich ex-wife interview, the non-scandalous-yet-constantly-reported meme that Romney is "rich," Perry dropping out, is Santorum Paul's only competition? Will someone else now have to get in? Or, will Romney still cruise to victory?

I know, I know, the polls show Gingrich charging. However, in a social conservative State like SC, I think the Marianne Gingrich interview will go nuclear. I would not be surprised to see his support cut in half, literally overnight.

Of course, the fact that Perry endorsed Gingrich (and so did Palin) may help him a lot. And the 'redemption' part of that may help reduce the impact of Marianne's interview, with the vibe of 'yeah, we know he wasn't so good back then, but he's changed - he's seen the light'

Besides, if she comes off as too bitter, it may not make that much difference.

She did develop a relationship with Newt while his first wife was still alive. I think that makes her complicit at a minimum. She acts surprised that Newt did the same thing to her that was done to his first wife. Duh!

bbauska wrote:She did develop a relationship with Newt while his first wife was still alive. I think that makes her complicit at a minimum. She acts surprised that Newt did the same thing to her that was done to his first wife. Duh!

I just can't see anything but an electoral disaster if he's the nominee. There is already a gender gap. Add Newt and that goes through the roof.

Question for those of you who understand the primary process betterthan I do. Is there a serious chance that it could end up with no overall winner ? It strikes me that if Santorum drops out early then it could quite easily shape up that way. Paul seems to have a fairly consistent 20% or so that will back him right through the process but which is unlikely to grow much bigger. Romney has about 25-30% with the potential for more, but his success seems in large part down to there being a sense of inevitability about him. That could easily be undermined with a few bad showings. Gingrich has less committed supporters than either of those two but could conceivably be the last man standing on the right after SC, allowing him to tap mthe anti-Romney sentiment. What's the chances that you could see a convention without an annointed winner, is that too far-fetched ?

Sassenach wrote:Question for those of you who understand the primary process betterthan I do. Is there a serious chance that it could end up with no overall winner ? It strikes me that if Santorum drops out early then it could quite easily shape up that way. Paul seems to have a fairly consistent 20% or so that will back him right through the process but which is unlikely to grow much bigger. Romney has about 25-30% with the potential for more, but his success seems in large part down to there being a sense of inevitability about him. That could easily be undermined with a few bad showings. Gingrich has less committed supporters than either of those two but could conceivably be the last man standing on the right after SC, allowing him to tap mthe anti-Romney sentiment. What's the chances that you could see a convention without an annointed winner, is that too far-fetched ?

It's actually being discussed in conservative journals. So, it's not so far-fetched. Iirc, the delegates are bound on the first ballot, then the wheeling and dealing begins.

I remember when Clinton was running (Bill, not Hillary). I thought it could go that way for the Democrats and either did or thought about registering Democrat just for the fun of a convention like that.

I don't see Santorum dropping out. I could be wrong, but with the recount showing him (sorta) winning Iowa (even though no one will ever know), why would he? He's beaten Gingrich in Iowa and New Hampshire. I think Gingrich is going to take a big hit over the next couple of days as all the dirt is re-stirred.

I don't think Paul will get 20% in Florida, although that could change with Perry dropping out too.

Honestly, as much as Democrats think it would be a nightmare, I think a convention could be great for Republicans. The pressure would be on all the reluctant candidates to come to the aid of their party. We could see a Jeb , Ryan, or Rubio emerge. I think Jeb would be the most likely: instant name ID (even if some of it would be negative) and instant money.

However, what is more likely to happen is this: the GOP will circle the wagons around Romney. The only way that won't happen is if a REAL scandal hits Romney. The Caymans is a non-story. The 15% is a non-story. Bain is a plus.

I will be shocked if Romney is not the guy.

Johnny boy was on Jay Leno last night and was fantastic. Did anyone else see him? Jay asked if he would eventually run again. Mr. H didn't give a straight answer so I'm hopeful.

Leno is still on the air?

dag hammarsjkold wrote:Johnny boy was on Jay Leno last night and was fantastic. Did anyone else see him? Jay asked if he would eventually run again. Mr. H didn't give a straight answer so I'm hopeful.

I saw him. I thought he was good. Finally didn't appear stiff like usual. Though, at one point I remember him trying to make a joke that fell flat..... I think he was making a dig a Chelsea Handler who was sitting next to him as the previous guest.