Tonight’s Super Tuesday Primary leaves little to be positive about, even for McCain supporters.  Tuesday merely proved the degree to which the GOP is fractured, unenthusiastic, and weak.

Romney and Huckabee still have life in them, but McCain was the night’s big winner.  November is well off, but at this stage the fall forecast is dim. The Republicans will be entering the race with a 72 year old Senator, despised by large swathes of his own base, sluggishly propelled by a divided and deeply demoralized GOP electorate that is likely to produce an anemic campaign war chest.

By contrast, the Democrats, feverishly enthusiastic and rabid for change, will enter flush with cash, and led by either the Nation’s first woman nominee – backed by her husband’s famously formidable political machine or the Nation’s first black nominee – a hollow but undeniably charismatic candidate.

From here on out, we can likely expect a dramatic shift to the left. Either of these Democratic candidates will significantly raise our taxes, fling open the doors to our borders, enact economically crippling environmental policy, stack the Supreme Court with leftists, attempt to impose socialized medicine, and force a humiliating and ignominious withdrawal from Iraq. In the view of many conservatives, Senator McCain would only be slightly better on many of these issues, save the War.

No matter how you cut the cake, 2008 is shaping up to be a big Democratic year.

Whether anything can be done to mitigate this impending disaster remains to be seen, life has a way of changing the calculus suddenly and unpredictably, but at this stage, prudence demands that we prepare those tax shelters and buy an extra rifle while we still can.

An inglorious day for the GOP; all the signs point to a gathering storm.

Duncan Hunter wasn’t electable enough, Fred Thompson wasn’t exciting enough, and now, despite the fact that the Republican Party is about to nominate the one Republican that nearly all conservatives love to hate, Mitt Romney isn’t consistent enough. The result will be the nomination of the ‘maverick’ John McCain as the GOP choice for President of the United States.

If election 2008 has proven anything thus far, it’s that the conservative wing of the Republican Party isn’t as powerful, as important, or as influential as many conservatives once believed. How times have changed since 1980.

Despite a record that includes the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform legislation that gave rise to the disproportionate influence of George Soros and groups like Moveon.org, despite the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill that came within a hair’s breadth of giving amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, to a slew of proposals that would have kept our taxes higher, unfairly burden America with unilateral environmental regulations, subjected Americans to the jurisdiction of international criminal courts, undermined American maritime dominance, etc., McCain is poised to become the standard bearer of Ronald Reagan’s party, and conservatives, plagued by indecision and disunity, are apparently powerless to stop it.

By most conventional standards, Governor Romney is an excellent candidate. But in election 2008, following a Bush presidency that left a bad taste in many conservative mouths, the good is the apparent enemy of the perfect, and many would rather see their party go down in flames and await a phoenix-like conservative rebirth in 2012, than nominate someone less than perfect.

The problem with this strategy of course is two-fold:

If McCain is nominated over the objections of conservatives, it will considerably diminish the power of the conservative movement within the GOP. Moreover, should McCain win the presidency in November without the assistance of conservatives, and indeed over their objections, it will force the entire American political paradigm to the left for the foreseeable future.

More importantly however, is not what such a nomination would do to the GOP, but what it might do to America. In the place of the less than perfect Romney will be the very imperfect John McCain, Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton, and the toll upon the Republic could be severe.

McCain is an honorable and decent man, but his willingness to compromise on so many issues, and his indifference to the views of his own party and constituency make him both unpredictable and unaccountable. Though McCain would continue to stand strong on foreign policy and military affairs, domestic policy would undoubtedly take a decidedly non-conservative beating.  If either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton were elected, the result could be nothing short of a giant step toward European socialism.

In the famous words of Ronald Reagan, now is another ”time for choosing.” This time the conservative movement must determine whether it remains relevant or not. If so, it must immediately end its fascination with Ron Paul’s noble but uncompetitive campaign on behalf of constitutional puritanism, abandon its support for Governor Huckabee’s positive but futile GOP-Jennings-Bryan-campaign, and marshal its support for Governor Romney in every Super Tuesday state.

If not, it must resign itself to near term political impotence, abdicate the Party leadership to its most liberal wing, and consign the future of the Republic to one of three people that it deeply distrusts.

Thursday’s Republican debate in Florida, which was calm, respectful and thoughtful, contrasted sharply with the rancorous and largely shallow Democratic debate in South Carolina held days earlier. In what was a largely, low-key, policy-heavy debate, domestic issues and economics took center stage, while foreign policy concerns such as Iraq were little mentioned.

The emphasis on domestic matters deprived Senator McCain of his strongest issue – his clear leadership on Iraq and the War on Terror, and forced McCain to play on slightly foreign economic turf. Senator McCain was particularly weakened by a sharp question from moderator Tim Russert in which Russert quoted McCain’s admission that he needed to be “educated” on the economy. McCain, was also treated to needling questions about his age and reputation for a mercurial temper, though McCain diffused those questions effectively and with good humor, and was later aided by Governor Huckabee who rose in defense of Senator McCain’s vigor.

Economics also proved to be a less suitable match for Governor Huckabee, who is seen as lacking authority on economic matters and has been vigorously criticized by pro-growth economic groups such as the Club for Growth.  Nevertheless, Huckabee’s strongest debate moment was indeed on an economic issue - a softball question from Senator McCain involving Huckabee’s Fair Tax proposal, in which he delivered a vision for a simpler, consumer-based taxed plan along with a crowd-pleasing indictment of the IRS.

For political observers reading between the lines, it was apparent that McCain and Huckabee shared a mutual desire to be non-aggressive with one another, and signaled the possibility of a McCain/Huckabee ticket.

Tonight’s undoubted winner however was Governor Romney, who demonstrated once again a smooth, presidential style, and a considerable proficiency in fiscal and economic matters.  Despite several tough questions, including another question about his faith, Romney delivered what MSNBC anchor Chris Matthews described as “commanding” answers. This sentiment was shared by viewers who participated in the unscientific text-message poll which followed the debate, and named Romney the decisive debate winner – overshadowing Senator McCain by more than 20 points. Romney’s performance also included hard-hitting jabs at Senator Hillary Clinton and a memorable, crowd-pleasing line about Americans not wanting former President Bill Clinton back in the White House “with nothing to do.” Romney also appeared to be the recepient of more questions than any other candidate, and therefore shared a concomitant plurality of valuable air-time. 

Coming in last according to respondents was the normally sharp Mayor Giuliani, who delivered a less memorable and more distracted performance than usual. Though it should be noted that Giuliani was the recipient of the evening’s most overtly negative question – a call to respond to an ugly, ad homonym attack by the New York Times.

For Florida voters only now making their decisions, tonight’s debate will no doubt inure to the benefit of Governor Romney who looked and sounded every bit the chief executive. With polls already trending his way, this Boca Raton debate could prove to be the decisive moment that could catapult Romney to victory in Florida, and the unchallenged status as national GOP frontrunner.

With Fred Thompson’s departure from the GOP field and Huckabee’s slow demise, the Republican race for 2008 is quickly coming into focus. The race is now between three candidates - John McCain, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. But is it?

There is significant speculation about what Thompson’s departure means, and which candidate will benefit. There can be little doubt however, that Thompson’s departure helps Mitt Romney, who now becomes the clear conservative choice in the GOP field.  This is particularly true given that Thompson did not endorse John McCain.  Whatever the flirtations with Huckabee, he was never a viable option for a national ticket, and he was consistently regarded by mainstream conservatives as anything but a true believer.

Many of the latest polls show McCain with a slight, but statistically insignificant lead in Florida, and Giuliani and Romney nearly tied for second place. Some however, such as the normally reliable Rasmussen, show Romney in the lead.

Florida is widely regarded as critical for Rudy Giuliani, and most analysts are probably correct. Although Giuliani could continue on after Florida, unless he demonstrates real strength in the Sunshine State, there is little to attract most voters to Giuliani on super Tuesday. Anything less than a win by Giuliani will be seen as a dramatic loss, and McCain’s continued successes will draw away the remaining support. Giuliani’s campaign has been based largely on his record of making government work in New York City, coupled with a “take no prisoners” approach toward the War on Terror, however Rudy’s true appeal was always the sneaking suspicion by many that he could win in November. Giuliani’s failures at the polls, particularly with Independents and Democrats, have cast doubt on that ability, and McCain’s war service record has overshadowed Rudy’s 9/11 warrior reputation. In the end, it seems that even a second place finish for Giuliani in Florida may not be enough, and a third place finish would almost certainly derail his candidacy.

The real race in Florida, as in the country, is now between John McCain and Mitt Romney.

Despite a healthy respect for McCain’s service record and his personal attributes, McCain is simply wrong on too many issues to be the choice of conservative Republicans. From illegal-immigration and campaign finance to taxes and environmental policy, McCain is simply in a different place than the majority of his party’s base.  Despite polls which show that McCain could be the strongest contender in November, regular Republicans simply cannot bring themselves to support a man who openly discussed leaving the Republican Party, joining John Kerry’s 2004 ticket in opposition to President Bush, and who presently has Al Gore’s 2000 runningmate, Joe Lieberman, stumping for him.

Though some still harbor doubts about Romney’s late conversions to some important conservative positions, and unease with what they view as Romney’s comfort with politically expedient ingratiation, Romney’s stated positions line up nicely with the majority of Republicans, and no one can doubt that he is an enormously capable and articulate leader, uniquely qualified to deal with the increasing worry over the Nation’s economy.

Moreover Romney enjoys the support of a considerable and growing sector of the Republican Party machinery, and is endorsed by unquestioned conservatives. Romney is the choice of conservative bellwether The National Review, which said of Romney:

“Our guiding principle has always been to select the most conservative viable candidate. In our judgment, that candidate is Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts. Unlike some other candidates in the race, Romney is a full-spectrum conservative: a supporter of free-market economics and limited government, moral causes such as the right to life and the preservation of marriage, and a foreign policy based on the national interest…More than the other primary candidates, Romney has President Bush’s virtues and avoids his flaws. His moral positions, and his instincts on taxes and foreign policy, are the same. But he is less inclined to federal activism, less tolerant of overspending, better able to defend conservative positions in debate, and more likely to demand performance from his subordinates. A winning combination, by our lights. In this most fluid and unpredictable Republican field, we vote for Mitt Romney.”

Romney’s candidacy has also been bolstered in recent weeks by affirmation from conservative opinion makers such as Rush Limbaugh who has been generally supportive of Romney and brushed off doubts about Romney’s sincerity declaring, “I believe Mitt Romney’s conversion is genuine.” Moreover, with the endorsement of former presidential candidate and illegal-immigration hawk Tom Tancredo, Romney looks increasingly like the anti-McCain.

With Thompson’s departure, the conservative vote in Florida will slowly coalesce around Romney, and there was widespread evidence of such a shift today on influential blogs.  Huckabee will be largely abandoned and Giuliani and McCain will split the moderate vote, giving Romney the chance at a surprise upset and the unquestioned position of frontrunner. Given the early ballots that have been cast, the amount of time and money invested in Florida by Giuliani, McCain’s South Carolina momentum, and the persistent fluidity of this contest, it is difficult to predict who will win Florida. No one should be counted out, but look for Romney to do well among self-described conservatives, and possibly to take the Sunshine State. 

Barring some unforseen circumstances, and consistent with our earlier predictions, we believe that Governor Romney is increasingly well positioned to enter Super Tuesday, and ultimately to be the 2008 GOP nominee.

 Not if Michigan conservatives have anything to say about it.

Despite his lead in national polls, conservative Republicans are deeply distrustful of John McCain. While most concede that the nationally-known McCain could be their best hope for retaining the White House in November, many feel that McCain’s embrace of liberal positions – from pushing amnesty and campaign finance reform, to opposing tax cuts and promoting greater federal regulation - would amount to little gain.  Indeed, many contend that a President McCain, already predisposed to compromise with Democrats, and widely rumored to have considered leaving the Republican Party, would be a GOP disaster. 

All eyes are now focused on Michigan, where tomorrow’s primary could have an enormous repercussions for Republicans. A McCain victory could boost the Senator’s standings nationally, and provide the momentum necessary to give him a resounding win in South Carolina, where he currently leads in the polls.

With so much riding on Michigan, throughout America, the conservative war cry has gone up - vote Romney.

Though most readily concede that Romney is an imperfect candidate, he is by all accounts, the leading Reagan conservative in the field – the others being former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson, and California Congressman Duncan Hunter, who has gained little traction. 

The late enthusiasm for Romney however, isn’t due to a sudden epiphany by conservatives that Romney is their guy, rather, it’s a concession by most that other than Thompson, Romney is the best shot for true conservatives.

Thompson, the candidate that most excites conservatives has performed poorly in the race, and despite a surprisingly good debate performance last week, still trails McCain, Huckabee and Romney in South Carolina. The Palmetto State is largely seen as a do or die contest for Thompson, and a surging McCain, fresh off a Michigan victory over Romney would almost certainly spell disaster for Thompson and could propel McCain right through to the nomination.

By contrast, a Romney win in Michigan would mark a sea change in the race. Romney, who has been on shaky ground since his victory in Wyoming, needs a big state win to keep himself in the race and increase his momentum heading into the southern primaries. Moreover, such a victory would send a message across the country – that Reagan conservatism is still at the heart of the GOP.

Despite the press’ characterization of the Republican race as a free-for-all, battle lines have increasingly been drawn around complimentary campaigns; it’s now a struggle between two groups – the more liberal McCain and Huckabee versus the more conservative Romney and Thompson.

Weekend polls showed a slight trend toward Romney, but with so many variables, it’s difficult to tell who will take the Great Lakes State. An open primary, such as Michigan has, is widely regarded as favoring McCain, whose appeal to independents and moderate Democrats could give him the win. Moreover, Michigan is familiar territory to McCain, who beat rival George W. Bush there in 2000. Still, with every Democratic candidate besides Hillary Clinton boycotting the Michigan primaries, it is unclear whether enough registered Democrats or Independents will turn out to either vote against Hillary Clinton by choosing “uncommitted,” or vote for John McCain.

Despite the open primary, Romney also has reason to smile. The name Romney is familiar to Michiganites, as Mitt Romney was born in Michigan, and his father, George Romney, served as Michigan’s governor, as well as chairman of the Detroit-based American Motors Corporation. Romney’s association with the state, and his reputation as a successful businessman, adept at turning failing organizations around, may propel him to a win with an electorate suffering from economic woes. Add to that a possible enthusiastic turnout from conservatives, including Thompson supporters, and Romney could eek out a win that would have enormous implications.

At this point it’s simply too close to call, but Michigan may hold the key to the GOPs immediate future – will it be the continuation of the Reagan model offered by Romney and Thompson, or a trend left, toward the compromise and economic populism offered by McCain and Huckabee?

In the end, turnout, and the will of non-Republicans may hold the key.

We’ve seen it a hundred times. A candidate with great natural charisma, ruined by handlers, pollsters and message artists all trying to push their notion of what the electorate is looking for. It’s personality by committee, and it’s at fault for destroying dozens of rising political stars. Its latest victim is Mitt Romney.Cognizant of every conceivable liability, Romney’s handlers have attempted to transform Romney into a pleasant, competent, and inoffensive candidate. Yet in attempting to be all things to all voters, Romney appears less valuable and less authentic to everyone.

To be certain, it can’t all be blamed on Romney’s handlers. After all, Romney’s people only responded to the demands of the GOP’s social conservative base, but social conservatives are a fickle lot, they are either with you or against you.

Rather than embracing Romney, as growing more conservative with age and experience, like Reagan, social conservatives labeled him a phoney.  They’re wrong of course, Romney after all is the lifelong married man with a picture perfect family living the American entrepreneurial dream. Indeed the Romneys appear to be the living embodiment of traditional social values.  Romney’s personal life suggests that if he flipped his positions, he flipped from being a mainstream conservative of Mormon orthodoxy to a liberal Republican in order to run for office in notoriously liberal Massachusetts (not the other way around).  Normally such a move by a Republican would be greeted with a wink from social conservatives, happy to slip one by the Democrats and land a Republican in foreign territory – the Massachusetts governor’s chair.  From there Romney defended the pro-life cause, defended traditional marriage, balanced the books, and with the help of the Heritage Foundation, devised a plan that provided every citizen with health insurance, while avoiding a government takeover. 

There is no real reason social conservatives should distrust Romney, much less dislike him, but perhaps Mitt the Mormon was never likely to be a favorite.

Whatever the past, it’s now time to remove the fetters that have bound Romney; Michigan may be the governor’s last chance to prove he’s a 2008 winner.

Romney’s latest campaign slogan, “Washington is Broken,” is the campaign’s best yet…at least it associates Romney with an idea. Change is not the right word for it, this is a conservative party after all, and everyone’s on the phoney ”change” bandwagon now. No, the right message is more toward accountability, performance…results. Its time to match problems with skills. And who is better at turnarounds and achieving results than Mitt Romney?

Michigan provides Romney with the perfect climate. We’ll be hearing a lot about Michigan’s “one state recession,” and the disastrous liberal policies that have led to its decline. This is perfect fodder for Romney.

Romney should be what Romney has always been – the man with the plan. A streamlining manager that can help turn Michigan’s economy around. The man that can tackle the world’s most dysfunctional organization, the U.S. government, and transform it into a leaner, more responsive one. The United States is moving into the 21st century, with a 20th century business plan. It’s time for a top to bottom audit, a streamlined reorganization, and a new sense of competitive spirit. Let’s do things faster, cheaper, better. Let’s get results for the American people.

We need a man of vision, of positive energy, and of action. This is the real Romney, the Romney that people will respect, the Romney that voters seeking answers to real problems will embrace.

Political handlers be damned. Enough with the hackneyed slogans and electoral makeovers. It’s time to let Mitt be Mitt.

It’s the kind of performance that all candidates hope for.  The chance to go toe to toe with your opponents and demonstrate clearly why you are the best choice to be your party’s standard bearer. Though the other candidates turned in respectable, even good performances, at this critical juncture, the weekend and the moment clearly belonged to Romney.

In a series of debates held Saturday and Sunday, the five major GOP contenders Mitt Romney, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee traded barbs and pushed their campaign messages to Granite State voters.  Saturday’s debate moderated by ABC’s preening Charlie Gibson was something of a Romney ambush, with each of the Governor’s opponents – most especially John McCain and Mike Huckabee – taking shots at his record, his positions, and his alleged negative campaigning.  Though each landed some notable zingers, the aggressive move by the candidates to try and knock Romney, appears to have backfired.  The normally statesmanlike McCain, sitting on the far end of the stage looked tired and mean-spirited, and delivered a performance that led Fox News anchor Brit Hume to exclaim,  ”I think what they saw was John McCain perhaps at his least attractive. He was scornful. He seemed almost on occasional moment even petty.”

Huckabee faired better, but the Mr. Nice Guy image that he has sought to cultivate began to fray at the edges, and his sarcastic interjections during Romney’s explanations of his policies was unflattering and gave the impression of discourtesy.

Though Romney was the focus of his opponents’ attacks, rather than looking beleaguered or overwhelmed, Romney rose to the occasion. Indeed, the fortuitously centrally-seated Romney looked every bit the president – a man calm, cool, decisive and in control under fire.

Sunday night featured a Fox News debate moderated by Chris Wallace, whose hard-hitting questions zeroed in on the candidates’ respective weaknesses.  Though Thompson was largely given a pass, Giuliani, McCain and Huckabee were each given tough questions. Undoubtedly however, the focus of the evening was once again on Governor Romney. The toughest questions were directed at the Governor, and no other candidate was forced to defend his campaign advertising or had the disadvantage of having his own words quoted on screen in conjunction with his opponents attack.

Nevetheless, the evening clearly belonged to Romney. In what may have been his best debate performance, Romney again looked like the man in charge… and the man to beat. His answers were clear, concise and articulate and his manner was pleasant and respectful, if competitive.  Whatever the questions about Romney’s evolving positions or his corporate style, Romney proved to be intelligent, knowledgeable, and articulate – perhaps more than an even match for Barak Obama or Hillary Clinton in the general election.  Moreover, Romney pushed a clear mainstream conservative message that included a stronger military, low taxes, economic competitiveness, energy independence, free market health care reform, education reform, and above all the importance of adopting policies that help strengthen the American family.  Giuliani’s performance was solid, and McCain faired well, but Huckabee clearly was the evening’s loser. Though his energy outshone the lackadaisical Thompson, he was tripped up by Romney’s probing questions and gave evasive answers that contrasted meekly with Romney’s command performance.

Focus group debate analysis performed by veteran pollster Frank Luntz immediately following the debate showed that Romney was judged by viewers to have been the clear and decisive winner, with Luntz remarking, “With just two days to go, Mitt Romney hit a home run tonight.”  By contrast Huckabee received overwhelmingly negative reaction, and McCain’s performance registered little. 

Whether the debates will have a significant impact on Tuesday’s election remains unclear, but given the high number of undecided voters, Romney’s performance over the weekend is sure to give the Governor some momentum and in all likelihood will push many fence sitters into the Romney camp. Though McCain’s lead still holds in the polls, one senses that there is significant fluidity to the race and with many independents attracted to the dogfight between Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama, the atmosphere may just be ripe for a Romney victory.

Consistent with our earlier prediction, GOPublius believes that Romney will edge out McCain in Tuesday’s contest.

Did you know there’s another caucus before the New Hampshire primary? Yes, it’s Wyoming, and it’s Saturday, January 5.  Though it’s raised the ire of the RNC, Wyoming is moving forward with its primary anyway in the hopes of playing an important, if less than decisive role, in selecting the GOP nominee.

To add to the mystery, no major media operation is covering the race, nor have they bothered to poll Wyomingites, so we are left to wonder who, if anyone, will win, and whether it will matter.

The buzz in Wyoming centers around two candidates – Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney, the only two major candidates who have visited the state, though the momentum generated by Thursday’s contest in Iowa could make Huckabee a competitor, and low turnout could even hand a surprising victory to the likes of Ron Paul.

John McCain remains the only westerner among the major candidates, but his campaign has made little effort in the state. Given these facts, and his surprise showing in Iowa, it looks as if Wyoming could be fertile ground for former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson. The folksy, gun-owning Senator could hit the right note with plain-spoken, independent Wyomingites.

Still, Mitt Romney’s organization skills should not be discounted, nor should the enthusiasm of his fellow Mormon parishioners, who comprise a significant minority and can count on organizational support from bordering Utah.

In all likelihood, Wyoming will make little difference to the national race, if for no other reason because it will take place on a weekend, but it’s true impact may be upon New Hampshire. If Romney wins, its suggests the beginning of a comeback that could carry over into New Hampshire. For Thompson, it could provide continuing hope for his devoted following and could keep him relevant while he waits for South Carolina and the southern primaries.

It’s anyone’s guess, but the smart money is probably on Thompson.  

Rudy Giuliani:The Michigan debate may have been Giuliani’s best. The affable mayor seemed relaxed, optimistic, and in command of the issues. His attacks, waged largely against Hillary Clinton, did much to elevate him above the other candidates and helped to feed the notion that Giuliani is both the inevitable nominee and the best match-up against Hillary Clinton in a general election. Giuliani was able to avoid many of the social issues that have plagued him in earlier debates due to largely policy-focused questions, and his retorts were generally articulate and on-point. When coupled with some humorous if slightly contrived lines, Giuliani’s performance was exactly what he needed to help build on his frontrunner status. 

  Mitt Romney: Romney continues to shine in the debate forum. His command of the issues is solid, his style is confident, and there is little doubt that he is competent. Unfortunately Romney’s handlers have gotten to him; forcing the normally cheerful and easy Romney to take on Giuliani over a trumped-up difference in policy. Moreover, Romney’s endorsement of the unconstitutional federal line-item-veto does nothing to bolster his constitutional credentials (nor does his leave it the attorneys position on war powers) or his already suspect conservative credentials as a strict constructionist. Romney is at his best when he leverages his business acumen against the failed big-government policies of those on the stage as well as likely Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton. Romney should take a page from Ross Perot and treat his campaign as a hostile takeover of a badly managed government, while using his easy, clear, style to build confidence and optimism. Romney should campaign on his strengths rather than on Giuliani’s unapparent weaknesses, and should avoid the kind of forced lines that bolster his critics claims of phoniness.

Fred Thompson: Given the high hopes among rank and file conservatives, Thompson was almost sure to disappoint, but the veteran actor proved even less of a star than expected. From a stumbling start that was far to reminiscent of George W. Bush’s grating inarticulateness, to platitudinous answers to policy questions in which his eyes frequently diverted to his notes, Thompson did little to rebut his solidifying reputation as a candidate running on image rather than on ideas. Moreover, on the debate stage, compared to optimists like Romney, Huckabee, and even Giuliani, Thompson seemed dower and distant. Thompson’s forte is clearly not a staged debate, but rather the folksy one-on-one encounters with everyday citizens. Thompson has yet to prove that he has the “fire in the belly” to be president, or the command of the issues to defeat the intelligent, if overtly leftist, Hillary Clinton.

John McCain: McCain’s Michigan performance may have been his worst. The once aggressive McCain seemed tired, downtrodden, and at times gave rambling answers to questions that he is known to have a better command of. Though McCain’s strong position on the war continues to lend credence to his campaign, and there is no question that McCain would be a strong commander-in-chief, the candidate himself seems to have been deeply affected by the precipitous (illegal immigration-driven) decline of his campaign. Moreover, McCain seemed plagued by technical difficulties that left him unable to hear the questions, resulting in a series of awkward pauses that undoubtedly if subconsciously highlighted his age. McCain’s performance was competent, and honest, if uninspiring.

Mike Huckabee: Huckabee continues to surprise and excel in the debate forum. His clearly articulated, folksy and cheerful demeanor makes him among the most engaging on the stage and continues to generate interest in his candidacy. Though some may deride Huckabee’s slightly “hickish” last name (certainly no worse than Millard Fillmore), there can be no doubting that Huckabee continues to gain popularity, and his common sense approach to governance seems refreshing and relatively genuine. Unfortunately, Huckabee continues not to receive the type of serious policy questions from moderators that he increasingly deserves. 

As for the other candidates, who have yet to emerge from solid second-tierdom, the results were mixed. Duncan Hunter’s tough, assured style continues to resonate confidence and decisiveness. Unfortunately his unrelenting focus on the issues of Chinese trade policy and a strong military begin to paint a portrait of the Congressman as an overly one-dimensional candidate. Indeed, it appears as if Hunter is campaigning full time for secretary of defense, rather than president of the United States. Sam Brownback continues to sound rational and clear, and gives the impression of a competent and dutiful public servant… perhaps suitable as a future head of the Department of the Interior. Ron Paul’s slightly hysterical personal style continues to erode any gains that his principled constitutional positions might otherwise engender, and Tom Tancredo, though right on illegal immigration, simply is out of his league as a presidential contender. Border Czar Tancredo has a nice ring to it however.

If Thompson and McCain were the debate’s big losers, Romney and Giuliani came out far ahead of the pack… and due to his poise, clarity, and skill the winner was clearly Giuliani.

If the Republican party nominates a pro-life candidate -read: Rudy Giuliani – the party as we know it may be over. There is little evidence that the Republican Party can survive if it nominates a candidate so at odds with many of the fundamentals of the GOP base. If Giuliani is nominated, “Pro-Lifers,” out of disgust may chose to stay home or vote for a third-party candidate, that would split the GOP coalition and land another Clinton in the White House. This is not a complex issue: the Republicans will have a major problem on their hands if Giuliani is nominated. Giuliani may appear to be a stronger candidate for a national election, but if he can’t bring the GOP rank and file with him, he’s the weakest of all. Still, others are betting that the prospect of another Clinton presidency is too much to bare and that come what may, the GOP faithful will rally behind the imperfect Giuliani in the end…only time will tell.