My point is that the electoral map has changed dramatically from 1976. Republicans were competitive in nearly every state in 1976, and 1980, 1984, and even 1988. Starting in 1992, they weren't anymore. There are at least 15 states that will not be voting Republican under almost any circumstances (CA, CT, DE, HI, IL, ME, MD, MA, MN, NJ, NY, OR, RI, VT, & WA). It's sad, but it's the reality. Tommy Thompson wouldn't change that equation, and neither would Rudy or Precious Willard.
"Maybe if we end up with the Hilderbeast as President the GOP might wise up and nominate Don (Carcieri) or Tim Pawlenty for President in 2012, who knows?"
Neither Carcieri or Pawlenty could even carry their own states as Presidential candidates. If the Dems put up Dave Freudenthal of WY for President, he wouldn't be able to carry his own state, most likely. Some of these states will vote for Governors opposite to the majority party, but they won't do so for Senators and Presidents. That's just how it is, and pretending it isn't so won't change the equation.
I don’t entirely agree with the last part of posting # 35. If Fred Thompson chooses a well-liked northern running mate, he might be able to pick off one or two Gore/Kerry states. Tim Palwenty could deliver Minnesota to Thompson. His approval ratings are much higher now than they were when he was reelected last year. Norm Coleman would also be a good choice. It’s unfortunate that Tommy Thompson isn’t interested, as he would be an asset in his home state. And I find myself wondering, would Judd Gregg be a good choice? I don’t know much about him, other than his being conservative and a strong vote-getter in NH.