Redstate

In my opinion, McCain is the only candidate on the GOP side that can swing enough independents over to our side to win the election in an obvious Democrat year.

HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.

I personally know many yellow dog Dems in LA that happily voted for Jindal not so much because they agreed with him but because it was time for a change. I wish Governor Jindal the best and I bet those semi-reluctant LA Dems will be more than pleasantly surprised that they elected a competent, energetic, honest and brilliant man instead of the usual hacks they have in the past.

However, if you look at all the polls, things don't look so hot for our side. The "right track/wrong track" polls are overwhelmingly on the "wrong track" side and President Bush is approaching 65+ dissaproval ratings. It will be very difficult to win next year. I'm not giving up but I want to put our best foot forward and I think John McCain has the best chance. Unfortunately, he's running out of cash and even if he somehow starts to show some life, he may have to opt for public financing and face Hillary and a bottomless pit of money.

Next year we'll have 435 local federal elections for the House, 33 or 34 (I don't know which offhand) state elections for the Senate, and 50 state elections for Presidential electors.

There is no national mood. The old saying 'all politics is local' is true because of the way our government is structured.

If we had national elections, we'd probably throw out the whole Congress every two years.

HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.

Neil, you've been a strong proponent of keeping a positive attitude and looking for ways for us to win. I respect that and you deserve alot of credit. Things don't look so rosy right now, but with the right candidates and the right message we can certainly win in the end.

I must say, however, that the idea of tossing out the whole Congress every two years does have some appeal. :-)

I think it'd be great.. until the fourth or fifth time, heh.

HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.

Whatever ends up happening in the presidential sweepstakes, I think it's likely that the Democrats will gain 4-8 seats in the Senate and will probably gain some House seats as well.

You're right that, generically speaking, the Republican brand is lagging far behind the Democratic brand. Voters say they even prefer the Democrats on things like national security policy. And that doesn't bode well for us.

And this underscores how important the presidency is -- because the Dems are going to have the votes to do most of what they want in the next Congress.

But there is a saving grace -- and it's what was behind Bill Kristol's poignant essay recently titled "Cheer up!", in which he predicts that the Republicans will hold the White House. The saving grace is that voters don't (yet, anyway) seem all that thrilled about having Hillary Clinton as president.

Our problem is our party label. Their problem is their (likely) nominee. I think our chances in the presidential race are much better than most people do. But it could be tricky.

I completely disagree with you about McCain, though. At one time, he was the darling of the independents, the media, and others who were (more than anything) anxious to find some way to stop the Bush juggernaut. They were anti-Bush, he was anti-Bush....and the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

But they've left him -- if he actually ever had them. Not only has he started sounding more conservative than he once did, he's no longer the Republican anti-Bush. Instead, he's the most vociferous defender of the Iraq War and the surge. And, to these people, this is the reason he's fallen back.

I think it's other reasons. But, whatever the reason, he has fallen back. And while his debate performances and such give the impression that he could come back from the political grave, it isn't going to happen.

You're right that, with the right candidate, we can quickly turn the tables on the political conventional wisdom. And you're right that we have to nominate somebody who can sufficiently keep the Republican base while also reaching out to other voting blocs that typically go against us. We need somebody who operates above and beyond the party label.

But McCain isn't that somebody.

I tend to think that McCain's problem isn't so much with independents (who, BTW, have largely left him...check out his poll numbers) -- it's with Republicans.

John McCain's a fine man and a patriot. But he's paying the price for all the bridge-burning he's done in the past 8 or 9 years (yes, it predates the Bush Administration) within our party.

He isn't going to get the nomination and he has only himself to blame for it.