Posted on 06/03/2007 9:38:03 AM PDT by TexanSniper
MACKINAC ISLAND -- Who will be the Democratic and Republican presidential nominees in 2008? Two veteran political “handicappers” predicted Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney would be the last candidates standing Saturday night during the closing session of the Detroit Regional Chamber’s Mackinac Policy Conference.
Charlie Cook and Stuart Rothenberg, both columnists and analysts with their own Washington-based newsletters, told the Saturday dinner audience that it’s really a matter of determining who most likely will avoid fatal landmines during the campaign ahead.
Cook described Clinton’s campaign as one of “Prussian efficiency,” more like Richard Nixon’s campaign in 1972 and certainly “more organized than any Democratic campaign that I’ve ever seen.”
But Clinton also has a liability – 46-48 percent of Americans “won’t vote for her no matter what. If she were a stock, she’d have a very narrow trading range. There’s no room for error. She’s cautious and she doesn’t make mistakes.”
Cook said if Barack Obama were able to broaden support to a majority of African-American voters, less-educated Democratic voters and older voters, he could be a contender.
Rothenberg, who handicapped the GOP race, said “I don’t know what the hell’s happening. Normally, you’d look for the oldest white guy in the race.”
But McCain has lost his outside status, Rudy Giuliani is “in the wrong party,” (“He’s pro adultery in a party that is not officially pro adultery,” he quipped) and Mitt Romney “oozes leadership but has multiple positions on issues like abortion” that are important to GOP voters in Iowa.
Fred Thompson is in the race, Rothenberg said, “because the media needs a new name. He’s a vessel each of you can pour your hopes and dreams into, the Republican Barack Obama.”
Cook said the most important factors influencing who will get their parties’ nominations are: Iowa caucus, the New Hampshire primary, national polls and ability to raise dollars.
Both analysts said if history were a guide, Democrats will win the White House because the pattern is that generally since World War II, no party earns third terms. The exception was George Bush’s election to succeed the popular Ronald Reagan.
The wild card this year may be New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and a third-party bid. “If you can walk, chew gum and have a billion dollars, I might be able to do something with that,” Rothenberg said. He could easily get on the ballot in all 50 states if, early next year, each party has candidates who are “deeply flawed.”
Romney is not a Boston Brahmin.
The GOP is up against it in 2008, and it will take a terrific candidate to pull off a victory.
Having a candidate that to good looking is a high class problem for the GOP to have. For that matter, he is also to capable, and to articulate, and has had to much executive experience and achievement. Conversly, he hasn't had to many wives
If so, the rats win and America is gone unless something major happens.
Don’t insult Thompson by comparing him to Clinton.
I thought some of them were! ;-)
LLS
I wasn’t referring to Thompson; Thompson wasn’t in the last debate. My comparison was that Romney is the GOP version of Bill Clinton - smooth and covered with teflon. He clearly beat McCain in the last debate - I liked how he used a question designed to embarrass him to embarrass McCain. Juan McCain deserves it.
No, not yet. This bill puts them on the Path to Citizenship, which will take years. However, you can see the political dynamic. Step one is to make them instantly legal. Then the campaign can begin to get them the franchise. We can't have people here legally without participation in our system. We want them assimilated, right? No taxation without representation, etc.
Nothing ever hurts Dems. They have no conscience, no core and no morals. The MSM doesn’t care if Reid is a Mormon. They will hammer it to death with Romney. It’s the perception that Conservatives will implement their religion while liberals are only faking religion to try to get the religious vote. Remember how the MSM used to marvel at the way Billy Jeff could spin them? They were in awe of how he could manipulate them. Conservatives don’t stand a chance that the MSM will give them a fair shake.
And, thus we have the ‘EVIL OF TWO LESSERS’....!!!
Careful on the 'who' and the 'how' of your comparisons here. Clinton is a 'sefl-serving', narcissistic. . .power-addicted; virtueless man whose life is defined by how he defines the meaning of 'is'. He chose politics for personal agrandizement, power and monetary enrichment.
Romney may look like teflon; would offer that he does, in fact. . .and he is nimble with facts; but most importantly; he sticks to the truth of the matter; and lives the values he espouses. . .
Clinton has never let the truth guide him; or stand in his way, by any measure.
In truth; little to compare here. . .
Just like her husband, I believe the only way Hillary can win is with a viable third party candidate. If Bloomberg launches a Ross Perot style run then Hillary will win. Of course, both Bloomberg and Hillary know this.
All a 'given'. . .particularly the MSM and the Leftist agenda they serve and what we know we can expect from them.
Meantime, Repubs; if they were to just tell the truth in the Left's own words; would be better off; and could have great ad campaigns as well; but seems that is too bold an approach. They did not do it during Clinton or Kerry campaigns; will not do it now, I suspect.
The Swift Boat Vets saved us from Kerry. Hopefully there will be some who will shout the truth from the rooftops this coming election about whichever Dem is running. I absolutely believe that no Dem could win anything if the truth is told about them. And the Republicans need to get over their need to be perceived as nice guys. We know we’re nice and good, too. The MSM will never let Conservatives be known as the good guys.
As the field of candidates stands now, that's an easy prediction to make.
True. . .and others helped as well. Think our Leadership; inluding President Bush; imagine, these 'others' will do it ALL for them. But how much should one expect from the 'grace' of others. . .
EvenRush offered after last election; he was tired of carrying water for Repubs who will not carry their own load. . .or something to that effect. And he is right. Am personally sick of the 'silence' and now many in Party colluding with Demrats.
All told; not a great story here; and with little to offer for a 'happy ending'.
Meantime, thanks to the usual determinedly strident, misleading. . .and truth-destroying voices of the Dem 'mythmakers'. . .'swiftboating' has been added to our American lexicon of political speech. . .meaning to 'savage; lie and destroy' a political opponent - or more kindly. ..an 'ad hominem attack' to bring down a political opponent; a 'viral attack' based on sensationalized rumor, innuendo. And/or. . .more frickin 'somesuch'.
I’ll hold my nose and vote for Mitt.
I won’t for McCain or Rudy.
No nose holdin’ needed for Fred.
The headline of the article is a bit misleading. While the article mentions Hillary as a front runner for her party, on the Republican side it does not mention a clear frontrunner whether it is Mitt or Fred leading the race for Republican nomination.
You are trying to persuade me that Clinton is the only deceptive politician here? Please advise me which politicians are not “’sefl-serving’, narcissistic. . .power-addicted; virtueless man (politician) whose life is defined by how he defines the meaning of ‘is’. He (The politician) chose politics for personal agrandizement, power and monetary enrichment.
Romney may look like teflon; would offer that he does, in fact . . . .” Your definition of Clinton covers almost all politicians.
I think you are trying to compare turds here. In politics, very often the choice is not between good and bad, the choice is between bad and worse. Clearly, Romney is a politician’s politician and as such is bad, however Clinton is worse. You may be perceived as naive if you hero worship politicians, whether their name is Romney or Clinton.
PS: Large numbers of Bushbots have finally realized the truth about Jorge after years of work, donations, and hope after the amnesty sellout - don’t be deluded about Clinton, Kyl, Romney, McCain, JulyAnni either - they are all slick double-tongued untrustworthy politicians. IMO,Romney is the best politician for thinking on his feet, I had to admire him in the debate for his skills in talking his way out of hardball questions - and leaving McCain to take the ricochet. For indepth analysis of politicians, google “Why Bad Men Rule” by Professor Hoppe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.