GOP choices

Washington Post:

For three decades, the Republican presidential nominating contest has served to unify the national party's coalition of social, economic and foreign policy conservatives in advance of a general election fight with Democrats.

This year, it is ripping that coalition apart.

Is the GOP grounded in the social issues embodied by Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee or the foreign policy experience of former POW John McCain? Do Republicans see their futures in a former CEO such as Mitt Romney, who promises to tackle Washington incompetence, or in a leader such as Rudolph W. Giuliani, who talks tough on terrorism and crime? Should the party embrace anger about immigration or optimism about America's potential?

Among members of Congress, the lobbying shops on K Street and the local GOP committees in Iowa and New Hampshire, Republicans are divided, confused and sometimes demoralized about their choices for president. With less than two weeks left before voting begins, the party's rank and file are being asked to ratify a new direction for the GOP amid the clash of a chaotic and wide-open campaign.

And the party's soul-searching is unfolding in a sour environment: two states where the GOP was walloped by Democrats in 2006, leaving the surviving Republicans in Iowa and New Hampshire grappling with an identity crisis of their own. In dozens of interviews last week, many Republicans said they are frustrated.

Scott Weiser, who lobbies the Iowa statehouse for the Iowa Motor Truck Association, said he attended a Republican fundraiser recently where all but one of the lobbyists and business executives were still undecided about who they will support in the presidential contest.

...

I think the story makes too much of the so called "split." Any of these guys will be better than any of the Democrat nominees. Most of the top guys do well against the Democrat top guys in head to head polling. It is probably healthy that Iowa and New Hampshire voters cannot settle the race for the rest of us. The process will probably thin the ranks to the top three or four candidates and move on to more populous states where the politics will switch from retail to wholesale and ad wars will dominate. That will favor candidates who have put themselves in a position to be recognized and have raised the money to get their message out.

Their credentials will be vetted as never before and ethanol will be only one of many issues of importance. It is unlikely that any Democrat can craft an energy policy in Texas that will attract voters, because most of them are anti energy period. Democrat constituent groups already moving against ethanol because they are worried about tortilla prices in Mexico and NAFTA. Don't expect the Democrat candidates to be candid about that in Iowa.

Prediction--Duncan Hunter would beat Ron Paul in Texas if either is still in the race in March. Hunter is really a pretty good guy, but he has not moved into the top tier and may join Tancredo soon among the drop outs. I think that Giuliani, Romney and Thompson would stand the best chance in Texas right now. Huckabee has angered too many conservative Texas Baptist to do well here. In Baptist politics, Huckabee threw his lot with the "liberal" Southern Baptist, and the conservatives have long memories.

Giuliani has the support of governor Perry for what ever that is worth, but his law firm is well connected politically in this state and he can get the support he needs to run a competitive campaign here.

I think Thompson and McCain are rolling the dice on doing well in Iowa and New Hampshire. If they do not do well there or in South Carolina their chances start shrinking. If Thompson can hang on and get enough money to compete in the wholesale states he can do well. He is the most effective candidate in the short ad spots.