I assume by surreal you mean interpreting the law regarding Gore v. Bush. Oh, and, of course, you do know that had Gore prevailed in the US Supreme Court he still would have lost under every conceivable vote count except the one where he got to cherry pick votes from only three counties in Florida, right? Even the NY Times said so.

Personally, I thought Kerry's failure was due more to the stupid ploy of being John Kerry, you know, reporting for duty with his magic hat in an SUV that wasn't his and so on and so on...

As to what constitutes good judgment from a candidate and which candidates possess it to what degree, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I mean, I wouldn't want to waste any lives words arguing about it.

Justice Alito and Cheif Justice Roberts do count for something, after all.

Ok Charles--of course, by Bush's own measure his Supreme Court nominees were unfortunate second choices.

According to Bush, Harriet Miers is the most qualified person in the country for the court and he was unable to persuade the Senate of that fact.

I agree with your assessment on the Democrat's incompetence. Although Gore clearly had the support of most of the American people in 2000, the fact that the election boiled down to a surreal supreme court decision should not eclipse the fact that Gore should have picked up more states.

As for Kerry, his failure was due to the stupid ploy of buying into the Republican frame on nearly every issue.

I think the next election people will be looking for someone with good judgement, over all else--this is why Giuliani's candidacy is dead in the water.

It is difficult to predict which Republican candidate can tap the judgement argument since they all are flawed in this regard. On the Democrat side, Clinton cannot pass the test. Edwards is trying by expressing regret for his support for the war--but it may be too little too late. Obama and Vilsak have demonstrated good judgement, but their relatively obscure backgrounds may hurt them.

The fighting dogs of the democratic political machine are howling as we speak over the prospect of a Giuliani run.

Hillary’s popularity skyrocketed during the lewinsky scandal. You really think that “sword will remain sheathed”? Hell, no.

It is an interesting phenomenon, perhaps unprecedented in American history, that the more publicity the Clintons get, positive or negative, the more the American people like them.

My goodness, are there no perfect candidates most of the populace can agree on? Everyone is flawed to some extent and has to compromise to a further extent to garner 50% + 1 votes.

Exactly.

I think G's the best option we have right now from the GOP, although Newt would be the better pick if his "weirdness factor" wasn't already higher than G's.

Many of the comments about Rudy remind me a little of comments 6 years ago concerning George W. Bush.

Dude, this certainly doesnt bolster your argument! Bush, by every account, has been a disaster for the country. I am not willing to go as far as you and speculate that Rudy will be in the same league as Bush...although the challenge of cleaning up Bush's mess will likely doom whoever his successor is to failure.

And, should it come down to a Hillary-Rudy matchup in November 2008, I suspect the adultery sword will remain sheathed.

Hillary's popularity skyrocketed during the lewinsky scandal. You really think that "sword will remain sheathed"? Hell, no.

Lots of Rudy links to unload on you tonight. Over at Outside the Beltway, James Joyner wonders if Giuliani's past is too odd for him to be elected president. Ace has some words of advice for Rudy, mostly on immigration......

While I'm no fan of Mr. Guiliani's positions on gun control, global warming, and a few other things, he is still vastly preferable to any of the Senators, ex-Senators, and various other gadflys and nutroot choir directors who have officially declared. No one who advocates freedom and a strong defense to the extent I would like to see them will ever be elected president, but I'll still end up voting for someone. Likely, it will be someone who is still willing to fight the GWOT.

Many of the comments about Rudy remind me a little of comments 6 years ago concerning George W. Bush. As Archilocus once wrote, the fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing. And whatever the virtues of their many bits of wisdom or rumored abilities, that one big thing is something the foxes still seem to want no part of.

Dibs on the band name! We'll call our first album "Fersboo."

JJ, there are many borderline moderate/conservatives that know what Rudy did to turn around NYC before 9/11 and are willing to overlook some of Rudy's 'weirdness'. It's all about priorities and without law and order and a strong national defense/anti-terrorism stance, all the other issues Rudy might fail in are irrelevant.

In noting my earlier post on Rudy, James Joyner raises an interesting point: is there so much adultery out there amongst the major ‘08 contenders that it will all cancel out?
As James notes, it isn’t like McCain can bring it up, and certai...