Because it was such a good idea for the governor of Arkansas to run in 1992.
Because it was such a good idea for the one term governor of Georgia to run in 1976.
2008 was the first election in a long time that I can remember where it was all about national superstars.
Daniels would win every state Bush won in 2000 and would also do well in the Rust Belt.
Barbour, admittedly, is a Southerner. But he also has a reptutation as a moderate Southerner. The same kind of reputation that Sanford was alleged to have had that made him such a good candidate. Barbour definitely has handled multiple crises in his tenure. His executive ability is beyond question and his success in a state where the opposition controls both houses of the legislature and much of the local governmental apparatus is simply phonemenal.
And everything I just said about Barbour I could say about Riley. And Riley presents a special advantage. He’s not as moderate as Barbour (and both men are conservatives) but within Alabama politics he is perceived as a moderate and Riley’s refusal to go along with Roy Moore when he defied that court order would sell well to the law and order types in the middle of the country.
And you don’t win a presidential election by “getting the most votes”. Al Gore and Hillary Clinton both did that and neither of them became President because of it. You win by getting a majority of nominating delegates and then by winning the electoral college.
It is a different world since 1976 and as far as Clinton,
if half the idiots who voted for Perot would have voted for G.H.W. Bush we wouldn’t have some of the crap we are facing today.
Have you lived outside of your state and have you traveled much?