Tuesday, December 11, 2007

HORSERACE, FRED THOMPSON, MIKE HUCKABEE, JOHN MCCAIN, RUDY GIULIANI, MITT ROMNEY

Looking Ahead to Wednesday's GOP Debate

Over at the campaign blog of that other conservative publication, William Kristol seems to find some of the candidates lacking, and suggests...

This gives John McCain and Fred Thompson a big opportunity. In tomorrow's debate, they can go presidential. They can draw a contrast with the squabbling governors and mayor next to them on stage. It is, after all, a wartime election, even if voters occasionally forget it. There are, after all, big domestic issues at stake, like entitlement reform and the courts. Thompson and McCain are lagging in the polls, but they are (now more than ever, ironically) the most presidential candidates in the race. Can one of them pull off an upset by refusing to pander and to squabble, by refusing to stoop to (try to) conquer?

It is hard to overstate just how big tomorrow's GOP debate is; it's in Iowa, will be broadcast three times in 24 hours. (It starts at the awkward time of 2 p.m. EST and can be seen on Iowa Public Television, CNN, C-SPAN3, Fox News Channel, C-SPAN Radio and Fox News Radio.) But the strange factor is that this is the last debate until the Iowa caucuses.

I thought Fred Thompson disappeared in the last debate. His task won't be easier with the stage cluttered with yet another also-ran cluttering the stage in the form of Alan Keyes. (As one of my colleagues noted, as the race wears on, the number of candidates is supposed to shrink, not expand!) I think Fred's new all-Iowa, all-the-time strategy is sound - and necessary - but tomorrow might be the last chance for him to make a splash and demonstrate himself head and shoulders above the rest of the field. His pitch is simple, but he's got to make it with vigor: "On a stage with many good men, I'm the man who has fought for the values of each major segment of the Republican party - each leg of the stool: for the strong defense of our nation espoused by foreign policy hawks, for the traditional values of social conservatives, for and for the free-market policies that stir economic conservatives. We need unity to beat Hillary; we can't leave any part of our coalition behind. This is the wrong year for one part of our coalition to try to force its ideal candidate on the others."

What's the over/under on the number of times Mitt Romney mentions his endorsement by the editors of National Review? I'm guessing twice, at least once to defend himself from an attack from another candidate.

I completely agree with Patrick Ruffini's advice to Giuliani:

For Rudy to survive, his campaign mantra for the next 29 days must be: national security, national security, national security. Is the national security party really going to nominee a former governor with zero national security experience to face al-Qaeda?

For Mike Huckabee, he's going to be attacked early and often. He's perhaps the most skilled wordsmith in the group; he had better have good, quick rebuttals to all of the target areas: Wayne Dumond, tax increases, economic populism, "Holiday Inn Express," foreign policy experience, "Christian Leader", forces that are "not human", the DNC belief in his glass jaw...

For John McCain, a lot of mudslinging could ultimately benefit him. He always seems a little above it all, or seems to have no patience for the usual back-and-forth. He's got poll numbers in his corner, with him matching up very favorably with Hillary Clinton. He can make the "Thompson argument plus," i.e., "I've worked on the goals of each major group of conservatives, and I can beat Hillary all over the electoral college map."

As usual, and perhaps even more than usual, this will be about the YouTube moment, i.e., "sanctuary mansion." With no debates until after the Iowa caucuses, any dramatic moment of tomorrow afternoon will get a lot of play over the coming weeks...

12/11 05:12 PMShare