A tale of 10 losers

Guest post by Edward Copeland

Granted, I would be predisposed not to agree with most of what the would-be GOP presidential nominees would say last night, but, to me, the show seemed particularly pathetic, especially when watching Romney and Giuliani do their best to pander. Ex-Maverick McCain definitely seemed to come loaded for bear. So, in the interest of fairness, I'll list what I think were the best and worst moments from the debate for each of the ten eventual losers (unless, of course, the Democrats make the mistake of nominating Hillary Nothing-But-Ambition Clinton).

**********

SAM BROWNBACK

BEST MOMENT: I’d push more a political solution along with a military solution in Iraq. And here I’d push a three-state, one- country solution in Iraq, with a Kurdish state, a Sunni state, a Shia state, with Baghdad as the federal city. I think we’ve got to push a political solution along with the military to get to a stable situation in Iraq, which is our key political issue of the day.

WORST MOMENT: (on the Terri Schiavo case) Yes, it should have, and it gave her the right and the family the right to take that appeal to the court. That’s what the Congress did. And her life is sacred. Even if it’s in that difficult moment that she’s in at that point in time, that life is sacred. And we should stand for life in all its circumstances.

**********

JIM GILMOUR

Was he even at the debate?

**********

RUDY GIULIANI

BEST MOMENT: I’d like to go back to the earlier question that you asked, because I think it really is important that we, you know, define the Republican party to fit today. And neither party has a monopoly on virtue or vice. That’s just a fallacy that we sometimes fall into.

WORST MOMENT: (exchange on whether he supports government funding for abortions)

Giuliani: I don’t. I support the Hyde amendment. I hate abortion. I wish people didn’t have abortions.
Matthews: So you’re not for funding at all?
Giuliani: I believe that the Hyde amendment should remain the law. States should make their decision. Some states decide to do it, most states decide not to do it. And I think that’s the appropriate way to have this decided.
Matthews: Should New York -- when you were mayor of New York, should they have been paying for -- the state should have been paying for --
Giuliani: That’s a decision New York made a long time ago, and New York --
Matthews: And where were you on that?
Giuliani: I supported it in New York. But I think in other places, people can come to a different decision.

**********

MIKE HUCKABEE

BEST MOMENT: Clearly, there was a real error in judgment [on Iraq], and that primarily had to do with listening to a lot folks who were civilians in suits and silk ties, and not listening enough to the generals with mud and blood on their boots and medals on their chest. Those generals told us early on it would take 300,000 troops to successfully go in and stabilize Iraq.

WORST MOMENT: (when asked to give the Bush administration a letter grade) I think it’s too early to give them the grade. You don’t give a student a grade in the middle of the exam. We’re still in the middle of the exam. Let’s wait and see how it turns out, then we can give the president a grade.

**********

DUNCAN HUNTER

BEST MOMENT: I think that global warming and the need to be energy independent gives us a great opportunity. I think we should bring together all of our colleges, our universities, the private sector, government laboratories and undertake what for this next generation will be a great opportunity and a great challenge to remove energy dependence on the Middle East and at the same time help the climate. I think we can do that. We need to take taxes down to zero for the alternative energy sources. We need to make sure that all the licensing from our laboratories goes to the private sector, goes to the American manufacturing sector for these energy systems. I think we can do it.

WORST MOMENT: And incidentally, on the Schiavo case, you know Ronald Reagan said on the question of life, when there’s a question, err on the side of life. I think Congress did the right thing.

**********

JOHN McCAIN

BEST MOMENT: (on stem cell research funding) I believe that we need to fund this. This is a tough issue for those of us in the pro-life community. I would remind you that these stem cells are either going to be discarded or perpetually frozen. We need to do what we can to relieve human suffering. It’s a tough issue. I support federal funding.

WORST MOMENT: My friends, when the majority leader of the United States Senate says we’ve lost the war, the men and women that are serving in Iraq reject that notion. And if we lost, then who won? Did al Qaeda win? When on the floor of House of Representatives -- they cheer. They cheer when they passed a withdrawal motion -- that is, a certain date for surrender, what were they cheering? Surrender? Defeat? We must win in Iraq. If we withdraw, there will be chaos, there will be genocide, and they will follow us home.

**********

RON PAUL

BEST MOMENT (tie): (when asked why he voted against the Iraq war) That’s a very good question. And you might ask the question why are 70 percent of the American people now wanting us out of there and why did the Republicans do so poorly last year. So I would suggest that we should look at foreign policy. I’m suggesting very strongly that we should have a foreign policy of non-intervention, the traditional American foreign policy and a Republican foreign policy.

BEST MOMENT (tie): I trust the freedom of expression, and that’s why we should never interfere with the Internet, that’s why I’ve never voted to regulate the Internet, even when there’s the temptation to put bad things on the Internet. Regulation of bad and good on the Internet should be done differently. But, no, there’s every reason to believe that we have enough freedom in this country to have freedom of expression, and that’s what is important.

WORST MOMENT: (on federal funding for stem-cell research) Programs like this are not authorized under the Constitution. The trouble with this -- issues like this is in Washington we either prohibit it or subsidize it. And the market should deal with it and the states should deal with it.

**********

MITT ROMNEY

BEST MOMENT: (on Terri Schiavo) I think we should generally let the family make a decision of this nature. ... In the case here, the courts decided that -- what they thought was the right thing to do, and then I think Jeb Bush and the Florida legislature did the right thing by saying we’ve got a concern. They looked over the shoulder of the court. But I think the decision of Congress to get involved was a mistake.

WORST MOMENT: (exchange on whether he would pursue stem-cell research)

Romney: It certainly will. Altered Nuclear Transfer, I think, is perhaps the best course.
Matthews: Embryonic. Embryonic.
Romney: Altered Nuclear Transfer creates embryo-like cells that can be used for stem cell research. In my view, that’s the most promising source. I have a deep concern about curing disease. I have a wife that has a serious disease that could be affected by stem cell research and others, but I will not create new embryos through cloning or through embryo farming because that would be creating life for the purpose of destroying it.
Matthews: And you won’t take any from these fertility clinics to use either.
Romney: I’m happy to allow that -- or I shouldn’t say happy. It’s fine for that to be allowed to be legal. I won’t use our government funds for that. Instead, I want our government funds to be used on Dr.Hurlbut’s method, which is Altered Nuclear Transfer.

**********

TOM TANCREDO

BEST MOMENT: Yeah. Karl Rove would certainly not be in the White House that I inhabited.

WORST MOMENT: Raising his hand to indicate he doesn't believe in evolution.

**********

TOMMY THOMPSON

BEST MOMENT: I believe the al-Maliki government should be required to vote as to whether or not they want America in their country. If they vote yes, it gives us a legitimacy for being there. If they vote no, we should get out.

WORST MOMENT: (when asked if private employers should be able to fire someone because they are gay) I think that is left up to the individual business. I really sincerely believe that that is an issue that business people have to got to make their own determination as to whether or not they should be.

Thompson joins GOP field

By Michael J.W. Stickings

The hype lately has surrounded former Tennessee Senator (and current movie/TV star) Fred Thompson -- with conservatives looking for a celebrity candidate to bolster a field of (in their view) less-than-desirables, he may be both suitably conservative and suitably famous -- but it was Tommy, not Fred, who entered the race yesterday.

Appearing on ABC's This Week, the former Wisconsin governor and Bush II cabinet secretary referred to himself as a "reliable conservative," the one people "can count on". Although well behind the leading candidates -- Giuliani, McCain, and Romney -- in terms of name-recognition, he sees himself as "the dark horse candidate," "the underdog".

So -- can he win? Let's turn to Ed Morrissey: Thompson was "a popular governor in the Upper Midwest," which will help him in Iowa. "He has plenty of executive and legislative experience" -- indeed, he was governor for 14 years -- and he was secretary of health and human services for four years. Although he was at HHS for Bush's pharma-friendly prescription drug benefit bill, he "has some credibility among centrists and independents on health care". And his promotion of welfare reform and school choice while governor gives him credibility among conservatives.

In short, Morrissey sees Thompson as "the doppleganger for Bill Richardson in the Democratic race," that is, as a second-tier candidate with a lot more experience than the current first-tier candidates: "He has the best resume of any Republican in the race so far. With fourteen years of executive experience, he has more than Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney combined. He has a national presence, and his continuing popularity at home in a purple state cannot hurt him, either."

All of which are good points. But here's why I don't think Thompson can win: It is very likely that the Democrats will select a "celebrity" candidate, that is, a candidate with enormous name-recognition and national popularity: Obama, Clinton, Edwards, or perhaps (just perhaps) Gore. With this in mind, I cannot see the Republicans going into the '08 election with a non-celebrity candidate, even one, like Thompson, who has a great deal of experience and local/regional popularity. If presidential elections were about competency, then, yes, by all means, Thompson would be a leading Republican candidate, just as Richardson would be a leading Democratic one. But they're not. They're about image -- about style, not substance. Even if Thompson manages to rise into the top tier, which is hardly likely, he is too lackluster a candidate, with too lackluster a personality, to secure the nomination. This isn't fair, but it's the way it is.

What's more, Republicans rarely select non-celebrity candidates to run for the presidency. Think about it. Democrats have gone with non-celebrity candidates five times since World War II -- Clinton in '92, Dukakis in '88, Carter in '76, Kennedy in '60, and Stevenson in '52 -- but how many non-celebrity Republican candidates have there been during that span? Again, what I mean here by "celebrity" is a candidate who was not, say, the sitting vice president or the clear establishment choice or, like Eisenhower, a major public figure. Aside from Goldwater in '64, who was at least a celebrity to conservatives at the time (and one of the driving forces behind the conservative movement that emerged thereafter), I don't think there's been a non-celebrity Republican candidate since Dewey in '44, although this too is arguable.

What this means is that Republicans tend to go with major public figures (Eisenhower), sitting vice presidents (Nixon, Bush I), prominent political figures who have run before and who have occupied the national stage (Nixon again, Reagan), prominent political figures with connections to the establishment (Bush II), or establishment leaders who are seen as next-in-line in terms of orderly succession (Dole). Given the extent of America's growing celebrity culture, it seems unlikely that either party would select anyone other than a major national celebrity -- hence Obama and Clinton among the Democrats -- and this would seem to be especially the case with the Republicans.

This is why Giuliani and McCain are the top two candidates. This is why some on the desperate right are talking up Fred Thompson (even with his lack of experience: style over substance). This is why non-celebrity candidates like Romney and Brownback likely won't win the nomination (although Romney is may be on the doorstep of legitimate national celebrity-status).

And this is why Tommy Thompson doesn't have a chance.