Race Rankings: The Power Of Three

The Republican race is in an enormous state of flux, with three top-tier candidates running three very different campaigns. The candidates are beginning to sense that they have, at most, three or four weeks to break out of their shells.

These rankings are ordered by likelihood of winning the Republican primary and are based on a number of factors, including organization, money, buzz and polling. Click here for Democratic rankings.

1. Rudy Giuliani -- He became serious about New Hampshire at the very moment Mitt Romney began to close the deal. Expectations for the national front-runner ought to be high in at least one of the two early states. What about Iowa? Second place seems up for grabs but organizationally, the campaign is very behind in that state. And then there's Michigan; what's the campaign going to do there? His first round of TV ads will tell us the early state strategy... maybe.

2. Mitt Romney -- Romney's on cruise control through the Iowa caucuses, where he's expected to win, and in New Hampshire, where he isn't. He's in real trouble in South Carolina. But Michigan is turning into a great opportunity for Romney to rebound should he narrowly lose in New Hampshire. If he wins two of the first three and then loses South Carolina, it's a long campaign, with March's Junior Tuesday (not February's Tsunami Tuesday) being the decisive primary day.

3. Fred Thompson -- Thompson survived "Meet The Press" with only minimal fodder for his opponents. He's getting more comfortable taking up the space McCain used to occupy. He wants to be the sober, serious guy.

Continue reading our 2008 Race Rankings.

Comments

So we have a fraulent man, a flipflopper and a friend of drug dealer at top 3 on GOP side.

Giuliani is a pro-abortion, anti-gun, pro-gays leftist who made a criminal his police commissioner and then recommended him to be Homeland Security Chief.

Romney is a fake republican who has flipflopped on every single thing thats dear to conservatives. He is the most cunning politician.

Thomsosn is a lazy, dumb politician with a trophy wife and whose campaign co-chair is a convicted drug dealer.

Its time for Huckabee to move to the top.

Posted by Sandy | November 6, 2007 8:51 AM

How is Romney in trouble in South Carolina? The RCP averages have him in first place.

all the polls show a tight race. as soon as he started advertsiing, he shot up in teh polls, went from single digigts to the lead or close second.

so whats the trouble? endorsements from those like paul weyrich don't hurt either there.

I just don't get that?

Posted by Galt | November 6, 2007 9:18 AM

I personally have met Romney and he will be the next President of the United States. He is going to win Iowa, and also Michigan. As for Huckabee, I like him as well, and I think he would make a great Vice President. Both men have strong moral characters, but Romney is the canidate that can defeat Hilary in 2008. Romney is the only one that can stand head to toe with the Clinton machine. If Americans will get behind Romney I know that he will do everything in his power to make this country safer. He cares about what happens to the American family, and he has my vote.

Posted by Joseph | November 6, 2007 10:36 AM

Hate to break it to you, but Thompson did not survive "Meet the Press" with minmal fodder. The guy practically imploded. Remember, Thompson was the great hope of Social Conservatives. That interview proved without a doubt that he does not fit the bill. Why do you think that the Social Conservatives have started lining up in droves to support Romney? They are aware it is crunch time and that other than Romney there are no viable Social Conservatives except Romney (Huckabee is a wonderful, likeable social conservative, but doesn't fit the bill fiscally, and then there is the pesky little issue that he was a professional preacher that will completely alienate non-religious folks).

Now if you are a fan of Thompson for his Federalist Ideals, then yeah he did great. The problem is, nobody was begging him to run based on Federalism, it's not that polarizing of an issue. If Limiting the Federal Government is what you want, Ron Paul would be a more preferred candidate as he is both for that and for limiting abortion (Generally these philosiphies conflict, but as Ron Paul has experience as an OB/GYN, he has made the exception and is pro-life)

Posted by Joel | November 6, 2007 10:43 AM

Joel said it well. Thompson shot himself in the foot on Meet the Press by stating that he was not in favor of the marriage and pro life amendments.

As for Romney, I too don't see Romney being in trouble in SC. To the contrary, things are actually looking more positive in SC with him climbing in the polls and now getting endorsements from two senators (DeMint and Bryant) and some key social conservative leaders (Weyrich, Bob Jones, etc.).

Posted by Mark | November 6, 2007 10:56 AM

Romney's hardly on "cruise control" in New Hampshire. His lead is constantly slipping there. And he's behind Huckabee in most national polls.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by matt | November 6, 2007 11:10 AM

Sandy (Comment#1):

Is that really the best you've got? Old worn out empty talking points? Please try harder next time.

Posted by Jon | November 6, 2007 11:14 AM

This is what will really happen with the Republican primary.

Mitt Romney will get big wins in NH, Iowa, Wyoming, Michigan and South Carolina.

Why ?

NH just endorsed by Sen Judd and he was leading there anyway. Thats pretty bulletproof.

Iowa, Romney paid his dues there, 600 to 700 town hall meetings. 20 percent lead.

Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, Arizona and Nevada Romney will win because of the LDS population. And he saved the Winter games in 2002.

Michigan, Mitt Romney grew up there, has won the straw poll and they need his help to recover from their one state recession...

South Carolina, Team Romney is headed up by Sen. Jim DeMint, very popular Sen there and Romney is piling up endorsements.

When Florida sees this, they will want a winner.

Mitt Romney would great for this country ! He has solved every problem he has been faced with ! He is very Unique and talented.

GO ROMNEY/GIULIANI 2008!

Posted by Tyson | November 6, 2007 11:56 AM

Romney is also a fake republican. He simply changes his position based on office he is running for. The proof is in the pudding:

* Romney raised "fees" in Massachusetts by $260 millions but he says, "I never raised taxes".

* Illegal immigrants worked on governor Romney's lawn.

* Romney Bashed Contract With America In 1994

* He does not care whether Bin Laden is caught or not. He said, "It's not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.

* Romney criticizes Iran but invests in Iran.

* Romney told Ted Kennedy during their debates that he (Romney) will do more to fight for the rights of gay people than Ted Kennedy.

Romney is not a conservative at all.

Posted by Condi | November 6, 2007 12:04 PM

When I hear Romney talk he sounds like a complete phony. Analyzing his record its clear that he's a serial flipflopper and a real opportunist. But that's not what I'm talking about. His manner and voice and what he says ... everything sounds extraordinarily canned and contrived. And in a class in that respect way beyond anything John McCain or Rudy Giuliani say.

Posted by mk | November 6, 2007 12:07 PM

Mitt's rapid action team from his HQ is very active in the comments section here. Most of the comments here sound like Romney's press releases.

Posted by Ed | November 6, 2007 12:10 PM

Anyone who says that Romney is more conservative than Huckabee or McCain are joking. Romney is a Masachussetes liberal who acts like a conservative while Huck and McCain have been conservative from day one.

Posted by GoHuck | November 6, 2007 12:13 PM

> Mitt Romney would great for this country ! He has
> solved every problem he has been faced with ! He
> is very Unique and talented.

Yes, he has solved every problem by flip-flopping. And yes he is a unique and talented flip-flopper.

Posted by Chuck | November 6, 2007 12:16 PM

Why is Romney not expected to win in NH ? He is leading in the polls there. Also, why is he in real trouble in SC ? I think when you make such statements you owe it to your readers to back your statements with analysis of poll numbers or some other relevant facts, otherwise you won't have any credibility.

Posted by Richard Gallant | November 6, 2007 1:01 PM

You guys are wasting your time. The GOP will not win in the general election no matter who they face. GW has seen to that.

Hillary will win. She's the Skull and Bones candidate. The Skull and Bones candidate has one each of the last five elections.

Posted by Law Student Josh | November 6, 2007 1:21 PM

I see Marc didn't put Ron Paul at number 3 or at least give him an honorable mention.

Yesterday, his grassroots people completely unaffiliated with the campaign just raised $4.2 million from 37,000 donors.

Check his straw poll victories and you'll see that he has the best records out of all the republicans.

Marc, he is gaining ground and you aren't mentioning it. Please correct this.

Posted by B Reyes | November 6, 2007 2:21 PM

Romney is way ahead right now, followed by Huckabee or maybe Giuliani only because Huckabee has no money.

Your rankings are just silly. Anyone leading in Iowa and New Hampshire is leading period, regardless of what meaningless national polls say. Get a clue.

Posted by bob | November 6, 2007 4:11 PM

B Reyes wrote about Ron Paul: "Marc, he is gaining ground and you aren't mentioning it. Please correct this."

I agree with this. He raised over 4 million dollars in one day. Let's see Thomson do that?

He is the one that should be on the list. I heard his Sirius radio ad on the NFL station. It was terrific. Get with the program Marc.

Posted by M Drennan | November 6, 2007 4:48 PM

Much as I like Ron Paul, He belongs Tied with 4th place along with Huckabee and McCain.

Like it or not, the "electibility" of a candidate is heavily dependent on the attention the MSM gives. Name Recognition is essential to the game, and it takes a lot of effort to garner the sort of constant attention given to the top 3 candidates in each party, (Guilani's front page news of a standard NH campaign stop is a prime example, particularly when compared to Ron Paul's 4+ Mill effort being relegated to page A20) There's only so much oxygen, and unless one of the bottom 3 manage to break out:

Huckabee is really trying, but he still can't seem to manage more than 30K a day with any consistency, and that lack of money is going to be crippling in the next 60 days.

McCain is operating on a wing and a prayer, but he's lost a lot of core support (quite a few of whom have migrated to Thompson, and to a lesser Extent Paul) Once he started trying to garner the support of the SoCons, he alienated the moderate base, and hasn't really recovered.

Paul, If ever there was a wildcard, it's Ron Paul, in 2000 it was McCain, Ron Paul appeals to the same group of people, but with the added advantage of as of yet, not selling out. Which means that he's holding on to the principles card. (which is attracting a lot of supporters who otherwise might not agree with him, but can respect what he's saying). He could come up big, He could end up with 5% But what he cannot do is have *only* New Hampshire, He needs to get double digits in another state, Michigan is one possibility, Wyoming is another. New Hampshire can be written off as a fluke or a quirk of the region, Grabbing another state and performing well will be critical for legitimizing his candidacy. Until he does that, it's hard to rate him above anyone else.

But I will admit, it was kinda fun watching those number spin faster than the deficit clock

Posted by Mark | November 6, 2007 6:56 PM

Do you have to leave out important facts to make for an interesting race?

Heres the truth of the matter: Romney has won over Iowa, New Hampshire, leads South Carolina, leads Michigan, leads Nevada, leads California, and is making serious gains in Florida. It is all but over folks.

And as far as Hillary, she is not electable. Period. She is far too polarizing. I don't care who she is running against, she can not close the deal. Romney, next president of the United States.

Posted by Bryan, Boston Ma | November 6, 2007 11:16 PM

I'm not part of Romney team...just don't want the conspiracy theorists to think my comment is planted...
Even though I'm not decided on a Repub candidate, I think Romney is in a better position than the press is giving him, especially from you Marc.
Romney is not in trouble in SC. Doesn't mean he's won the state, but he's a strong contender there and in NH. I have no idea if he'll win either NH or SC, but he certainly could, so at least say it how it is.
I think the media will probably continue to downplay anything Romney does right. They'll say he didn't win big enough in Iowa and point that Giuliani didn't try. They'll also elude to something around the line of Romney buying votes. They'll make even a slight loss in NH or SC sound like the end of the guy's campaign. They'll bring up the Mormon issue (they'll preface it by saying it shouldn't BE an issue, but they will still bring it up).
I'm surprised that the media isn't giving the guy more credit. Makes me wonder why...
Just my thoughts.

Posted by Barc | November 7, 2007 12:25 AM

I fully expect Romney to win five of the first six states, four at the least.

Iowa (leading)
New Hampshire (leading)
South Carolina (narrowly leading in most polls)
Michigan
Wyoming
Nevada (this will be close)

Florida will improve and be the first big test.

Romney is a true leader. He has the education, the experience, and the talent to turn around not only the GOP, but the country.

I have heard Giuliani speak, too, and he bored me. Romney doesn't need a book called Leadership to be a leader!

Posted by Jed | November 7, 2007 1:29 AM

Former Senator Fred Thompson is the only candidate that gets it. He makes decisions based on principles. Principles don’t change. You have to stand for something and not change who you are based on the polls. That is what Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani have done and all of the Democrats do it. Give me a leader that will stand by his principles anyday versus someone that stands for everything.

I know many Republicans and conservatives that will stay home if Rudy Giuliani is the candidate. He does not represent our values as conservatives, and never will. Millionaire Mitt Romney is a Republican-in-name-only (RINO) that simply has everything else and nothing to do. “I guess I’ll just try to buy the presidency”. The White House isn’t for sale! He has flip-flopped on almost every issue in the last few years! Conservatives will simply stay home and the Democrats will pick up additional seats in the House and probably get the 60 seats in the Senate they need to completely destroy our country-nice picture huh?

However, I think Fred can bring America back together, if that’s even possible. America needs a rebirth of patriotism and honor. Republicans also need a rebirth. President Reagan was our last rebirth and he can never be duplicated. Fred Thompson will bring his own down-to-earth common sense to this country.. A little of the good old days of faith, federalism and family would do well for this country. If a conservative runs as a conservative, he will win!

Think of it this way: Eight years of another Clinton White House? Now if that is not a sufficient enough reason to pull together as a nation, and fight this socialist liberal takeover of our government, what is?

Folks, we are in for the fight of our lives, just as our young men and women are fighting for our freedoms in Iraq and Afghanistan, we must fight for our nation right here and now! I truly believe Fred Thompson is the one man who can pull this nation back together! Rudy Giuliani will just tear us apart.

Posted by Alan Srout | November 7, 2007 1:14 PM

Preved dyatlam!

Posted by Jenna | February 24, 2008 3:39 PM

Emm.. What this all boils down to is.. http://gellias.info/ciallis/site_map.html >ciallis online discount</a> ITS I have to agree

Posted by Assenteme | July 28, 2008 8:16 PM