Dear Sabramerican,
Well, who is electable is a tough question right now. You don't really know until you're at least about a third of the way into the primaries.
It is the nomination process that helps determine just how electable a candidate is.
But anyway, I could hold my nose and vote for Sen. McCain, although I'm pretty sure he'd lose even with my vote. LOL.
I'd be willing to vote for Sen. Allen, although not terribly enthusiastically.
I'd vote for Gov. Owens of Colorado. I'd vote for Mike Pence.
Before you say this or that one is unelectable, save your breath, or your keystrokes. You don't know who is and isn't unelectable anymore than I do, or anyone else around here does. After his execrable performance at the 1988 Dammocrap National Convention, I never thought Gov. Bill Clinton of Arkansas could ever be elected to any office outside his state. In 1976, I certainly didn't see former Gov. Reagan as a particularly electable fellow. As well in 1976, we all laughed at the peanut farmer from Georgia running for president!
I remember all the folks who said that a certain Texan governor would just crumple under the pressure of a national campaign in 2000. I also heard he was just too dumb to win.
I've also been told that sitting US Senators just can't make it to the White House, yet Mr. Kerry came within a few inches of doing just that, and Mr. Dole would have made a much closer race of it without Mr. Perot gumming up the works.
The nomination process, itself, will grant stature to whomever comes out on top, and whomever DOES come out on top will instantly become electable. Highly electable.
I'll support my candidate(s) through that process, and watch it unfold. There are really only a few Republicans whom I could not support, who are mentioned as likely candidates for the nomination. One of them is Mr. Giuliani.
sitetest
I don't like Senators or Representatives as candidates because they learn quickly in congress to talk a long time without ~saying~ anything. They bore me to tears. Every single one of them.
Post 169 is very wise, very well written. I do, however, see trends. Our nation is growing ever more polarized. It's only natural, now that our choices of news sources has so abruptly expanded. Each side is certain that it's news sourcing is more accurate. This is a healthy, yet turbulent process. And like I said, polarizing.
Some are banking that being 'more centrist' is in. I don't think so. The energy level of each base is a vast powerhouse just begging for leadership that fits it's agenda. Centrists do not reach either base.
I don't want some smoke-filled room calling the shots in the primary process and pick some worthless centrist and then find out that all their strategery was folly. As you noted, many of us will vote for the winner of the primary. After all I said about Giulianni, when it comes down to primary time, what am I supposed to do? Let some rat win?
Once the primary is over, there are only three choices: vote for one, vote for the other, or protest. Only one choice is clear at that point: the lesser of two evils.
We NEED, ABSOLUTELY NEED, to pick a conservative before the primary, someone who can rally conservatives the way Howard Dean rallied the left. The primary is front loaded now. It moves very quickly. That means, unless we want some rolodex to pick our candidate, we need to hash this out ahead of time.