Yes, yes, I know they hate each other's guts.  But this is politics. 

It's not unheard of for two people who aren't best friends to form alliances.  And think of it:

• No one is stronger on the economy than Romney.  He speaks with knowledge and experience...and he's actually done it in the real world, met payroll, created jobs.  He would be a great asset to the ticket on the economy.  And the economy is sure to be a hot topic.
• Conversely, no one is stronger on the war in Iraq than McCain.  His foresight on the surge when no one was supporting it gives him tremendous leverage.  And his personal narrative makes him a very, very powerful opponent.
• Romney is strong with the conservative base - if McCain picked Romney as a running mate, it just might help him heal some wounds with the very important conservative activists he would need to win in November.
• McCain has tremendous crossover appeal - more than any candidate in either party.  Romney would need some of those Democrats and independents to win in Novemember.

So you see, much as they might hate it, they need each other.

Mac and Mitt...the odd couple that just might work.

Here is John McCain weaseling around a direct question about open-borders advocate Juan Hernandez working on his campaign:

From a press release by the Romney folks:

Sen. McCain Recently Insisted He Wouldn't Need An Economically-Savvy Running Mate: Sen. McCain Now Says That Because Of His Experience On The Senate Commerce Committee, He Wouldn't Need A Vice President With Economic Experience. "Noting that he also later ran the Senate Commerce Committee, Mr. McCain said in the interview that he would feel no need to select a vice president with expertise in economic policy to balance his own foreign-policy experience." (David Leonhardt, "Fiscal Mantra For McCain: Less Is More," The New York Times,
www.nytimes.com,1/26/08)

Yet Just Months Ago, Sen. McCain Said He Would Need A Running Mate "Well-Grounded In Economics": In November 2007, Sen. McCain Said He Would Choose A Vice-President Who Understands Economics Because He Doesn't. "On at least one occasion, McCain has raised the matter himself. On Nov. 10, while traveling through New Hampshire on his Straight Talk Express bus, McCain was asked what he would seek in a vice presidential candidate if nominated. After mentioning the ability of a potential running mate to replace the president, McCain said, 'You also look for people who maybe have talents you don't, or experience or knowledge you don't, as well.' 'What are those qualities that you don't - that you wouldn't mind complementing?' asked David Brooks, a columnist for The New York Times. McCain paused. 'Uh, maybe I shouldn't say this, but, somebody who's really well grounded in economics,' he said." (Sasha Issenberg, "McCain Tested On Economy," The Boston Globe, www.boston.com, 1/26/08)

In The Recent Boca Raton Debate, Sen. McCain Denied Saying He Didn't Know About Economics: McCain Denied His Own Comments When Tim Russert Quoted Him Saying He Did Not Know About Economics. RUSSERT: " And now the economy has taken hold. Ask any of the voters; it's the economy. Senator McCain, you have said repeatedly, quote, 'I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.' Is it a problem for your campaign that the economy is now the most important issue, one that by your own acknowledgment you're not well versed on?" MCCAIN: "Actually, I don't know where you got that quote from. I'm very well versed in economics." (MSNBC, Republican Presidential Candidate Debate, Boca Raton, FL, 1/24/08)

But Sen. McCain Himself Has Repeatedly Said He Doesn't Understand Economic Issues: Sen. McCain: "The Issue Of Economics Is Not Something I've Understood As Well As I Should." "Like Mike Huckabee, who joked recently that he 'may not be the expert that some people are on foreign policy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night,' McCain suggested to reporters Monday that American consumer culture offered a short cut to expertise. 'The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should,' McCain said. 'I've got Greenspan's book.'" (Sasha Issenberg, "McCain: It's About The Economy," The Boston Globe, www.boston.com, Posted 12/18/07)

- Sen. McCain: "I Still Need To Be Educated." "On a broader range of economic issues, though, Mr. McCain readily departs from Reaganomics. His philosophy is best described as a work in progress. He is refreshingly blunt when he tells me: 'I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.'" (Stephen Moore, "Reform, Reform, Reform," OpinionJournal.com, 11/26/05)

Ed Morrissey, of the well-read Captain's Quarters conservative blog, has just endorsed Romney. It's definitely worth a read, as he is a well-respected center-right blogger and had previously said he wasn't going to endorse.

Hugh Hewitt talks about Bill Bennett's chastisement of John McCain for his "below the belt" (Bennett's words) attack on Romney.

McCain seems desperate...does he know something? Stay tuned...

The American Conservative Union's David Keene has a column where he lays bare the "McCain Myth" of the Arizona Senator as a non-politician straight-talker. 

Here is an excerpt:

No one can question McCain’s courage or his patriotism. John McCain is rightly admired for his service and suffering on behalf of his country, but even the most cursory examination of his supposed courage and consistency as an elected politician reveals the man to something less that he claims.

Other candidates who change their positions on important issues are described as “flip-floppers,” but John McCain is viewed as that rare politician whose views on important issues have “matured” over the years.

Thus, McCain appears justifiably disgusted when confronting political opponents like Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani for changing their positions on various issues over the years, but is never forced to face his own hypocrisy in doing the same. From taxes to his relationship with social conservatives and his position on Second Amendment or “gun” issues, McCain has shown an unending willingness to do just what he so self-righteously accuses others of doing—tailoring his position to suit his needs of the moment. 

One area many people point to when they favor John McCain is his supposed electability. The thought goes that since most head-to-head polls currently have him doing well against either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, he would be the Republican candidate most likely to win in November.

Balderdash!

Remember Michael Dukakis? He had a 17-point lead over Bush 41 at one point. All it got him was his head handed to him when it came time to exercise the only vote that counts. There are other examples too, of course. The point is, that that head-to-head polls at this early juncture mean nothing.

Let's look at some of McCain's shortcomings that could be fatal in November:

1. His age - he's in his 70s, which in and of itself is of course fine, but he's starting to look ragged in some of his appearances, and his speaking, never exactly Reaganesque, is getting worse. Now imagine him with 10 more months of hard campaigning.
2. His personality. Many find his feistiness endearing, but over the ensuing months there's a decent chance his legendary temper will unleash at the wrong time, in the wrong way. Americans like passion, but they don't like hotheads as presidents.
3. His policy positions. While he'll definitely take some independents and Democrats, he'll also lose some Republicans, both through outright defection and simply becuase some will not feel motivated enough to vote. The latter reason is likely to be fatal -- the Democrats are fired up, and a Republican candidate that conservatives are reticent about will be a death knell come November.

Now let's look at Mitt Romney:

1. He is a young 60 - fit and healthy. He's like the energizer bunny.
2. Romney has shown an almost superhuman capacity to keep his cool. Some people would actually like to see him get more riled when others are out of line...but at least you know he won't blow his stack and spin around in the room like a top.
3. He is clearly the most conservative viable candidate. He'll keep the base, and his expertise on the economy will win over independents over time.

The latest poll showing up on Real Clear Politics, from ARG, shows Romney up by seven points...it would be a big win for Romney if he wins there, would mute the news for whoever wins SC...

I know some people are dismissing Romney's win in Michigan as simply a favorite-son triumph, or saying it is just more of Mitt pandering to some group.  I see it differently.  What I saw when I watched Romney speak to Michiganders was the real Mitt, a practical problem-solver who knows how to surround himself with smart, capable people and is a master at crafting solutions.  i was living in Salt Lake City during the Winter Olympics, so i saw it first-hand.  Lest anyone forget,  the olympic games were on the brink of disaster, deeply in debt and scandal-ridden.  Some wondered if Salt Lake City would even be able to go through with it.  He turned it into the most successful winter olympics in history, and a sparkling presentation of our country to the world at a time when it was critical to show off to the world the stuff that America was made of.  The "show" that is the olympics was breathtaking, with Olympians bringing into the arena the american flag that had flown on 9/11.  For anyone who saw it, they will never forget it.

Another reason i am supporting him is that with all the talk about "national security" (justified), it is sometimes forgotten that the economy, especially in the area of trade, is also a national security issue.  Japan has little in the way of natural resources, but the high standard of living its citizens enjoy and its large productivity give the country a measure of security as a nation that much larger nations, with significantly greater natural resources, and in some cases more military strength, simply don't enjoy. 

i feel totally confident that no candidate is as well-prepared to guide the country economically as Mitt Romney.

...have you noticed the similarities (I know they're not identical) between the candidacies of John McCain and George H.W. Bush?

Both men:
- were decorated military veterans
- had lost nomination fights in the past
- had extensiive foreign policy resumes
- criticized for being less interested in domestic politics
- criticized for being a moderate, not being conservative enough.

True enough...McCain and George HW...seperated at birth.

Here, as I see it, are the most likely scenarios going forward:

McCain wins Michigan, Romney wins Nevada, Huckabee wins South Carolina, Giuliani wins Florida
This is the conventional wisdom scenario, based on polls and expected results.  This would make super tuesday look like a demolition derby where all four would probably get some delegates, and this thing could go all the way to the convention. 

Romney wins Michigan, Romney wins Nevada, Huckabee wins South Carolina, Giuliani wins Florida
This is based on the idea that if McCain doesn't win Michigan, he is probably not going to win South Carolina, and he'd be done.  If this happens it would be basically a three-way on super tuesday, which could produce a clear nominee, or could portend a long fight.

Huckabee wins Michigan, Romney wins Nevada, Huckabee wins South Carolina, Huckabee wins Florida
Huckabee is the nominee

McCain wins Michigan, Romney wins Nevada, McCain wins South Carolina, McCain wins Florida
In this scenario, McCain rides victories in NH, Michigan, South Carolina and Florida into super tuesday, and gets the establishment behind him (albeit reluctantly).  McCain is the nominee.

Romney wins Michigan, Romney wins Nevada, Huckabee wins South Carolina, Huckabee wins Florida
Super tuesday showdown between Romney (conventional conservatives) and Huckabee (evangelicals and populists/moderates).

What are your scenarios?  Comment here!

Here are my predictions for today...

Republicans

Huckabee - He will stay positive, try to look like a Republican Obama.  He's trying to do well in NH, but probably speaking just as much to folks in Michigan and SC.

McCain - He's going to prefer staying positive (I think he's pretty confident at this point).  His big task will be to not get dragged into a fight with Romney...his temper could get him into trouble in that situation.

Romney - He's got to walk the fine line of being aggressive but not negative.  A dream situation would be if McCain came unglued and said something crazy.

Democrats

Obama - He'll keep doing what he's been doing...soaring rhetoric, not a lot of details.  It's worked so far, why change it?  He has the advantage that people really, really want change, and they see that change personified in him.

Clinton - The consequences can't be overstated in the debate for her.  She's got to find a "nice" way to portray Obama as an inexperienced novice too green to take on the nation's problems.  It'll be hard, because people seem willing to roll the dice.

Here are my thoughts on Iowa:

Democrats:

Obama:  Couldn't have been a bigger win, obviously.  Now their big challenge is to keep their eye on the ball, and not get so giddy at the thought they might actually WIN this thing that they forget to "play the game".  You've seen this happen in sports, where an underdog freaks out because they're doing well.  it's possible it could happen here too.  Though I don't think it will.

Clinton:  Couldn't have been a worse loss.  Don' know where she goes from here.  I think she'll lose in NH, win Michigan by default, and limp to SC for a last stand.

Edwards:  The angry young man is done.

Republicans:

Huckabee:  He got everything he hoped for.  He'll get third in NH and hope for a strong showing in Michigan (second would be nice but he'll take third) and go for the win in South Carolina.

Romney:  i'm a Romney guy, but there's no whitewashing it - he had a horrible night.  He can recover, but to have any hope of the nomination, he needs to win in NH.  My wife is in sales and she always says people buy with their hearts and justify it with their heads.  Romney never sold to people's hearts in Iowa.

McCain:  (Yes, i'm skipping Thompson, because i want to)  He needs a win.  And he'll probably get one.  Then he wants #1 or #2 in Michigan, and the same in SC (though he probably needs a win in one of those).

Rudy:  Some people say he's done - I'm not so sure.  But I think the next few weeks will be nervous time for him.  He's either a genius or an idiot.  Time will tell.

1st Place: Mitt Romney
2nd Place: Mike Huckabee
3rd Place: Fred Thompson
4th Place: John McCain

1st Place: Barack Obama
2nd Place: John Edwards
3rd Place: Hillary Clinton
4th Place: Bill Richardson

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24241

Jim's comments:
This is good news for Romney on both counts.  Obviously winning would be good, but if Obama wins, he draws independents in New Hampshire.  Could be good news for Mitt tomorrow all around...