He has a lot of advantages and will be a formidable candidate. So yeah of course he is seen as the favorite. Of course so was Giuliani.
If there is one thing I learned from 2008 it's that the candidates everyone are talking about now will not be the nominee come 2012.
Candidates can only be formidable when people actually support and vote for them.
2008 was a very strange year. It was the first time in decades that neither a sitting President nor VP was standing for election. Succinctly put, it was a free for all.
2012 should be a more traditional year with respect to an opposition party selecting a candidate to challenge a sitting President. Rarely, in these instances do "dark horses" come from nowhere to gain the party's (in the GOP) nomination. In the last 50 years, we've selected Goldwater, Reagan and Dole to challenge Dem incumbents - all very well known political figures. I'm guessing that 2012 will be the same. Whomever the nominee will be, I'm quite sure that it will be a very well-known and experienced name.
You definitely get it. You are only off on one thing. Giuliani wasn’t the historical favorite. The historical favorite won the nomination (as is the norm with the GOP).
“If there is one thing I learned from 2008 it’s that the candidates everyone are talking about now will not be the nominee come 2012.”
Which is why I doubt Sarah Palin will be the nominee. I see 2012 shaping up as a battle between Romney and Huckabee.