Speaking of ’08

James notes below that Russ Feingold is not going to run in 2008. To me, no shock there, given that he didn’t have much of a chance to win.

Meanwhile, Ed Rogers takes a look at the GOP field in WaPo.

Right now it is shaping up as a McCain v. Romney v. the Rest (since I don’t think that Rudy is going to run and ditto Gingrich).

FILED UNDER: 2008 Election, US Politics, ,
Steven L. Taylor
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a Professor of Political Science and a College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog). Follow Steven on Twitter


  1. just me says:

    I think Gingrich and Rudy are both running, they are up here in NH entirely too much.

    I don’t think McCain has a chance-the base can’t stand him.

  2. Triumph says:

    Lincoln Chafee’s op-ed in the NY Times today could be seen as a “feeling the waters” gesture.

    A Bloomberg/Chafee independent ticket would make things interesting in ’08.

  3. Tano says:

    Pretty weak field on the starboard side, wouldn’t you say? The two biggies are both anathema to the base, in a party that has adopted base-pandering as its core strategery. Then there is a Massachusettes governor, and thats about it for serious candidates, or those with a realistic chance.

  4. SoloD says:

    Interesting how all the GOP heavy hitters have a significant issue that could sink their potential candidacy. Conservatives hate McCain; Giuliani is socially liberal, extremely so; Gingrich has ideas, but his record is mixed at best; and Romney has the Mormon thing. Which one is the hardest to overcome?

    (My money would be on the Mormon thing — not too many people know much about the religion, and many branches of Christianity consider it a cult.)

    Probably gives hope to a guy like Huckabee, who is basically a blank slate in most people’s eyes.

  5. Triumph says:

    Gingrich has ideas

    This has got to be one of the great myths of contemporary poltiics–GIngrich as “intellectual.” Just because he was briefly a professor at some obscure college in Georgia doesn’t make him the next William F. Buckley.

    Please, tell me what are the “ideas” that distinguish Newt from any other Republican???

  6. Adam Herman says:

    Romney looks like the frontrunner at this point. He’s charismatic and the base doesn’t hate him. His supposed deficiencies(Mormon, Massachusetts) are minor.

    I’d personally prefer McCain, but I also preferred Lieberman in 2004 back when he was leading in the polls. McCain’s 25% or so that he’s currently polling could be the limit of his hard support just as Lieberman’s 18% or so was the limit of his.

    But I wouldn’t count McCain out. He’s got over a year to win over the base, and he’s been their friend on a lot of issues that he doesn’t get credit for. It can be done, and he’s hiring all the best handlers and consultants to help him.

    Giuliani also has to be considered a frontrunner if he runs. Forget about the social issues problems. It will cost him some votes in the southern primaries, but he’ll be fine everywhere else. He’s been a loyal Republican, gets it on the war, and was one of the most successful mayors of our time.

    Gingrich isn’t horrible, but he’s undisciplined and has ethics issues in his past. He’s a smart man who should be listened to by any sitting President, but he shouldn’t be the one in charge.