Free Republic

One thing many here are forgetting, is that there is no national primary. Rather, it is 50 individual races. Ergo, what should matter is how candidates are doing in those respective states, with primacy given to the early ones.

While not committed to any candidate yet, you gotta hand it to Romney for the way he’s conducting his campaign. That a Mormon & Republican from Mass has managed to snare the leads in Iowa, NH and SC (or a tie-—depends on the poll) is quite impressive. Is it a blip or indicative of the future, as those early states typically pay more attention to politics than non-early primary states?

And, if one is to draw conclusions from the national trend graph above, you can see that Huckabee is trending up while Fred is trending down. Will be an interesting race.

Whoever becomes the GOP nominee, let’s pray we can beat Hillary. We should ALL agree on that one!

“”If you don’t measure something, you can’t change it,” Romney said. “The process of leadership is one of painting a vision, then saying how you’re going to get there, and then measuring whether you’re actually getting there. Otherwise, you risk only talking about great things but not accomplishing them.”—Mitt Romney

I like this quote. Most leaders miss the “vision” thing, as Bush I said. Bible says “where there is no vision, the people perish.” Nice to see a Repub who gets it. Love his business acumen...about time we have a Pres. candidate who’s made his success in the business world. Best resume of all the candidates, IMO.

“That’s an interest point. I thought Romney would have been better served to have run again for governor, but he didn’t, a Democrat took the MA governorship, and now Romney may have a chance to be nominated.”

In today’s nomination cycle, it would be quite hard to do what Pres Bush did in ‘98 in Texas-—win re-election and then go for the presidency. The race for the ‘08 Presidency began 6 months ago-—just when Mitt would have started his 2nd term.
To campaign in Iowa, NH, SC, etc. it would be very hard to do all of that + be a governor. Possible, but much, much harder than in ‘98, IMO.
However, in all reality Mitt wouldn’t have won a 2nd term, as the Democrats were united behind 1 candidate. With Repubs only 15% in that blue state...well, you do the math.
Plus, 2008 is an open year...waiting until a possible opening in 2012 would be much riskier. So, given both considerations, he took the right course of action.

“George Allen would be the frontrunner now had he forgone his Senate race.”

At the beginning of 2006, that was the conventional wisdom. So, I did my research on him and while part of the good guys team, IMO he doesn’t have the wits to beat any of the bad guys——Hillary, etc. Remember, these things have ways of working themselves out. If he hadn’t flamed out in the Senate campaign, he would have done so in a Presidential one. So in one sense its better for us that he did so early, thus sparing us worse down the road. That said, still wish he would have beaten Webb-—we’d be in control of the Sentate still. Unfortunate indeed.

While all may not like the idea, you gotta give him/his campaign credit for original thought/ideas. Such creativity and "out of the box thinking" is what might carry him far. If not as the Repub. nominee, then as Veep for Rudy (?) or maybe a cabinet post. Who knows, but such creativity is a good thing to have as President, IMO.

"Rule one of war, political or otherwise: know the terrain you're fighting on."

Good point in your quote above.
To win, we've got to solidify the base (i.e. Conservatives, Republicans and Libertarians) and then gain enough moderate voters to push us over the top---my opinion, that is.
Given that, we want the most conservative guy to win the primaries, but one that can also win over the center in the general election w/o alienating too many folks. This candidate has to be able to appeal to women, minorities, etc. to draw them away from the Dems (i.e. the expected Shrillary-Obama ticket). Tough to do in '08 w/Shrillary appealing to the leftists and angry/single white women and Obama to blacks. However, of all prospective candidates, Romney could do it best.
Why? Well, he's conservative enough to get most of the base to vote for him. And, he's telegenic enough, seemingly warm & positive enough to draw people to him. Don't know him and haven't met him, but that's just my opinion. Americans like warm & friendly people----partly why Reagan smashed Carter & Fritz Mondale---he had that "it" factor in spades over them.
Not that this should trump his beliefs, but it IS a factor that can't be denied. And, he's spotless in terms of corruption, marriage, etc.
I love Newt and think he's probably the best "thinker" in the conservative movement, but he won't win a general election.
Given my druthers, here's what I'd ask for:
Pres: Romney
VP: Santorum, Jeb Bush, Sanford, Mike Pence, etc...
AG: Rudy Giuliani
SECDEF: McCain (he's spot-on in the GWOT and Iraq)
White House Policy Advisor or RNC Chair (or both!): Newt Gingrich

Just my .02 for today!

Ok, so by your rules he's not a conservative.

So please put forth who, realistically speaking, is and is running for Prez in '08.
-Mike Pence is great, but he needs more seasoning (i.e. governorship---exec. level experience, IMO).

Of all the folks running for Prez of Republicans, Romney IS the most conservative, bar none.

Of all the prospective Prez candidates thus far proffered, he's the one. I'd not mind seeing a Romney-Santorum (other possibilities being Romney-Pence, Romney-Sanford, etc...) Imagine a Romney-ticket w/a Giuliani as the Atty General and McCain as the SECDEF. Can anyone offer a better start for an administration than that? (Other than the Gipper being reincarnated, that is)

Two words: socialized medicine. He's a tax-and-spender and a Marxist. Deal with it.

That's absurd. The man made his fortune as a venture capitalist...he helped bring Staples, the office supply company, through its IPO & to the success it has today.
To call him a Marxist is stupid and totally off base.
Back to reality Jack Hammer.

He sure sounds Presidential. Looks the part, too.
How about his personality? Warm like Reagan or more laid-back like Bush?
How about his abilities as a speaker (one can't get that w/o listening to him speak)---his words (CPAC)look good, but how do they sound? Right or wrong, that's important to winning votes.
So what's the possibility of him even winning in '08? He's not even a candidate right now, is he?
Hate to say it, but maybe there will/could be a repeat of history in that a disaster democrat (like Carter in '76) wins (possibly Shrillary?) and then Pence in '12 wins a landslide, much like the Gipper did in '80?
I raise that point only b/c he's not much of a candidate so far if he's not raising $$ towards the goal of '08.

Excellent article. As a member of the Army, it gives me great pride to read articles/letters such as this.
This needs to be distributed in the MSM, not just on conservative sites (where I've seen it as well)
JMB

Mike Pence sounds very Reagan-esque!!! He has a very, very bright future!!! He would make a great VP candidate (thereby being introduced to the nation) in 2008, possibly even a Pres. candidate.
Love his "Christian, Conservative & Republican in that order" phrase!!! Also, he passes the looks test, making him acceptable to most Americans.
Watch this guy (as many others on FR have so ably noted)!!!

"Then Justice Stevens will be replaced before 08. That will be 6-3."

Just curious, but how serious of a possibility is this? I mean, he's 85 and all so you'd think he'd be pretty soon...but might he try to hold out until 2008??? How about Ginsburg...always heard she was in poor health too.
Just wondering!
J

Ok, here's your answer----one of the most fantastic candidates you could imagine, Viet Dinh. Check out the links----he's the next John Roberts in the future!!!

http://www.leadingauthorities.com/20767/Viet_Dinh.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/vietdinh.htm
http://www.asianam.org/viet%20dinh.htm
http://www.nndb.com/people/273/000044141/

Ok, here's your answer----one of the most fantastic candidates you could imagine, Viet Dinh. Check out the links----he's the next John Roberts in the future!!!

http://www.leadingauthorities.com/20767/Viet_Dinh.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/vietdinh.htm
http://www.asianam.org/viet%20dinh.htm
http://www.nndb.com/people/273/000044141/

Ok, here's your answer----one of the most fantastic candidates you could imagine, Viet Dinh. Check out the links----he's the next John Roberts in the future!!!

http://www.leadingauthorities.com/20767/Viet_Dinh.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/vietdinh.htm
http://www.asianam.org/viet%20dinh.htm
http://www.nndb.com/people/273/000044141/

Ok, here's your answer----one of the most fantastic candidates you could imagine, Viet Dinh. Check out the links----he's the next John Roberts in the future!!!

http://www.leadingauthorities.com/20767/Viet_Dinh.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/vietdinh.htm
http://www.asianam.org/viet%20dinh.htm
http://www.nndb.com/people/273/000044141/

Ok, here's your answer----one of the most fantastic candidates you could imagine, Viet Dinh. Check out the links----he's the next John Roberts in the future!!!

http://www.leadingauthorities.com/20767/Viet_Dinh.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/vietdinh.htm
http://www.asianam.org/viet%20dinh.htm
http://www.nndb.com/people/273/000044141/

Gotta agree that a combination of Allen, Pawlenty and Rice look pretty strong for us in '08, although I don't know too much about either of them yet (same for most of America, I'd bet). However, who in 1996/7 picked GWB to be the next Pres?

As many here always say, look to the governors. Allen & Pawlenty pass those tests.

At the same time, would love to see Dr. Rice be the governor of Cali., do a great job, and then one day (2012/2016) parlay her success there as a jumping board for Pres. Dem's can't win w/o California....would almost ensure a Rep. victory if we got California. Would be a nail in their coffin. Such a route would enable her to become more "seasoned" in domestic politics.

Speaking of 2008, assuming Shrillary is the Dem nominee, who does she pick for Veep? If I were her advisor, I'd say Obama to get the black vote, Richardson the Latino vote or Evan Bayh to try and pick up a red state.
Best,
JMB

PS 1st time poster---love the board!!!

Gotta agree that a combination of Allen, Pawlenty and Rice look pretty strong for us in '08, although I don't know too much about either of them yet (same for most of America, I'd bet). However, who in 1996/7 picked GWB to be the next Pres?

As many here always say, look to the governors. Allen & Pawlenty pass those tests.

At the same time, would love to see Dr. Rice be the governor of Cali., do a great job, and then one day (2012/2016) parlay her success there as a jumping board for Pres. Dem's can't win w/o California....would almost ensure a Rep. victory if we got California. Would be a nail in their coffin. Such a route would enable her to become more "seasoned" in domestic politics.

Speaking of 2008, assuming Shrillary is the Dem nominee, who does she pick for Veep? If I were her advisor, I'd say Obama to get the black vote, Richardson the Latino vote or Evan Bayh to try and pick up a red state.
Best,
JMB

PS 1st time poster---love the board!!!