If he weren't a Senator, I'd say George Allen would look pretty good as a candidate. Family man, pro-life, from a southern state, reasonable conservative credentials, definitely did a good job on the Republican political leadership front in the last election. But, it's a conundrum. The main reason I know him is because he's on our side in the Senate. I don't want to lose that, plus the recent record of people running for President from the Senate isn't all that great. Governors seem to have the edge.
On the brightside, Allen was a Governor for a period of time. Perhaps he still has more of that mentality than one of a Senator?
I like George Allen and he's a little different than your run-of-the mill Senator -- was a Governor and a congressman as well as Senator... IMO he "could" pull it off he he decided to run because I think he'd be acceptable to most Republicans as enough Dems to pull us over the top --
George Allen's a good choice. He's a Senator now but he went to the Senate from the Governor's Mansion. He was a very popular Governor in Virginia.
Allen is the best nominee I've heard discussed. But he might lose to Warner in 2006!
And I think the party will nominate someone who is a no-name and a governor. Senators have way too much baggage. Sanford isn't ideal, but I don't know who is. I sure hope that we get someone from the West or South, so that we don't have a damn Yankee leading the ticket that has to be super-conservative to overcome the fact that he talks funny.
And anyone touting Rice has the wrong Secretary in mind. Rumsfeld in 2008!