That's what it really comes down to in 2008, right? As Power Line notes, she's way ahead in the polls and it's silly to think there's ever been any serious doubt about the nomination. As we've seen, inbound hypocrisy charges just keep bouncing off. All the good ones wear teflon.
The only serious declared competitors are of course Obama and Edwards, if one calls them serious. Edwards hardly projects any strength and the notion of him on a poverty tour is high comedy. Barack has lately lost a couple of outboard engines and the inboards are smoking. He doesn't have the experience to run this country but he's only in training anyway.
What about Gore? Well, he's a loser. Harshly put, but that's his image. A lot of people will also be creeped out by his climate zealotry.
That leaves the debates as thinly disguised showcases for Hillary with the other candidates as props to make it look official, sort of like a Harlem Globetrotter game. Can any Republican beat her?
How about politician emeritus John McCain? Despite his firmness on Iraq and his past valor, the straight talk boat capsized with immigration. Changing course only made it worse. Besides, he's always had a problem projecting optimism and charisma.
Rudy does have charisma and a smiling personality but he lacks background. Not political background--being the mayor of New York is enough--the boat anchor is his checkered personal life. His handlers will be trying to find ways to make people forget while the Democrats do everything possible to make people remember. Oh, and there's that pesky abortion thing.
Mitt has that sculpted look and is rather sunny but his pesky problem is the Mormonism. It will be a show stopper for some people like it or not. He'll also continue to be hammered on his own abortion flip flop, and now that we know his military age sons don't consider the military a priority right now...well. Put it this way, cheap shots yes, but if the right can accuse Al Gore of hypocrisy for flying private jets while demanding the little people change their ways then they leave themselves open to having the left make similar hypocritical hay about allowing the little people to fight wars.
There's Mike Huckabee. He's smart and quick-witted and seems honest but it's hard to believe this country can elect a Baptist preacher in this day and age. The hysteria about the coming theocracy would reach record levels.
The other declared candidates are merely also-rans at this point.
That leaves us with the obvious wild cards. Fred Thompson has been smart to bide his time since it saves money, reduces the chance he'll say something stupid that can be used against him later and tends to get most of the skeletons out of the closet in advance. While it's true a tad of luster has worn off the candidacy that's mainly from the perspective of political junkies. The bulk of voters don't care yet. He's still quite formidable.
As for Newt, his brilliance in the field of political science and history along with his arch conservatism greatly interests some. He would certainly be a very articulate president. Thing is, he's got so much baggage some of it's still rotating around the carousel at Hartsfield International. The left will do everything possible to resurrect the image of "the Gingrich who stole Christmas" and they may succeed with help from the MSM.
Hopefully Thompson finally enters the race in early September. It would be fun to see him blast on the scene in the You Tube debate, making subtle fun of the dumbarse questions from people in costumes. We really need to find out if he's up to the challenge of taking on Hillary before it's too late to issue a last minute call to the bullpen for Newt.