Barnes: Only Mitt and Rudy Can Win

Fred Barnes has an article out today in the Weekly Standard where he breaks down the strategies and scenarios of the now five top GOP candidates. Giuliani, Thompson, Romney, McCain, and Huckabee. He rightly says that national polls are a terrible predictor of the ultimate winner, but I have a couple bones to pick with his analysis.

So the Romney scenario is obvious. He wins early and takes off like a rocket. His name identification soars. Just as significant, he'll have the money--his own, plus funds he's raised--to compete fully on February 5, Super Tuesday...

...But Giuliani's focus is on Florida and then on the big-state primaries on February 5 in California, Illinois, New York, and New Jersey. He, too, has the funds to compete. His scenario--breaking out in Florida and blowing away the field on Super Tuesday--is credible in my view.

...McCain's scenario depends on improving on his run in 2000 against George W. Bush. Then he skipped Iowa, won in New Hampshire, lost in South Carolina, and won in Michigan.

..Thompson's scenario involves doing well enough in Iowa and New Hampshire to be a viable candidate by the time South Carolina rolls around and winning there. What then? Beating Giuliani and Romney in Florida and winning at least the southern primaries (Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee) on Super Tuesday, plus Oklahoma and a few other states. But his strategy of running as the only "consistent conservative" hasn't stirred enough support to produce a credible scenario leading to the nomination.

The analysis is correct on several points. Rudy does indeed have the best path to victory. He can let Romney waste time and energy there, and know that he can make it up later. This is even better knowing that Romney will have to spend a certain amount of time taking shots at other threats to Giuliani, like he did recently with Mike Huckabee. The Rudy strategy is solid. Let those who need to win in Iowa and New Hampshire, duke it out against each other and hold your fire for when you need to win.

Mitt has money and organization and little else. The problem he's been having is generating any kind of excitement in the base. For his scenario to work, that has to change fast.

But Barnes takes McCain way too seriously. The McCain campaign has been dead weight for about six months now and almost everyone recognizes it but McCain himself apparently. It's true he's gotten a little more positive press recently, but this is nothing more than a dead cat from the bottom. Among the top five GOP candidates, John McCain is the worst one to put up against Hillary and he won't be getting anywhere near a win.

Huckabee has a long shot, but it's a shot, and more importantly for Team Huckabee, he appears to be surging at just the right time to get some serious money. He needs wins and close seconds in Iowa and New Hampshire to get to the next level, but if he gets those wins, and some serious money between now and then he can build on that and go to natural strength states on Super Tuesday. This is not out of the question, but again, a long shot.

It's Fred Thompson that is an enigma. He has NOT been campaigning like a normal presidential candidate. And now he has faded in the polling and been taking weeks off here and there. If he wins he will rewrite the rules for all future campaigns, but his $9 million raised last quarter means he's a top tier candidate. Super Tuesday is mostly Southern and it comes early, and he, like Huckabee is a southern candidate. They could both use John McCain to drop out early, but even barring that, either of them could take off and Fred Thompson will be the candidate that would more likely be able to draw support from both the southern evangelical Christian conservative wing, and the northern conservative/country club wing.

That leaves the best scenarios to Giuliani, Thompson, Huckabee, Romney, and then John McCain. At this point I'd put my money on a New York/New York matchup in 2008.