Republicans only hope to keep the White House is

[agcatter]

Rudy.

I believe Hillary will name Ohio governor Strickland as her running mate nailing down Ohio.

Republicans cannot win the electoral college vote without Ohio.  (see 2000 & 2004)

Therefore, Republicans have to make up the difference by pulling New Jersey, Pennsylvania, or Connecticut to their side, something Thompson or Romney will definitely not do.

I'm not saying Rudy will win those states.  Just saying he he will run better in the suburbs in those northeastern states giving him a shot - something the other GOP candidates definitely don't have IMO.

Thoughts?

[agcatter]

The reason 2000 and 2004 are considered the baseline is because, well, that reflects the most recent trends in electoral reality.  As far as Louisiana, no way.  Hillary is not going  to carry Louisiana.   Last time I looked, Bobby Jindal was up over 20 points in the governor's race so I question just how radioactive the Republican label is in that state.  As in much of the South, having a Democratic edge in party registration means nothing at the presidential level.  Blacks hate Bush?  Leaving aside the fact that a large amount of blacks no longer reside in New Orleans, Bush isn't on the ballot this time.  Even when he was Kerry got over 90% of the black vote.  Not much room for growth there.  Kerry still lost the state by 13 points. 

West Virginia?  Very doubtful.  Liberal Hillary is not going to be favored in a state state that shunned equally liberal Kerry by 13 points.  It will be closer however as Giuliani's not as socially conservative and that will cut into the GOP margin.  Iowa, New Mexico, sure.  I'll buy that.  Democrat is probably favored.  However, those two states wouldn't do it without Ohio or without Florida or other state breakthroughs.  Missouri, definitely closer than 2004 but it's a culturally conservative state at the presidential level.

No one is arguing that the field isn't more tilted Democratic this cycle than 2004.  In fact, that was the whole point of my post.  Rudy is the only counter to that tilt.  He would need to break through in states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Connecticut and possibly Wisconsin.  Again, I'm not saying he would, just saying he has a shot where the other GOP candidates do not.

[agcatter]

To the comment that Hillary - Strickland would look calculated, it definitely would look that way.   No doubt because it would be no question about it.  However that would be trumped easily by the fact that it would deliver the desired result - Ohio on a silver platter - locked down tight.  Ohio is so important electoral college wise that the appearance of calculation just won't matter.  Besides, Hillary is already looked on pretty universally as calculating.  I don't thik her image in that regard has much further to fall.

Giuliani would have to steal one or two of the above mentioned blue states to offset it.  As I said, he's the only GOP nominee capable of doing so.  Without Ohio, the other Republican candidates are dead in the water.

[agcatter]

It doesn't do any good to nominate a candidate like Thompson representing "principle" if nominating Thompson means Hillary will win the White House in the general election.  Her in the White House is as far from conservative principles as you can get.  I don't know any Republicans who believe there is not a huge difference between Rudy and Hillary on almost any issue.

As far as Hillary carrying Louisiana, not going to happen.  Kerry lost the state by 15 points.  You don't make up that kind of margin with someone like Hillary no matter how much of a populist she pretends to be.  Besides, Louisiana males are less likely to vote for a woman for president than almost any state.

[agcatter]

I agree about Obama - - first woman and first black on the same ticket.  That might be pushing her luck just a bit far.  She won't risk it.

The best thing Republicans have going is Hillary - her high percentage of negatives keeps the Republican general election candidate in the ball game.