Pathways To The Nomination

I quickly write in for elections, like tommorow. I win Iowa, lose new hampshire and win in Michigan. Next follows a landslide to win the rest of the states and I lose against hillary or obama in the national elections as i fail to show up on one of the key debates because im spending time in Vegas with a prostitute.

Posted by Baggy | December 21, 2007 10:20 AM

Now wait a second... I'm from Minnesota, so I've seen this happen before.

Ron Paul wins the nomination the Jesse Ventura way.. that is: His support doesn't show up because his voters are first time voters who want to stick it to the Man (in MNs case it was HHHumprey the 3rd and Norm Coleman, in RPs case it is the war and the federal reserve.)

Posted by Bjorn | December 21, 2007 10:29 AM

Or;

Ron Paul could win the nomination if..... Paul hangs in there, benefits from a Huckabee fall in Iowa -- i.e., Huckabee CANNOT win Iowa in this scenario, which means that Romney wins Iowa which means that Romney probably wins New Hampshire; Paul somehow wins South Carolina and wins Southern states on Feb. 5; Romney and Giuliani battle in some northern states (and Romney maybe even wins one), and Paul lives to fight Giuliani or Romney as the Paleo-conservative alternative.

Posted by Bjorn | December 21, 2007 10:31 AM

Thompson's chances seem slim enough to be negligible. Romney's path is perhaps the easiest, as he stands to benefit from the Stop Huckabee effort by GOP elites. If Romney's too weakened, either McCain (if they've forgiven him) or Giuliani seems more likely to pick up the slack (the GOP elites-- the Wall Street types-- are fine with Rudy, aren't they? They don't really care that much about social issues).

Posted by PJ | December 21, 2007 11:03 AM

Pundits can decide who wins the nomination if... They can convince the primary and caucus goers that each vote in a close primary like this one doesn't count equally. That they should let the early voters sway everything and every voter later in the process should just fall in line according to what the pundits think so the pundits can pick the tweedledee (Democrat) and tweedledumb (Republican) that we have no choice between in November.

Posted by Andy | December 21, 2007 11:06 AM

Wow. You really think Huck still has a chance after these last couple of weeks? And you give such narrow possibilities for Fred and Mitt?

Truly if either one of them wins Iowa it's OVER for both Huck AND McCain.

And even if either one of them splits the early states with Huck, it's still over for Huck. Do you really think that California and New York are even going to consider him? Ever? (The answer is no by the way).

There's obviously an agenda here, steeped in bias.

Posted by red fred | December 21, 2007 11:09 AM

Most people think Rudy's path involves Hillary dispatching everyone else and refocusing the race on electability. Whether or not Rudy is electable, the fact remains that Republican primary voters probably associate compromise (moderate positions) with electability.

Posted by Democrats Against Hillary | December 21, 2007 12:07 PM

Is there any reason for Thompson to be anywhere but SC for the next 3 weeks?

He's not going to come in top 3 in either Iowa or New Hampshire, so why not pull all resources out of there and make South Carolina the line in the sand.

Pour everything into SC and see if that can give you the bump to propel to Florida and other southern states.

Posted by Chris | December 21, 2007 12:14 PM

Romney has begun to rise in the national polls, now reaching 20% in a recent nationwide survey. Regardless of who wins in Iowa, the national media focus will be entirely on Huckabee, Romney and John McCain for the last days of December and the first half of January. I think Romney is going to place a strong second or even come back to win Iowa and he will still beat McCain in New Hamsphire. Guiliani doesnt have a chance anymore. A pro choice adulterer at the top of the GOP ticket? Not a chance.

Posted by Joshua Fox | December 21, 2007 12:59 PM

...but the press doesn't really cover it that much because they're covering the vanquishing of Hillary Clinton...

*prays*

Posted by goethean | December 21, 2007 1:02 PM

Huckster will emerge, as the only candidate to remain for the conservatives.

Huck will win Iowa, McCain will win NH, removing Romney, and Huckabee is the ONLY social conservative left.

Posted by Oscar | December 21, 2007 3:06 PM

All of Ron Paul's supporters will be at the primaries, none are staying home to "see what happens".

Posted by Chris | December 21, 2007 3:18 PM

Thompson will win.He'll finish a solid second in Iowa which will startle the MSM and DC pundits..

New Hampshire & Michigan go to Mitt but then....

South Carolina..Fred will win this handily from the Huckster

Fred will sweep the south on Super Tuesday and have a decent showing out west (except for California)..By March it will be all over..

Fred is down to earth, specific on key issues with solid policies, talks to voters as adults even on 'third rail' type issues like the pending bankruptcy of Social Security and is tough as nails..not to mention a strong supporter to the Second Amendment and is pro-life big time.

Nuff said. He wins going away.

Posted by DHarvey | December 21, 2007 3:25 PM

Fred Thompson wins the nomination if... (when) Huckabee's HuckaBoom continues toward reality and turns out to be a HuckaBust. Iowa voters have a history of discounting the false "profits" bestowed upon the "media frontrunner" and he will become the new "Dean" of politics. Also there will be a revelation that it was the Romney Campaign behind the nasty anti-Mormon push polls in Iowa and New Hampshire. That alone isn't as bad as the fact that Romney initially blamed McCain for the polling and that is what will hurt Mitt badly. He'll slide to 2nd in Iowa just slightly better than Huckabee in 3rd. That leaves the top spot in Iowa for Fred Thompson. The Fox News All-Stars will all claim they knew Thompson had it in him all the time and Fred Barnes will squeeze his own chest with pride! Bill O'Reilly will dismiss the importance of Iowa and take another shower with a falafel.

Fred rides his new popularity and goes on to win in New Hampshire and South Carolina. McCain drops out after South Carolina and endorses Fred which puts him 25 points ahead of Rudy and 28 points ahead of Romney nationally just in time for mega super Tuesday. After that America realizes the clear consistent conservative choice is indeed Fred Thompson.

In the general, it becomes a contest between Fred and Hillary and despite their politics the election is decided on looks. Fred wins in a landslide.

Meanwhile Ron Paul gives free blimp rides to anybody with a tattoo in an embarrassing place.

Posted by FRedStates | December 21, 2007 3:55 PM

"All of Ron Paul's supporters will be at the primaries, none are staying home to "see what happens"."

Kind of like Dean's supporters in 2004?

Posted by Rockwell | December 21, 2007 3:55 PM

Fred could win if Huck loses in Iowa and McCain wins in NH as long as Fred finishes second or third in both races and McCain finishes low in Iowa and Huck low in NH.

Another scenario is that Romney gets a win in Iowa, putting Huck out by placing second, with Fred in third, but then Romney gets edged by McCain in NH, due to a Clinton victory in Iowa and independents turning out heavily. Romney will drop after losing NH, which will turn SC into a race between Fred and McCain. Fred will win that, which will make McCain drop. Conservatives will flock to Fred over Giuliani, who will have not won any state by the time Florida rolls around, which will give him the nomination.

Prediction: if Hillary starts racking up early victories, the GOP establishment will begin putting heavy pressure on each other to fall in line behind a viable candidate. That candidate will not be Huck regardless of his winning Iowa, and won't be Rudy because he will have been winless and not looking so electable. That leaves Fred, Mitt, and McCain. Between McCain and Mitt, whoever loses NH will be out, leaving Fred and the NH winner.

Posted by JPL | December 21, 2007 3:58 PM

Ron Paul I thought he dropped out ??? You sure hes stil in this ???

Posted by Fred Right and true | December 21, 2007 4:20 PM

Alan Keyes could win if he poisons the other candidates and hypnotizes the Republican primary voters into believing that he's not an obnoxious, self-hating, elitist zealot.

Posted by Tootie | December 21, 2007 4:38 PM

Fred's path to the nomination starts with him waking up.

Posted by Tootie | December 21, 2007 4:42 PM

Fred has a chance if...

Huckabee holds his lead and wins Iowa by a fairly substantial margin. But, the fact that this was thought of as a forgone conclusion combined with the media concentration on Clinton's debacle there doesn't give him much of a boost. Thompson finishes a solid third (19%). Then, comes the caucus no one talks about; Wyoming, where Fred has some following. He wins that, and proves he's for real. Romney holds his lead in NH and wins there, then barely defeats the Huck in Michigan.

By the time the candidates get to SC, Thompson has been campaigning there for weeks, having given up on Michigan and NH long ago. Then going into Florida, McCain not having won anything yet, drops out and endorses Thompson. Huckabee, also having won nothing, stays in, but has no chance to win Florida. Giuliani goes on to narrowly defeat Thompson there, and Romney finishes a distant third.

By the time Super Tuesday comes around, Huckabee is gone, and Romney is reeling, since he has little broad support. Thompson is able to come up big in the South, where fear of a Giuliani presidency among social conservatives proves to be a rallying cry. By the end of Super Tuesday, there is still no clear winner, but Romney is all but gone.

From here, it's anyone's guess. Wisconsin, voting virtually alone 10 days after Super Tuesday could turn the tide, or it could go much longer, possibly to the convention.

Posted by Lucas | December 21, 2007 4:57 PM

Everyone else drops dead. It is his only path. Having said that, I too believe Huckabee has the clearest path to win. I do not believe Mitt can win, because of bias, no way. John McCain has an outside chance, but things have to break his way big time. Rudy can win also, but he is in trouble right now for sure.

Posted by Fred wins because | December 21, 2007 5:20 PM

Mike Huckabee's path to the nomination now seems clear.

Mike wins in Iowa by a respectable margin. Romney and McCain follow. Not necessarily in that order. It has long been said that there are only three tickets out of Iowa. That means Fred's campaign dies in Iowa. Because Rudy has never really paid Iowa any serious attention he will be given a "fourth ticket" by the press.

McCain wins in New Hampshire. The people of New Hampshire have seen Mike doing very well in Iowa for a long time now. It has not yet influenced them to jump on Mike's band wagon. I doubt a win in Iowa is going to change that much. (Who finishes second third and fourth in New Hampsire will make little difference. All four runner ups will live to fight another day.) The people of New Hampshire with their first in the nation "Primary Election" like to be seen as leaders not followers, and maverick leaders at that. They even gave most of their votes to Pat Buchanan not too many years ago. The "Maverick" John McCain was their man eight years ago and he will be again, especially with all their local Newspapers now endorsing him.

Mike wins in Michigan. With Romney just having lost two straight matches he will no longer look quite so appealing to Michigan voters. The attack ads he will then be running will only make him look worse and galvanize Mike's supporters. McCain will finish second. And Romney will have to drop out of the race, no doubt blaming "religious bigotry."

Mike will win big in South Carolina. With both Thompson and Romney out of the race, and with McCain and Giuliani splitting the "moderate" vote, the one social conservative left in the race, and one from the south yet, Mike Huckabee will have little trouble winning in South Carolina. McCain will run a respectable second.

Mike will win big in Florida. Having just won three of the last four contests, even Fox News will now be singing Mike's praises. Guliani will have just lost four in a row prompting the people of Florida to quickly leave his sinking ship. McCain again will run a respectable second. Giuliani will refuse to give up, hoping for a miracle on Superduper Tuesday ( or a major act of terror somewhere in the world shortly before then. )

Mike will wrap up the nomination on Superduper Tuesday with Giuliani and McCain again splitting the "moderate" vote.

Posted by Michael Satterlee | December 21, 2007 5:46 PM

I think that the huckabots are on drugs there is no way that he can win nationally. He is death to the GOP in the upcoming presidential election if he so happens to win. I don't think that will happen. Mitt Romney will win it no matter what the pundits say. He has more key endorsements and a very well oraganized well oiled grassroots organization to get the vote out come Jan 3 in Iowa and all the key states. He has been the hardest working of the candidates. The reality about it is this: If Romney was an evangelist he would be the golden boy but because he is not the evangelicals will not wholly support him. The problem with huckleberry apart from his record is that he cannot draw all the bases together like mitt can. Huckabots need to do some intellectually honest research into this mans record. He may be a good man and a preacher, but he doesn't have what it takes.

Posted by pushkin | December 21, 2007 6:14 PM

Nixon was on five national tickets because he understood that, absent a major crisis for which one party gets blamed (see Carter, Hoover), victory at the presidential level goes to the candidate who can reach out to the middle. That is why Nixon would position himself between Rockefeller and Goldwater (and in 1968, Reagan).

Huckabee has positioned himself too far to the right. This thrills evangelicals who are tired of being taken for granted, but Pat Robertson had a better chance at the nomination than Huckabee does (Robertson at least had money and an organization).

Rudy has positioned himself too far to the left. The party will not nominate a pro choice, pro gay marriage, pro affirmative action, formerly pro gun control New Yorker.

Thompson's motto should be "lazy as I wanna be." He has no plausible scenario and has himself to blame.

Romney and McCain are in the middle, between Giuliani and Huckabee and are going all out. One of them will become the "anyone but Huck or Rudy" candidate and carry the nomination. The base does not love either of them. Romney has the energy, organization, looks, money and staff , but I used to work for McCain and have learned never to write him off.

Posted by Lance Entrekin | December 21, 2007 6:20 PM

How McCain wins.

First let me preface this that I am writing this not as a McCain supporter but just how I think the race will play out. Alot of this has more to do with trends that I am seeing and the general dynamics of the race.

There have been three significant factors that has allowed John McCain back into this race. These are:
1) The guliani strategy of not competing until Florida.
2) Thompson unmotivated campaign
3) The Huckabee boom

Iowa was really suppose to be a show down between Thompson and Romney. Romney had the organization and the evangelicals where to centralize around Thompson. Both of these canidates would battle it out taking out all the rest of the field except Guliani. Romney would win NH and Michigan while Thompson took off in SC. Florida would be won by Guliani (by a wide margin) and the feb 5th primary would of eliminated romney leaving Guliani and Thompson to fight it out to the primary.

Funny thing happend. Thompson never showed. His unmotivated campaign effort never transcended into any momentum. This left a huge vacumn with the social conservatives. Who to rally around?

Along comes Mr Huckabee? He explodes on the scene capturing the hearts of many evangelical. He looks initially like the knight in shining armour. But he also did one other thing. He exposed romney as not being the inevitable winner of Iowa. And when he shattered that, it opened the way that he is not the inevitable winner in NH.

So in theory, one would think that all that occured is huckabee replaced Thompson as the person battling out Romney. The problem: Huckabee is a social conservative, not a fiscal conservative. In general, a large part of the establishment does not like huckabee. Which still leaves a vacumn. Now you have a wounded Romney and a surging canidate does not have the "credentials" to carry the republican banner.

Along comes Mr McCain. Now many republicans have concerns with some of the stance Mr McCain has on some issues. But a majority of republicans (including myself) would feel comfortable because of his leadership and integrity issue.

So here is how it plays out. Iowa is currently a two man race. But Jan 3 comes closer, we start seeing the McCain surge (I believe we are already seeing it across the board). Romney looks like he is topping out at about 25-30%. That is amazing in itself with the amount of money he has spent in Iowa. Huckabee starts dropping, not dramatically, but alot of the scrutiny of the last week is starting to catch up with him. The howard dean of the party, possibly. So the question is who steps up. McCain or Thompson. Thompson is able to strip away some support from Huckabee, but Iowan's really are starting to get irritated by the food Huckabee, Romney, thompson thow down. Most Iowans see mcCain as their #2 choice and realize, he has the most realistic shot win the nomination. He doesn't in Iowa but comes in a strong 3 (possibly even 2nd). Romney wins has a narrow win, but the expectations game has McCain as the big winner. The big losers, Huckabee and thompson. Thompson drop out and endorses his long time friend McCain. Huckabee goes all in at south Carolina. Guliani comes in 6th.

On to NH. You are the neighboring governor and you can not exceed the 35% threshhold. Romney is not mortally would and attempts to go big time negative against McCain. But the moderates and independents come in strong. Really, this isn't going to be a race between Romney and McCain, but more of a race between McCain and Obama. Do not be surprised if you see McCain run ads against Obama on leadership and experience. Not hard negative ads but something to show the independents that he is the stronger of the two. With guliani all but conceding NH, his support plummets. McCain wins this one and not by a narrow margin. 6-10% points. Huge, HUGE victory. Guliani comes in 4th behind a very strong showing from Ron Paul.

Romney campaign is starting to crumble. He has all the money in the world, but his religeon and the "flip/flop" issues is catching up to him. Here comes Michigan. The problem? Independents (and I believe dems) are allowed to cross over. Interesting to note here. Most of the democratic canidates (except for hillary) are not on the ballot do to the primary issues. Another big win for McCain. Guliani comes in 4th again behind ron paul.

Romney now trys to chart out his course on potential wins. Realizes that if he doesn't win South Carolina, his campaign is over. Nevada becomes an after thought and McCain wins on momentum alone, guliani second and Romney a distant third.

Here comes South Carolina. All the press, all the momentum is now with McCain. It has been a long time since Iowa and Huckabee momentum is gone. His numbers are dwindling rapidly and that is to bad for Romney because that support is drifting toward McCain. This is an extremely negative contest but McCain prevails. Huckabee beats romney but still comes in a distance second. Romney reavaluates his campaign and drops out. Huckabee realizes that he does not have the resources to win. This is where it can get interesting. Does Huckabee play the spoiler roll to make his move as VP. Many evangelicals will want him to at least go to Feb 5. Guliani is again 5th.

Florida comes around and this is where Guliani is going to make his stand. But he has nothing except money. His base has collapsed. He has 15-20% support in Iowa but the McCain machine is starting to roll. Huckabee is still getting the evangelical vote but is now polling 10-15%. take note that Ron Paul is still moving forward. He is not winning but he has a solid 15% voting for him. Why, do I bring that up? Because it is at this point that ron paul has to make the decision. Does he see his party changing course or should he look at a libertarian run. My guess, he runs as a libertarian.

Guliani and huckabee are able to win some delegates on feb 5th but it is becoming inevitable that McCain is the nominee. Romney endorses McCain. Huckabee wants to continue but has no money. He drops out. Guliani is trying to see if there is any possibility to get a split convention. Answer? NOPE. Game/Set/Match.

Posted by asher | December 21, 2007 6:23 PM

I just spoke with a Republican campaigner (looking for money naturally); advised him that Huckabee is an idiot, and I am getting very hesitant associating with an idiot's party. He agreed with me (of course he would agree -- he wants my money) and advised that so many, many people had said the same thing. I throw it out for what it's worth.

And, honestly, silly me -- I never at all realized --being an arrogant New Yorker -- the importance of Iowa and New Hampshire -- that SC will triumph over FL and here in NY, CA, CT and the entire northeast we will move sheepishly in line with IA and NH.

This website is truly an enlightening experience.

Posted by voter | December 21, 2007 6:37 PM

People have got to be insane. If immigration is as big of a deal as they say then Romney is the guy not McCane the border senator that worries about the illegal vote, or Guiliani who put out the red carpet in New York, Thompson would suffice but his performance in a debate on average is substandard and we need someone who will tear Hillarys throat out. Huckabee is a little soft and there are doubts in my mind about him. His sermons have magically disappeared and I bet you we hear that they have resurfaced a month before the general election. Romney has to be the guy whatever path he takes.

Posted by Cameron | December 21, 2007 6:46 PM

Sincerly apologize that I did not edit prior to posting. Some of my thought processes are somewhat fragmented (Guliani has 15 to 20% in florida not iowa).

Posted by asher | December 21, 2007 6:50 PM

Ron Paul's path to the nomination..."slow and steady always wins the race"

Paul surprising 3rd in Iowa. Huckabee wins. Romney 2nd. Thompson and Hunter drop out and endorse McCain after 6th/7th place showings.

Paul 2nd to Romney's caucus win in Wyoming.
Paul places 3rd in NH with McCain first and Romney second. Rudy focuses on Florida and Huckabee on SC.

Paul 3rd in MI after Romney 1st and McCain second.
Romney gives his campaign 10 million for Super Tuesday.
Paul wins Nevada in an upset. McCain 2nd in Nevada. Romney 3rd.
Huckabee wins SC. McCain 2nd. Romney 3rd.

RP holds plurality of delegates due to all the early states that were penilized by RNC.

RP supporters raise 10 million online Jan 21st. RP fever rises nationwide. Negative ad war is unbelieveable among Romney, McCain, Huckabee, and Guiliani - indirectly benefiting the positive only campaign of Dr. Paul.

RP wins FL. Huckabee second. McCain Third. Romney 4th. Guiliani 5th. Guiliani drops out Jan 30 and endorses McCain.

Romney wins Maine. RP second. McCain third. Huckabee 4th.

RP wins 8 states on Super Tuesday including CA and IL. Huckabee wins 5. McCain wins 4 including NY. Romney only 3. Romney drops out and endorses McCain.

RP, Huckabee, and McCain split up primaries during rest of February. RP supporters raise another 12 million in 1 day in late February.

RP beats Huckabee to win Texas. McCain wins Ohio. Huckabee drops out and endorses McCain. President Bush endorses McCain as "Stop Paul" candidate.

RP beats McCain in PA on April 22nd. RP also wins in Indiana on May 6 but McCain wins NC the same day.

RP enters convention with marginal majority of delegates.
Major backroom shenanigans used to derail Paul. Massive rally on Sept 1 at convention by RP supporters make it politically impossible for the GOP to not nominate Paul.

Paul picks Mark Sanford as VP.

Posted by Marcus | December 21, 2007 6:55 PM

Cameron, I understand what your saying, but if you watch the numbers, I think Romney has a hard cap at around 30-35%. He has thrown an incredible amount of money in both Iowa and NH and still cannot break that threshhold.

As for voter's comments, it is not about following them, but all about momentum. Kerry won the democratic primary because all the momentum fell his way. He became the inevitable canidate way before FL, NY, CA, CT even voted. People like to vote for a winner.

Guliani made a tactical mistake. He really needs to make a full court press in NH to stop McCain's momentum but I don't see him doing it. I think it cost him in the end.

Posted by asher | December 21, 2007 6:58 PM

Path for Rudy:

Huckabee wins Iowa.
McCain wins NH
Huckabee wins Michigan
Huckabee wins SC
Nevada: doesn't factor in b/c SC will dominate news cycle
Huckabee wins Florida. Rudy finishes 2nd.

At this point Fred is out, and Rudy will beat Romney and McCain as the Huckabee alternative just by finishing 2nd in Florida.

McCain drops out and his support of moderates goes to Rudy.

A week until Super Tuesday when Rudy as the Huckabee alternative wins NY, NJ, Conn, Del, Cal,Mass, and a few more.

Huckabee wins most of the southern states.

Rudy will lead in delegate count and be the frontrunner heading into 02/01 Miane which he should win and then even if he loses Kansas and Louisianna on 02/09, he should win Maryland 02/12 and Wisconsin and Washington 02/19.

Posted by JDS | December 21, 2007 7:08 PM

You FRED HEADs are NUTS.....

Fred wins the nomination if... and only if... Romney gets hit by a truck... Guiliani is caught cheating (again)... Huckabee is caught on camera saying the N-word... and McCain dies of old age.

Huckabee's chances are pretty slim as well... You don't piss off Rush Limbaugh and waltz to the Republican nomination... sorry. Plus... even without the clemencies and the tax hikes... he just doesn't have the organization to compete. The Iowa momentum will be gone as soon as someone else wins New Hampshire, or Michigan, or Nevada.

Clearly ROMNEY has the best path to the nomination. He wins Iowa (and it increasingly looks like that will happen) and this thing could wrap up pretty quickly... he'll get a bounce and knock McCain out by winning New Hampshire... by the time South Carolina rolls around he'll be 4-0... don't tell me that South Carolina is going to vote for Fred or Huckabee after Romney is 4-0... just won't happen.

McCain has a legitimate shot as well... assuming Romney loses in Iowa and McCain can pull off an upset win in New Hampshire... even then he still needs to win Michigan and duke it out with Guiliani in Florida.

Guiliani's odds are decreasing quickly... back in September it looked like New Hampshire was going to be his firewall... no he doesn't have anything moving his way until Florida... and recent polls show that Florida is NOT momentum proof. Guiliani needs Huckabee to do well and Romney to lose both Iowa and New Hampshire...

Here are my odds... Romney (50%) McCain (20%) Guiliani (15%) Huckabee (12%) Thompson (3%)

Posted by bayzing | December 21, 2007 8:19 PM

I am sick and tired of people painting Huckabee as evangelical's candidate. Obviously you haven't watched him with open mind like so many regular joe's and jane's have. I am certainly not an evangelical. I think creationists and intelligent-design advocates are just bunch of hooeys.

Sure he appeals to the religious right but you're forgetting that Huckabee appeals to regular people like me too. How can you explain that by categorizing him as a "evangelical" candidate? Call it whatever you will, his straight shooting easy going manner, quick wit or whatever. He APPEALS to regular people. People who voted for Dubya and feeling guilty about it now that we're in the quagmire in Iraq and with stalling economy. People who are tired of conservatives driving this country to ground but afraid of Democrats even more. People how have visceral dislike for Hillary.

Out of all the republican candidates, he is the only one I am convinced that people will feel semi-good about come general election time.

Personally, I would prefer good old McCain but he seems to have created too many enemies along the way and I'm afraid his chances are rather dim. I'm not convinced that he'd win head to head match with HRC or Obama.

Remember who your real enemy is. Is your real enemy a preacher from Arkansas who would take your favorite candidate down or is it some ALL-DEMOCRAT HERO coming to rescue us all from the clutches of "evil war-mongering conservatives."

If you know your enemy, if you truly know your enemy, you don't fight this internecine fight being waged by Flippy-Floppy Romney on Huckabee.

Confidently I submit to you that Huckabee will win Iowa and take South Carolina for sure. He may even win Florida. You are forgetting this guy came from nothing. If you think he's just a fluke of some kind, perhaps there is a reason for this kind of fluke.

About being dissed by Rush being a handicap, in some circles, getting dissed by Rush is the best seal of approval one can hope for (i.e. club of the regular joes and janes). Perhaps Huck will show the impotent republican backroom dealers for what they really are. Wizard of Oz anyone? It would be worthwhile to vote for him if I can just see that he can raise the curtain on those fat-cats even if he were an Antichrist.

Who annointed you fat-cat venture-capital media moguls to be our leaders anyway?

Who says we needs your guidance or tutelage anyways.

Posted by xubio | December 21, 2007 9:03 PM

Or;

Ron Paul could win the nomination if... he finishes a surprising third in Iowa; independents in New Hampshire decide to vote for Ron Paul, placing him second or first; the mainstream media begin to take notice that this longshot candidate actually has a chance, boosting poll numbers and donation totals further; with a gaining momentum Ron Paul finishes third in South Carolina as well as winning in Nevada; Ron Paul fever continues nationally as he begins to look less like fringe candidate and more like an electable candidate.

Or;

Ron Paul could win the nomination if... his supporters show up at their various polling places and caucus meetings; Ron Paulicans continue their quest in becoming national delegates; when the GOP go to a brokered convention, after the first vote an overwhelming number of delegates switch from their bound candidate to Ron Paul, securing the nomination.

Posted by R. Mike Lyons | December 21, 2007 9:47 PM

Something that we are forgetting is that approximately 40% of the voters in Iowa will be evangelical's. I do not think Romney can overcome that now that the Huckabee campaign has been receiving so much coverage from the media. New Hampshire will go to Romney or McCain, depending on which has a better than expected showing in Iowa. Huckabee will not be received well up north, where the majority of fiscal conservatives are located. After this, I agree with the prior postings suggesting that Thompson will throw his support behind McCain, so that leads me to think that McCain will triumph in South Carolina. Of course, this is all speculation, albiet somewhat educated, but speculation nonetheless. I think at this time next week we will all be able to predict another scenario that is extremely likely to happen.

On a more personal note, as of this moment, I am throwing my support behind Romney. I wish I could support McCain because his numbers have consistenly been better than all the other republican candidates when polled head-to-head against the democrats, but I am big on illegal immigration and do not like his stances on the issue. I have learned that you vote for who you agree with most in the primary, and then for who you think will run the country the best in the general election. However, I will not actively campaign for a candidate that I did not support early on, so Romney is the only candidate I will lend my services to for the general election. I will be all aboard on the stop hillary express however, so at least I know I will get to campaign for something this year!

Posted by Shillmasta | December 21, 2007 10:18 PM

I actually think it comes down to Romney & McCain - whoever wins New Hampshire.

If Romney wins Iowa, he'll take that momentum to New Hampshire and win (he's already up a few on McCain). After he wins the first two, he'll look like the nominee and then wrap it up in Michigan - where it's currently close between Romney-Giuliani-Huckabee. His dad was Governor of Michigan and he'll win most of the non-evangelicals because Giuliani will be finishing outside the two in the first two contests. 3-0: Romney wins. Game over.

If Huckabee wins Iowa, it'll be a dogfight in New Hampshire between Romney & McCain. Whoever loses will be done. McCain has admitted that he has to win New Hampshire and Romney will have lost the first two states (after leading for most of the year and spendng the most money). Thompson also drops out - he's just a non-factor.

In the Huckabee wins Iowa scenario, it becomes a three man race post-New Hampshire, the New Hampshire winner (Romney or McCain), Huckabee, and Giuliani. I think that Giuliani stays more afloat in this scenario because no one has run the table. I think that Romney / McCain are both fiscal and social conservatives while Giuliani and Huckabee can only appeal to one wing. The New Hampshire winner and Huckabee finish 1-2 in Michigan and South Carolina. I don't know what order. Either way, Florida won't be enough to save Rudy and he'll either drop out or lose most of his supporters by Feb 5th. At that point, the ex-Rudy voters will back the New Hampshire winner and they'll scrap out wins in the bigger states over Huckabee. It may go beyond Feb. 5 (especially if it's McCain) but eventually Huckabee will lose because of a lack of money and the fact that the economic conservatives rally behind the New Hampshire winner.

I just don't find the Rudy scenario plausible. He loses the first four states but Florida still votes for him. Unlikely.

And yet in this article, it assumes that Rudy wins Florida in order for Huckabee to win. Thus, setting up a Huckabee-Rudy race. I think that the main thing that this article is missing is that although the race will probably come down to Huckabee versus someone else if Huckabee wins Iowa, that candidate will be determined by New Hampshire. Rudy will never have a chance.

Posted by Watching Democrat | December 21, 2007 10:20 PM

Huckabee just doesn't have a chance. He lacks money and organization to do anything. Let say he does win Iowa, what does he do? He won't come in the top two in NH. Probably will come in fourth.

McCain and Romney will stay in the race at least until south carolina. McCain will either win NH or come in a really strong second. Both will battle it out in Michigan where it will be a dog fight.

I don't see thompson making it to SC. If he doesn't, Thompson supports McCain. I would see in this scenerio, the vote splitting in three (huckabee, Romney and McCain).

After SC, it is all about name recognition, money and organization. Huckabee lacks all three. Even if Huckabee won SC outright, neither Romney/McCain or Guliani will stop campaigning. Why? Because they would see a huckabee SC win as a chance for a brokered convention. It will be all about delegate counts and the longer you stay, the better pull you have. Huckabee would get trounced on feb 5 because he does not have enough resource to put up adds in NJ, NY or California.

Realistically, he doesn't have a shot. The only way he would if he beat romney by 15-20% in iowa, actually place 1st or 2nd in NH, wins michigan and wins south carolina. But that is not going to happen. He loses all his momentum in NH. He is done.

Posted by asher | December 21, 2007 10:45 PM

Sorry folks, it's ROMNEY in the winner's circle ALL the Way to the White House!

Posted by Norma Parker | December 21, 2007 10:59 PM

If Rep.Tom Tancredo (R-CO) endorsed Mitt Romney, that good enough for me? We, as a nation cannot afford to support 12 to 20 million foreign nationals with large families.It's a growing drain on our Social Services and welfare, not forgetting hospitals, education and the massive population in our prison system, that is a bankruptcy warning to this nation! Only second to the War in Iraq, that is also a massive drain on taxpayers.Mitt Romney is the only one out of the multi-millionaire presidential list, that seems not to have an illegal immigration invasion skeleton hidden in his closet. "Mitt Romney stood up, and vetoed in-state tuition for illegal aliens, opposed driver's licenses for illegals. Of course their is Duncan Hunter, a crusader to build the 700 mile border fence. However just a few few days ago, a group of Democrats and a few Republicans led by Kay Baily Hutchinson (TX) derailed President Bushes bill. The cost of immigration to our society is enormous. The most recent estimate places the net cost of post-1969 immigrants at $61 billion in 2000 alone ($35 billion from legal immigrants and $26 billion from illegal immigrants). This is after immigrants’ contribution in taxes has been subtracted. As high as the cost is now, the rising tide of immigration will lift it even higher in years to come. By the end of 2002, the annual net cost of immigration will have risen $66 billion.

Posted by Daves | December 21, 2007 11:02 PM

First I was against Guiliani (because he left us hanging in the NY Senate race 7 years ago), then I was against McCain (for all the times he went against the Republican Party (ie. McCain-Feingold, etc.). So I was left with Fred, Mitt, and Mike.......

First I was for Fred, because I like'd how he acted on TV and seemed like a strong person/leader, until I watched him in his first debate. Then I was for Mike, because he had energy(unlike Fred), and said everything I wanted to hear, until I looked at his record and saw everything I didnt want to see (higher taxes, weak on crime/illegal immigration). So now I'm left with Mitt, and so will everyone else be when we get down to it.

Posted by Andrew, a NY refugee in TX | December 21, 2007 11:06 PM

How Rudy wins the nomination:

Rudy's recent slide has been tied in part to Obama's surge. So, HRC wins IA and NH and rolling to the nomination. Meanwhile Huck wins IA and McCain wins NH....and Mitt implodes. With HRC rolling, attention shifted back to Rudy as "best candidate to defeat HRC." Rudy wins or comes in second in MI...he and HRC win on the same day in NV, which overshadows SC. Rudy wins FL and is the clear front-runner going into Feb 5.

Rudy secures the nomination on Tsunami Tuesday.

Posted by Douglas Douglas | December 21, 2007 11:15 PM

Two things are already certain. Giuliani is toast. Look at his numbers in all early states. Thompson was never in the race.

Romney, McCain are likely final two, and if Romney punches him in NH, its over. McCain cannot carry the south or mountain states.

Huckabee is a liberal, and that's more clear every day. I love evangelicals, who have helped put good men in power the past 18 years, but your guy is not a conservative,, and a vote for him is a vote for Hillary.

Posted by Richard | December 21, 2007 11:59 PM

Three days prior to Iowa Ron Paul mistakenly makes a positive comment about President Bush and immediately checks himself into the Betty Ford Clinic. He never recovers.

Meanwhile...
Huckabee, overjoyed at the undeserved rise in his pole numbers, issues a political Christmas TV spot with himself portraying all three wise men. FOX news immediately launches Bill O'Reilly to do an investigation to determine if Huckabee is as smart as three wise men, or is only as smart as an Arkansas Governor who plays a minister. Huckabee later retracts the ad but never recovers politically.

Later that day...
Mitt Romney flip-flops on a earlier flip-flop on his flip-flop on Gun Control, no....it was immigration,no....it was that he used to be a Mormon, but now he is a Seventh Day Adventist, which is....wait...The Mormon Church just issued a statement, which reads, "Mitt who??". Without a religion to hang his hat on, and none available that he could buy, Romney quickly disappears from the political landscape and retires to watch his "guest laborers" mow his lawn.

The very next day...
McCain and Giuliani get into a fistfight after Rudy makes fun of McCain's war record. McCain kicks Giuliani's butt but good. He immediately gains 22 points in the polls, but quickly falls to 3% nationally after it is revealed that McCain provoked Giuliani by calling him "Judy".

Unnoticed until it was too late to react...
Fred Thompson steals Iowa, Romney second and McCain a surprising third. Rudy and Mitt tie in Michigan with Thompson in second, McCain is third. Thompson wins South Carolina, Mitt is Second, Rudy is third, McCain is fourth. The rest of the southern and western primaries play out the same way with the exception of Florida where Fred and Rudy tie. McCain drops out after never finishing above third and endorses Thompson. Fred Thompson goes on to win the nomination on the second ballot and beats the Hillary/Obama ticket, winning all states except New York.

Posted by PTParks | December 22, 2007 12:09 AM

Thomson--his staff want him to win more than he does

Huckabee--would be a good choice for VP but on the top of the ticket he gets eaten for breakfast by the dems

Giuliani--too moderate on the social issues

entrekin--good analysis and I agree-it's all about the middle---that means McCain or Romney

asher--good analysis--I hadn't thought about the spoiler role for Huckabee

bayzing--good %--I am lower on Thomson higher on Rudy and switched Romney and McCain

Thomson 0.5
Huckabee 12
Giliani 17.5
Romney 20
McCain 50

McCain wins based on electability over Romney. Asher is right. The surge has begun. He won't be stopped anywhere after winning NH (maybe hiccup in SC)

I'm biased though. I'd take a bullet for the guy.

Posted by prentman | December 22, 2007 12:10 AM

Ron Paul could win the nomination if..... He skips the last debate before the Iowa Caucuses. A CNN camera man, just back from a tour in the congo, has contracted ebola. All of the candidates are infected, and die in days. New candidates are frightened out of the race by the fear of going to an early primary state and contracting the outbreak of ebola themselves. Ron Paul is the only living candidate on the ballot.

despite this, he comes in fifth in Iowa, but makes a surprising 2nd place showing against a dead john mccain in New Hampshire. He places Third in South Carolina, wins Nevada and Michigan since those states have emergency sessions of there legislature to remove dead people from the ballot. Paul eventually wins by default since he's the only one alive.

despite this, he faces a tough battle on the floor of the convention in St. Paul as Governor Tim Pawlenty offers himself up for consideration as a floor candidate. Republican delegates, realizing that they are days away from nominating a crackpot for the presidency attempts to elect Pawlenty, but are aghast to learn he has ALSO contracted ebola and died.

Paul is nominated and loses the general election by obscene margins after every republican governor in the US endorses Hilliary Clinton.

Posted by Matthew Hedge | December 22, 2007 12:28 AM

All you that think McCain is going to run away with it after NH have a short memory - Go back to the year 2000 - Bush and McCain, South Carolina. When McCain starts getting confident (looks to be in the lead - or has the lead and the pressures on) he turns plum crazy - No offense Ron Paul. Unless Mitt finds away to slip-up it's Mitt to the White House in '08.

Overall chances (as of 12/22):
Romney 51%
McCain 13%
Thompson 19%
Guiliani 5%
Huckabee 12%
Paul

Posted by Andrew, still in TX | December 22, 2007 12:33 AM

I am amazed at the number of people who try to claim that Huckabee is "liberal". I guess you mean a pro-life, pro-marriage, fair-taxation, pro-death penalty, pro-military liberal? Come on folks... stop and do your own thinking for a moment.

The only two viable questions about Huckabee's conservatism have revolved around immigration and crime. People who are ignorant about Huckabee's campaign are incognizant of his immigration proposal which require all illegals to leave within 120 days and legally apply for re-entry at risk of arrest and deportation. As for his supposed softness on crime, the vast majority of these infamous commutations occurred long after most of these people had served the entirety of their sentences. Huckabee did preside over 16 executions... not that soft.

The conservative media has been opposed to Huckabee because they fear the liberals will have a field day against a staunch Christian conservative. Personally, I think they are out of touch and this country is a lot more conservative than they believe. If Republicans do not nominate Huckabee because they fear he will not prevail in the general election, they may eventually regret not selecting this incredibly articulate and likeable candidate. But this notion that Huckabee is liberal is utterly ridiculous.

Posted by Alan Orfi | December 22, 2007 12:57 AM

Romney fan in Texas

First, I might respect your position if you reversed Thomson (19) and Giulianni's (5) #'s. Someone who doesn't even want it doesn't have a 19% chance. And no matter what you think of Rudy-he will still have wide appeal on the 5th.

Second--I agree it is between Romney and McCain because the others are either too extreme or half-hearted. McCain will win cause of electability, experience and character.

Third--Romney has three things going for him 1--money 2--sound experience as a business leader 3--a good organization and 4--the ailes/fox news/ limbaugh team. 3 and 4 will desert him after Michigan. 1 and 2 are his to keep and go back to Wall Street.

Fourth--the reason his campaign will not be enough in SC--is the same reason McCain lost there in 2000 but will win this time--Romney ain't no George W. The establishment is only one third to one quarter (see #4 above) behind Romney (whereas they were 100% behind W) because Romney can't deliver social conseratives. The GOP needs that to hold together the Reagan coalition. SOCONS don't trust Romney b/c of his religion, his flip-flops and because frankly, he looks like a used car salesman.

Posted by prentman | December 22, 2007 1:24 AM

Interesting scenarios, but some comments...

First of all, Huckabee voters and Thompson voters aren't the same constituency. One is an evangelical populist. The other is a Reagan conservative. Huckabee's voters will go the distance with him if he wins Iowa, but I think he'll have problems expanding his coalition beyond the evangelicals and what few voters there are banking on the, "Fair," Tax issue. His main issues are abortion, Marriage, gays, and other cultural concerns. But he's more, "progressive," on immigration, spending, taxing, and (with his recent comments on Iran) Foreign Policy. If anyone has a ceiling it's Huckabee and it's about 25% of Republicans nationally. He can certainly win in Iowa (and probably will) and South Carolina (even-money if he wins Iowa), but once you get to larger, more diverse states like Michigan and Florida (where the most delegates are), the number of viable candidates will fall and 25% won't be enough to win in most of these.

Thompson's issues are a strong national defense, against de-facto amnesty on immigration, government spending and taxing (the Reagan limited-government issues) and much less abortion or marriage. In fact, he does share a constituency with another candidate (outside of immigration) and that's McCain (also a Reagan hawk on national defense and government spending, though not so much on taxing). One or the other will be out of the running after Iowa or New Hampsire. In fact, a Thompson win requires McCain's candidacy to end in N.H. It also requires him to beat McCain there, which is why Thompson's odds (presently) are very long. But Thompson's problem in New Hampshire is that they haven't seen him much at all and the press has largely (though not completely) written him off as not having the, "fire in the belly," to win. But Thompson has improved in this category and if he comes in the top 3 in Iowa, voters in New Hampshire and nationally will consider him viable from that point on.

Whether it's McCain or Thompson, there's an opening in the race in New Hampshire. New Englanders are, by nature, private about their religious convictions and don't appreciate candidates who wear their religion on their sleeves. Whether Huckabee comes in 1st or 2nd in Iowa, he'll come in 3rd or worse in New Hampshire. That leaves Romney and someone else. Probably McCain but maybe Thompson. Neither of them have to beat Romney. 2nd is enough there. And this is the candidate that (should Huckabee falter) the evangelicals will support in South Carolina in order to block Romney from coming in 1st.

Because either Thompson or McCain will emerge as a power from N.H., Romney needs to win in Iowa to maintain enough momentum to save face by coming in 2nd in S.C.. He needs Huckabee out of contention before S.C. If Huckabee wins Iowa, Romney will be finished-off in South Carolina. If he comes in 3rd or worse there, Romney's done. His campaign ends there.

Second, Giuliani can't afford to drop out of the top two in Michigan or Florida where he as led since the Spring, which is why he needs Huckabee to beat Romney in Iowa, because if Romney wins he'll push Giuiani into 3rd by Florida. If he comes in 3rd in either of these, he'll still win New York and New Jersey (in his back yard) but nowhere else on Super Tuesday and his candidacy will be over. But he doesn't need Iowa or New Hampshire because his strength lies in his National lead and as long as he remains in the top two there and in Michigan and Florida, he'll be hoping two conservatives emerge from the smaller states and divide the majority of votes allowing Giuliani to win with 1/3rd to 40% of the vote nationally.

Because all the candidates need to do well in Florida in order to appear to have momentum on Super Tuesday only 3 candidates (at most) will remain after Florida and one of those won't really have a chance to win the nomination.

So... Huckabee needs to win Iowa to stay in. Thompson or McCain will emerge from New Hampshire as a contender, but the other will terminate after New Hampshire. If Huckabee implodes, Michigan becomes more important because the winner there, between Giuliani and Romney, will survive South Carolina. The loser will not. If Huckabee remains, Giuliani will stand a far better chance of winning Michigan over Romney. Romney really needs to beat Huckabee in Iowa because otherwise he'll finish outside the top 2 in South Carolina and be finished.

The scenario that I see is that Huckabee will face Thompson or McCain on Super Tuesday with Giuliani hoping Huckabee remains strong enough to siphon-off enough votes from Thompson/McCain to win the big states (California and Illinois).

Once Thompson or McCain come in strong in New Hampshire they'll be the one to beat. And Giuliani will the only one left who can accomplish that, depending on his momentum and Huckabee's strength.

Posted by Jordan | December 22, 2007 4:03 AM

Notice how the Romney path takes the fewest words to describe and requires the least "assistance" from other candidates at key moments?

Romney is the NE Patriots of this Primary Season. His destiny is completely in his own hands.

If Romney wins Iowa and NH, it's over. The only guy that can beat Romney in Iowa is Huckabee. Every single Conservativde Pundit in America is on a "Stop Huckabee" Crusade. Ani-illegal immigration groups will be running SCATHING NEGATIVE ADS painting Huckabee as soft on Illegals between now and the 3rd. Illegal Immigration is the #1 Issue to Iowans. Huckabee has no organization on the ground in Iowa and is relying on Pastors to get their flocks out (which may cost those pastors their tax-exempt status).

If Huckabee still wins Iowa after all that, he truly is God's chosen candidate.

Posted by Bill Mitchell, Raleigh, NC | December 22, 2007 6:37 AM

Ron Paul tanks in the early primaries. Does worse than anticipated, down in the 4 to 5% range, not enough to be a blip.

His supporters suddenly realize that the Huck Monster is out front as a result of Iowa, good showing in NH, and South Carolina.

They decide to be pragmatic for once in their lives, and back one of the other Fiscal Cons - Giuliani, Romney or Thompson - and the Huck Monster is slain.

My money's on the Libertarian/Fiscal Con coalition taming the Monster.

Posted by Eric Dondero | December 22, 2007 7:50 AM

If the republicans want to win in November they'll nominate either Rudy or McCain. Huckabee will be Rudy's VP, while McCain will have a surprise choice, none of the running now. Could be the Governor of Minnesota!!

Posted by joe gores | December 22, 2007 8:06 AM

The McCain surge is starting to take hold. When he finishes third in Iowa, he will win New Hampshire, likely then win Michigan and then will compete for South Carolina. By Florida, it will be a three-man race between McCain, Huckabee and Guliani, with Guliani damaged goods by then and losing momentum fast.

Thompson will have dropped out and endorsed McCain; Romney will be sidelined and no one will want his endorsement; and Guliani will barely be part of the story.

Posted by Northern Man | December 22, 2007 10:59 AM

Here's my prediction'

Huck wins Iowa, Romney close second.

Romney wins NH, Mccain second but Mccian needs a victory so his campaign stalls.

Mich. Romney win. Huck second

SC--Huck wins. Romney second.

Nevada- Romney or Huck

Florida--by this time Gulliani is being overshadowed by the Huck, Rom dual. so Gul somes in third.

Going into super tuesday. Huck takes southern states. Gulliani is limited to NY and NJ. Romney takes everything else.

Posted by Emile | December 22, 2007 11:23 AM

Folks,
You are all missing one very important thing about Fred Thompson and the Iowa caucus. Steve King has 20% of the caucus voters in his ditrict and oh yes, he Just endorsed FRED! Say Fred gets 2/3 from King district, that's 13-14% of the voted and say from the rest of Iowa, Fred gets 10-12% of the vote, that gives him anywhere between 23-26% of the vote, and with other candidates allowing there delegates to change to be allowed at convention and say 5% go with Fred, he could end up with 1/3 of the vote. And with that he could win

Posted by DJ | December 22, 2007 12:14 PM

Interesting fact I have not seen; about 900 of those pardoned by Governor Huckabee never returned to prison. About 100 did. This is an amazing fact in that recidivism is about 65% in the states I have checked so far. If this is true, he "got it right" for 90% of "meth users."
Of course, it's much easier to be Governor Romney who does not seem to understand the possibility of redemption. It's all about law with Romney. Sadly, he doesn't understand grace or repentance, just about being right...even if he has to fudge the truth. Romney comes accross as a perfectionist. Must be a heavy burden to carry for the man but heavier still for those who work for him.

Posted by Don Hawkinson | December 22, 2007 12:39 PM

Lets remember people, as each of the remaining candidates slowly drop out of the race, who do they endorse? John S. McCain. Rudy, Mitt, Huck and Fred have all praised McCain in very eloquent ways. I'd say a good majority of those voters go to Johnny Mac when all is said and done, thus leaving him in the drivers seat.

Posted by Matthew Hedge | December 22, 2007 12:43 PM

The only thing Romney has holding him back is his Mormonism. His alleged flip-flopping is a bogus charge. The only flip he has ever made is from lack of information to more complete information. Romney would clearly be by far the best President.

Unfortunately American voters may show just how bigoted they are. Huckabee's 15.7 million Southern Baptists teach anti-Mormonism in their Sunday schools. How un-Christian can you get in the name of Christianity?

Posted by Christian Prophet | December 22, 2007 1:08 PM

We're going to be realistic here people...

Iowa: This is a close race between Romney and Huckabee. Huck leads the polls, but everything depends on voter turnout, cuz Huck's numbers have gone from a 14 point lead to about a 7 point lead (though that number appears, for the moment, to be stable.) The thing I don't think people are taking into consideration is that, if a candidate doesn't hit 15% at any given caucus meeting, his delegates have to re-distribute to the candidates that do have over 15%. Right now, the only candidates anywhere close to 15% in polls are Huck and Mitt. So the question is, will the McCaniacs, Thompsonites and godless liberals (i.e. Giuliani's people) be more likely to break for Mitt or Huck? That's a key question. If I had to guess, I'd say the liberals go for Mitt for sure, the Thompsonites go to Rudy for sure, and the McCaniacs could go either way. All I'm sure of is that the bus tour is not going to work, and that no other GOP candidate is going to emerge with a significant portion of the vote. It also seems to me that Iowa is almost a must-win for Huck, and for everyone else in the field. If Romney wins, how is he going to lose the nomination?

NH: One poll put McCain in a tie with Mitt. I like McCain, but he doesn't have a prayer if Mitt is close to winning or actually wins in Iowa. If Mitt gets crushed (like losing by 10 points or more) then McCain has a chance. Otherwise, Mitt's money and organization win. If Huckabee wins Iowa by under ten points, he'll have a strong third place showing. If he loses, he'll come in fifth.

MI: Polls originally had Giuliani up by a few points here. He won't win because his lead isn't momentum proof. The race is between Huck, Mitt and McCain. McCain needs a NH to have a chance here. Huck needs an Iowa win to have a chance here. Romney has a chance by virtue of his last name, no matter what. Still, if Huck wins Iowa and surprises people by coming in 3rd in NH, his momentum will sweep Michigan. Otherwise, I see Romney taking this one.

NV: If Romney has won any state by this point (a near certainty) he wins NV. Giuliani will get some Las Vegas voters and might come in second (or he might not,) but the westerners are just not going to vote for a pro gun control candidate. No chance.

SC: If Huck wins Iowa, he wins SC. If he doesn't, Fred Thompson has somewhat of a chance, but only if he pours himself into this place and Huck messes up. Even without Iowa, Huck still has the best chance here, followed by Romney. McCain needs his NH upset to have a chance (and would still probably lose to Huckabee.) I think this is probably Huck's state.

FL: In case you haven't been tracking, I'd say that the most likely scenario for things so far is that Huck wins Iowa and South Carolina, Mitt wins New Hampshire and Nevada, and one of them wins Michigan (maybe Mitt.) Apologies to Rudy, but, if that happens, the race is going to turn into a Huck vs. Romney affair. Huck is going to be the Southern, Evangelical, warm, social-conservative populist candidate. Romney is going to be the Establishment, everything-to everyone in the party candidate. North Florida will go to Huck. South Florida will be more friendly to Romney. The key question is how many Giuliani supporters will fear Huck enough to abandon Rudy and coalesce around Romney? I ask this because, in the above, most likely scenario that it becomes a Huck vs. Mitt contest, if either one wins decisively in Florida, he wins the nomination. Even a narrow win makes the nomination likely.

Now, if Huck wins Iowa, McCain wins NH, Romney picks up Michigan and Nevada and then Fred wins SC, Rudy will probably win Florida and the nomination, because no one else will have momentum and Rudy is the only one with money and name recognition. However, there's almost a 0 percent chance that this scenario will pan out. If Huck wins Iowa and SC, and then McCain wins NH and MI, Romney's pretty much done for, but Giuliani still has a chance at Florida (South Florida is less likely to embrace McCain that Romney.) I'd give the advantage to Huck in that case, but Rudy would still have a chance.

So in conclusion, if Huck and Mitt split the first five states, no one else (including Rudy) will be relevant, and whichever one wins Florida will probably win the nomination. This is the most likely scenario based on early polling, but it's not inevitable. If the early states split five ways, Rudy's probably going to be the nominee. However, if Huck can win both Iowa and South Carolnia, but Mitt doesn't win NH, the race will turn into a Rudy vs. Huck race, with Huck having the momentum and the likely nod for the nomination. McCain's only path to the nomination is if he emerges as the anti-Huck candidate, meaning he'll have to win NH, MI and NV, and Huck will have to win IA, SC and FL. Even then, Huck has a pretty big advantage.

In general, I think Huck has the best chance, because he doesn't have to win over any Giuliani liberals. I think it's going to be the Huck vs. the Anti-Huck (i.e. establishment.) I don't know who will win that one.

And in case you're wondering, I haven't made up my mind as to whom I support, so I tried to be as unbiased as possible in this analysis.

Posted by Matt | December 22, 2007 3:04 PM

If Hillary beats Obama handily in Iowa, that will benefit McCain in New Hampshire, because independent voters will be less inclined to see Obama as a winner down the stretch. They'll ask for a Republican ballot at the primary and cast a vote for McCain, believing that they're voting for the anti-Hillary candidate. McCain wins the nomination and narrowly beats Hillary in the general, on the basis of his experience and the fact that he didn't (completely) sell out to the base in the primaries.

But if Obama gets a victory in Iowa, New Hampshire independents will jump on the bandwagon and Romney will win the Republican race and the nomination, losing badly to Obama in the general.

Posted by Uncle Mike | December 22, 2007 3:07 PM

Guliani's stradegy is risky but possible. It doesn't necessarily hinge on him winning florida. The reason:

His goal is to be equal in delegates after feb 5. How does that occur? He wins NY (winner take all for), NJ (winner take all), CT (winner take all) and a large percentage of california (delegates split based on vote). Many people believe he will not have the momentum to take california, but one thing people are forgetting (or are not aware) is..........

California's mail in ballot. It is expected that up to 60% of the vote for california primary will be mail in ballots. Ballots will be sent out prior to NH vote (jan 2). I think his stradegy is to focus on the mail in ballot while the rest of the field is battling it out in michigan and SC. He has the cash and resources to go after this vote aggressively and if he can capture 40-50% of this vote, he would already have a built in 25% vote cushion before voters actually go into the poll.

This could almost give him enough votes to win him california. That would mean he wins NY, CT, NJ and NJ while others win ND, NM, ID and kansas. Delegate tallys would put him equal to almost any canidate making it a Rudy vrs either McCain/Thompson/Huckabee/Romney.

Gutsy stradegy. Not sure he will be able to pull it off.

Posted by asher | December 22, 2007 4:25 PM

I'm impressed. A lot of people here really understand what is going on (including "Watching Democrat"). If you read this list of comments and try to parse the most likely scenario, you have to come away thinking that the best bet is Romney. But that may say as much about Atlantic Monthly as the state of the race.

Posted by Jake | December 22, 2007 4:34 PM

i like watchful democrat too

3 other comments:

Uncle Mike---spot on-things rest on the Hillary vs. Obama Fight in IA. If HRC loses, Obama wins the independent fight in NH and gives the nomination to Romney. Mitt will be trsshed in November by whoever wins for the dems.

Matt--very good and realistic scenario--likely to be Romney vs. Huck with Mitt being favored. BUT ONLY IF McCain surge is not real. I beleive it is looking at latest FOX polls. We will see wen new #'s come out after Christmas.

Christian Prophet--what are you on? 'Romney doesn't flip-flop'? Read the Meet the Press transcript from last week.

Posted by prentman | December 22, 2007 5:43 PM

For the first time in over 50 years you end up with brokered coventions. Clinton, Obama and Edwards split the primarieswith none able to get enough momentum to pull away from the others. The animosity engendered among them makes it impossible for any two of them to make a deal to eliminate the third. After two or three ballots the thought that they might blow the election causes key Senators, Governors and union leaders to go to Al Gore and prevail upon him to accept the nomination and he is nominated by acclamation.
The Republicans come to the convention with Huckabee and Guiliani as the leading contenders. The social conservatives make plain that they will never back Guiliani and will either sit the election out or run a third party ticket. The pragmatic wing of the party say they will not allow Huckabee to be the nominee. Karl Rove, Ed Rollins and a few others decide that the only man who can unite the party and have a chance of being elected is Newt Gingrich. They prevail on Arnold Schwarzenegger to nominate him and Jeb Bush to second it. The delegates get caught up in the excitement and he prevails.
In the general election the ticket of Gore and Richardson win in a landslide.
Library Dwarf

Posted by Richard Wald | December 22, 2007 7:34 PM

FRED THOMPSON is the best person to lead this country. He is a true conservative and has been his entire life. All one has to do is check his record to see this.

During my time in the Army as an Intelligence Analyst, I served under both Presidents Carter and Reagan (as my commanders in chief). Without argument, President Reagan was the best commander-in-chief a military person could ever have served under. Fred Thompson possesses the same qualities and vision as President Reagan in that he is strong on national defense and sees a dire need to secure our borders and control immigration.

I can think of no better person to lead this country and fix the problems we have. He is the only candidate from either party who has specific and detailed plans on border security and immigration reform; revitalization of America's armed forces; saving and protecting Social Security; and tax relief and economic growth. These are detailed on his Web site at www.fred08.com. I challenge you to find any other candidate who has laid out specific plans to fix anything.

Fred Thompson has published his first principles, some of which are mentioned above. In addition to those, he strongly believes in individual liberty, personal responsibility, limited government, federalism, traditional American values, the rule of law and is a strong proponent of the Second Amendment -- all concepts established during the birth of our country and documented in our Constitution.

Again, try to find any candidate who has laid out their plans to "fix" this country. You will find they all speak in vague and abstract terms on their plans.

For those who have heard Fred Thompson speak, you will usually hear him say that the Fred Thompson you see today is the same Fred Thompson you saw yesterday and is the same Fred Thompson you will see tomorrow. He stands by his principles and values and doesn't shift his positions based on polls or public opinion; in other words, he doesn't say what the voters want to hear just to get elected, but remains steadfast on his views and convictions.

During his time in the Senate he focused on three areas: to lower taxes, strengthen national security and expose waste in the federal government. Fred Thompson has foreign policy experience, having served as member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Senate Intelligence committees.

As chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, he opened the investigation in 1997 on the Chinese government's attempt to influence American policies and elections, and this investigation identified connections with the Clinton administration (documented in the committee's report).

As a member of the Finance Committee, he worked tirelessly to enact three major tax-cut bills. Fred Thompson remains steadfast and even though a person may not agree with all his views and he understands some may disagree with him, you can count on him to be consistent and unwavering.

Don't be fooled by his laid back approach and what critics call his "laziness." As a former assistant U.S. attorney, he earned a reputation as a tough prosecutor and he possesses the toughness this country needs in order to tackle today's and tomorrow's issues.

I ask that you take a hard look at what this country needs, then take a hard look at all the other candidates' views, policies, their records and their track record on consistency. Fred Thompson possesses integrity, loyalty, commitment, energy and decisiveness, all traits of an effective leader, and will emerge as the best person to take this country boldly forward.

Posted by Frederick Paxson | December 22, 2007 7:46 PM

Larry Craig could win the nomination if....

Photos of Denny Hastert and Mitt Romney "en flagrante" are published in the National Review. Rush and Karl Rove come out of the closet. Mark Foley is re elected in Florida and Rev. Huckabee marries Dick Cheney and Scooter Libby in a "shotgun" wedding.

Posted by Bubba Smedley | December 22, 2007 8:02 PM

Bill O'Reilly may have been dead wrong about Huckabee never reaching 10% in the national polls, but he's right about the fluidity of this race: it makes things fun! Let's face it, conventional wisdom has been humiliated and humbled this election cycle. I suppose God has this thing for humbling the proud. In any case, I'm loving it.

My prediction for the nomination? NOBODY wins. At least not by convention. Here's how it happens:

Huck wins Iowa, Romney 2nd, McCain 3rd. Since Romney will have spent 10 million on Iowa to Huck's pennies and McCain was 6th behind Ron Paul a week ago, Huck and McCain win big, Romney looses big. McCain takes NH, which hurts Romney big time, but Romney manages to capture Michigan thanks to his daddy being the former governor there. Huck or McCain take SC since Romney has spent too much capital on Iowa and NH, and tired old Thompson can't win but stays until Super Tuesday anyway. It doesn't matter who wins Florida.

Giuliani and Romney split the North, Huckabee most of the South, Thompson a few states, McCain gets the rest.

Result: No candidate with a majority of delegates. Convention chaos.

Posted by Bojo | December 22, 2007 8:04 PM

Here's a scenario. Huck wins Iowa, does poorly in New Hampshire, wins in Michigan barely or comes close enough to prove national appeal, takes Nevada or again comes close, wins in South Carolina heavily, takes Florida, and then rolls up more votes in super Tuesday. Enter Bloomberg. Enter Paul. Free for all time with Edwards or Obama on the DEM side. So Gingrich gets in as well. The final race is so close that an independent panel with Putin and Chavez in formed and they award the post to Raul Castro.

Posted by TrueHawk | December 22, 2007 8:24 PM

Ron Paul's Path.

1. Strong 3rd in Iowa
2. Strong 2nd in New Hampshire
3. Strong 2nd in Iowa
4. Strong 2nd in Nevada
5. Strong 3rd in South Carolina
6. 4th in Florida

SuperTuesday: Wins enough delegates to be competitive at the convention. Other candidates split the vote and continue to annihilate eachother. Ron Paul's ground movement continues to swell in all 50 state. Another 20 million is effortlessly raised. Meetup numbers top 100,000. Delegates spots in every county are taken by Paul supporters. A massive national and internet marketing campaign by the Paul campaign and his supporters introduces the country to his views. People like what they hear. By the convention, 500,000 are working every day for Paul's nomination. Guiliani, Romney, and Huckabee have exposed eachother for the half-baked semi-Republicans they are. McCain is broke. Paul takes up the slack and gives the country back to its people.

Posted by Jake | December 22, 2007 9:00 PM

Correction:

3. Strong 2nd in WYOMING

Posted by Jake | December 22, 2007 9:02 PM

Sen. Thompson places 3rd in IA and 2d in S.C. He becomes the choice for social conservatives.

He is the opposition to Giuliani or Romney, whoever survives, and is nominated as a V.P. running mate who will pull in the far Right for them.

Posted by Jane | December 23, 2007 12:34 AM

The Liaberal polls show McCain beating every Democratic nominee for President. The GOP will realize they need a winner more than an advocate for each wing's particular issue.

McCain is everybody's second choice, and one that each wing can live with. Immigration and McCain-Feingold will become non issues when it comes down to the short strokes.

John McCain will be the GOP nominee in 2008

Posted by Independent Larry | December 23, 2007 1:05 AM

It's amusing to see a FIRED FORMER STAFFER -- Eric Dondero (Or is he calling himself "Rittberg" this week?) -- making laughably dire predictions about his former employer. GET OVER IT, ERIC. Your political career is over.

This is the same character assassin who brazenly declares that Ron Paul supporters only care about the war (and therefore they should support Cynthia McKinney), as if he's unbiased OR qualified to offer such analysis.

With the majority of the libertarian movement lining up behind Paul for reasons from foreign policy to bloated federal spending to civil liberties to the drug war, such attacks are not only laughably distorted, but also a transparent example of "sour grapes" from a terminated former employee.

Does ANYONE care what Eric Dondero has to say? Would ANYONE with a libertarian bone in their body be swayed by a traitor like Dondero who unjustifiably claims to represent the views of others?

Get back under your bridge, Eric.

Posted by Jack Parkman | December 23, 2007 1:34 AM

How can anyone actually desire that Huckabee win the Republican nomination? He wouldn't stand a chance against Hillary or Obama. Be realistic.

Dirt on Huck:
1. Lousy conservative voting record.
2. THE FILE PURGE. Before stepping down as governor, Huckabee wiped almost 100 computers in his offices using $13,000 in state emergency funds. The purge left incoming Governor Mike Beebe with no emergency funds for the second half of the following year.
3. THE ETHICS COMPLAINTS. The Arkansas ethics commission found that Huckabee had committed five violations for actions such as accepting inappropriate gifts during his tenure as governor.
4. Terrible knowledge, if any, of foreign policy.
5. He RAISED taxes.
6. In 1992, he advocated quarantining AIDS patients, well after it was commonly known that AIDS could not be spread through casual contact. He refuses to retract the idea today.

And there's so much more! They would make mincemeat of this goofball!

Posted by Amy | December 23, 2007 3:06 PM

Our soldiers will be comforted and will respect a man who has seen action. In McCain's case he has gone through absolute hell. The Democrat's newfound strength in congress is due to America's heartfelt concern about our soldiers and the need for a new strategy. McCain, to his detriment, provided a feasible strategy which provided progress. This strategy is in the draw down phase and provides the US with an ability to leave the security to the people. AMERICA RESPECTS PROGRESS.

WE also respect reasonable men of integrity.
In all McCain commands presidential respect with honor and executive energy which is the classic hallmark of the ideal president.

Which candidate of either party commands all three traits? (among their parties of course)

And truly in the end which is all that truly matters most other candidates have handicaps which are intractable. McCain's negatives are only those fostered by his compassion. Surely having kindness as a weakness is preferable to
political expediency,
fuzzy morality,
or congress's frightening lack of fiscal conserv.
as the flaw?

Posted by Tim | December 24, 2007 1:44 AM

McCain is the only GOP nominee with a realistic chance of winning in November. Voters still see him as the 2000 maverick and not as the man who tried to undo that independent streak the last four years. Since July McCain has gone back to his independent ways. The quieter turn of the war in Iraq has helped, though that's a big wild card going forward.

What hurts McCain most with primary voters is his stance on immigration. No domestic issue has motivated Republican voters more than immigration. And McCain is on the exactly wrong side of this issue for most GOP primary voters. That will seriously hurt him in SC and on Super Tuesday.

Will electability triumph principle for Republican voters? Nobody doubts McCain's service and experience. But many Republicans wonder if McCain will put that experience and service to the betterment of the GOP and the nation.

I think Huckabee's surge is real and is deeper than just evangelical voters. I also don't see his supporters just disappearing overnight. He will win Iowa and Romney will have to pull out all the stops to hold off McCain in NH. If Romney pulls it off, McCain is done. If McCain wins NH, then Romney will have to go into overdrive in MI and SC. He MUST win one of those states to survive through Super Tuesday.

The difficulty McCain will find throughout the primary process will be:

1) Lingering distrust of him over the years
2) Immigration, related to issue 1, but important in its own right
3) Lack of money
4) Competition with Giuliani for the moderate vote

If McCain wins NH and pulls a close second in SC, he can make a big statement in FL. If he comes close to Rudy or Huckabee - or even wins - then he's in great shape for Super Tuesday. But even then, it will be difficult for McCain, as Rudy will do well on Super Tuesday and Romney will remain a major force no matter what (he's got a lot of money and won't quit early). The key will be national, media-driven momentum and GOP pragmatism over principle. If all falls in line, McCain can get the nomination and very possibly the Presidency. But if something goes wrong - Romney wins NH, McCain fails to get second in FL, etc. - then he won't make it.

Posted by Elrod | December 24, 2007 3:27 AM

MITT ROMNEY IS THE ONLY GOP CANDIDATE WHO WILL AND CAN WIN THE 2008 ELECTION.
1) Has the money and the organization that is a strong match with HRC or better than OBAMA.
2) He is sincere in his change of heart regarding anti-abortion. There are no other issues he changed his heart on.
3) He does not bring his religion to mix with his politics. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints firmly beleive in the separation of church and state.
4) He is not an adulterer nor a divorcee. Has been married to his wife, ANN for 38 years.
5) He believes in Jesus Christ as the son of GOD.
6) He is very strong on immigration. He does not give my social security money to illegals who did not contribute to the system. He did not approve any tuition aid to illegals.
7) He pledged not to raise taxes. He will make the Bush tax cuts permanent.
8) He is a good Christian. His religion does not condone vices like drinking alcohol, gambling.
9) He believes in marriage between a man and a woman. He believes in civil unions for gays, but not marriage.
10) He believes in being married first before having children.
11) He has been married to Ann for 38 years. His wife and 5 sons and their family strongly supports him.
12) He has five sons and several grandchildren, a big family. He is defintely pro-life.
13) All these are defintely conservative and aligns with my own beliefs. I am a catholic conservative. We are not going to support Giulani. He is an adulterer and pro-abortion.
14) He is the only one who has a chance to beat Hilary or Obama.
15) His religion teaches and practices separation of church and state.
Huckabee= uses his religion for political gain, soft on immigration. Destroyed some tapes before he left the governorship in Arkansas. What is he hiding? Will raise taxes. A bush basher just like the democrats. He is too far to the right.
Thompson= Looks too old, and too slow, indecisive, that is to run or not. Not a good leader. Does not treat his staff fairly. No organization.
McCain= He is a RINO. Republican in name only. He is for Amnesty not very strong on illegal immigration. He is friendly with the Clintons and the Kennedy's and Feingold.
Ron Paul= He is really a Libertarian running under the GOP banner. He is more of a democrat.
Giulani= He is the adulterer and PRO-Abortion candidate. He has a lot of baggage as far as his affair with Judith Nathan, and his endorsement of an indicted police chief, Kerik. Kerik was indicted for fraud, recently. I do not think conservatives will vote for that. He is too far to the left.
Alice

Posted by Alice | December 26, 2007 4:02 AM

Pathways To The Nomination

Comments (77)

Recent Posts

Monthly Archives