At if you can't avoid the hurt, at least avoid the blame
Posted by aogThursday, 10 January 2008 at 13:14 TrackBack Ping URL

It’s a clear sign of getting old that every Presidential election seems to have ever lesser lights leading the way. Here’s a good question: of the current GOP candidates, are there any you would vote for over President Bush? For me, that would be only Thompson and Hunter, but the latter has only a slightly better chance of the nomination than I do, and the former is barely hanging on.

But still, I think Right Wing News has it wrong on thinking Huckabee is a valid fall back. The argument is

While Mike Huckabee isn’t as conservative as I’d like, John McCain has done more damage to conservative causes over the last decade than anyone else

True, but McCain’s damage is a sunk cost — nothing we can do now will change that. The only valid question is, who is likely to do more damage to the nation and the GOP in the future if elected? Like Kerry vs. Bush, I can’t think of any policy matter I care about where Huckabee is better than McCain. Everything I read makes me think that Huckabee would almost certainly be the GOP Jimmy Carter. Such a President isn’t a good thing, but if the nation is going to take that sort of hit it would be better in the long wrong to have it be at the hands of the Democratic Party.

Comments — Formatting by Textile
Bret Thursday, 10 January 2008 at 13:54

I think that McCain will be a better president than senator. In other words, a better executive branch dude, than legislative dude.

Hey Skipper Friday, 11 January 2008 at 12:34

As executive branch dudes, I can’t find anything in particular wrong with either Romney or Giuliani, either.

I’d prefer Thompson, but think McCain, Romney, or Giuliani would do just fine.

IIRC, Reagan wasn’t particularly conservative while governor of California.

cjm Friday, 11 January 2008 at 19:49

reagan wasn’t particularly conservative as president, either :)

Post a comment