Last week's column laid odds for the long-shot contenders seeking the GOP presidential nomination, from former New York Gov. George Pataki, at 500-1, to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (40-1).
We now turn to those with better chances to carry the Republican banner on Nov. 8th, 2016.
• Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (30-1): Paul represents a test case of whether libertarianism can move from an appealing theoretical project to a sellable political program at the ballot box. His biggest problem (as with libertarianism as a whole) is the area of national security.
If Mike Huckabee speeches on economics sometimes sound too much like those of Bernie Sanders', Paul's positions on foreign policy and national defense too often evoke Noam Chomsky and what Jeane Kirkpatrick called "blame America first" Democrats.
Republicans at this point want a reassertion of American leadership abroad, not a president who will turn Barack Obama's retreats and displays of weakness into full-blown, doctrinaire isolationism.
• Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (15-1): Even conservative pundits like Charles Kraut-hammer see Cruz as "unelectable" because he's too ideologically inflexible.
This will likely turn out to be the case, but there might also be no one in the field with greater potential for upward movement than Cruz, because he is a favorite of Tea Party activists who will exert a disproportionate influence in GOP primaries and because he might be the most effective debater in a race where debate performance is likely to prove an effective means of breaking out of the pack.
The hunch is the more debates, the higher Cruz climbs, to the point where there might be no choice but to take his candidacy seriously.
• Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry (10-1): Everyone is dismissing Perry because of his disastrous 2012 campaign, but many candidates have recovered from comparable setbacks in the past to win the presidency (perhaps the most infamous keynote speech ever given at a party convention was by Bill Clinton in 1988, after which some declared his presidential aspirations finished).
From all accounts, Perry has retooled, learned from his mistakes and is now better prepared for the national spotlight. He also still has a record to tout in Texas in terms of economic growth and job creation that no governor in the country can come close to matching.
Perry remains a dark horse at best, but could turn out to be someone who nicely fits William F. Buckley's rule--"the most right, viable candidate who can win."
• Ohio Gov. John Kasich (5-1): If you could go back to the old (and better) way of picking nominees, wherein party leaders got together and decided who would run strongest in November, Kasich would probably be the pick. His non-alarming, non-polarizing (dare we say "compassionate?") brand of conservatism and record of bipartisan accomplishment in Ohio would likely have appeal in other swing states as well; an essential factor if Republicans are to overcome the Democratic Electoral College edge.
Kasich has everything that Jeb Bush has, without the family baggage. Alas, his problem might be attaining liftoff, defined as finding a way of making it onto the A-list debate stage and remaining in the race past Iowa and New Hampshire.
• Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (5-1): Jeb's biggest asset is also his biggest liability--his last name. This is a shame in many respects, because he was a superb governor of Florida and would likely be a better president than either his older brother or father were.
Bush has money, an in-place campaign infrastructure, and some innovative ideas. Like Kasich, he is also the kind of moderate conservative who would play well in battleground states beyond Florida.
But Bush becomes president only if Republicans are willing to nominate someone from the same family for the fifth time in eight contests.
• Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (3-1): Walker's popularity among conservatives stems primarily from the crushing defeats he inflicted upon public-sector unions, the most reactionary and parasitic forces in American politics. Beneath his bland demeanor apparently lies an implacable determination in the face of resistance that could serve him well over the grueling long haul of a presidential campaign.
Walker isn't really "road-tested" at this point much beyond Wisconsin, but he seems to be someone that all wings of the party are enthusiastic about.
• Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (2-1): If Obama was cut from central casting for the Democrats in 2008, Rubio is cut from central casting for the Republicans in 2016. Each was/is charismatic, young, and has historic racial/ethnic appeal. Each also declared during their first terms in the Senate after serving time in their respective state legislatures.
While Obama is said to be a great orator, the Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes has declared Rubio "the best communicator in the Republican Party--and probably in American politics today."
You can also sense a palpable fear among Democrats when Rubio's name is mentioned, probably because of the threat he presents to two key pillars of the "new Democratic majority"--Hispanics and youth.
With respect to the latter, the John McCain-Barack Obama matchup in 2008 featured the largest age gap--25 years--ever in a presidential election.
On Nov. 8th, 2016, Rubio will be 45. Hillary Clinton will be 69.
Freelance columnist Bradley R. Gitz, who lives and teaches in Batesville, received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Illinois.
Editorial on 07/06/2015