Rank the top three most likely people to win the GOP nomination

[Mr. Morden]

Way too soon to say considering Obama was barely on the radar at this point.

What?  Yes he was.  He was second to Clinton in basically every Democratic primary poll taken in Nov. 2006.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm too young to remember anything from 1978, but my understanding is that Reagan was regarded as the frontrunner for the 1980 GOP nomination from the second Carter won the '76 election.  He was the obvious choice, given the close race he gave Ford in the primaries that year.

[Bull Moose Base]

I'm still at a loss to figure this one out.  I agree with Intrade that the top 5 most likely possibilities are probably Romney, Palin, Thune, Huckabee, and Pawlenty, but I go back and forth every week on how those five should be ranked.  (I would have put Pence in that category as well, but it now looks like he'll probably run for governor.  But the door's not closed there.)

And there's about a 1 in 3 chance that it won't be any of the people listed above.  This race is tough to assess.  It should get a bit clearer though in six months, when we'll at least have a much better idea of who's running.

1 in 3 sounds high to me. Do you think more of Barbour, Daniels and Newt's chances to overcome their liabilities?  Or are you thinking someone off the radar?  I am waiting for a self-funded businessman to jump in.

[Mr. Morden]

I'm still at a loss to figure this one out.  I agree with Intrade that the top 5 most likely possibilities are probably Romney, Palin, Thune, Huckabee, and Pawlenty, but I go back and forth every week on how those five should be ranked.  (I would have put Pence in that category as well, but it now looks like he'll probably run for governor.  But the door's not closed there.)

And there's about a 1 in 3 chance that it won't be any of the people listed above.  This race is tough to assess.  It should get a bit clearer though in six months, when we'll at least have a much better idea of who's running.

1 in 3 sounds high to me. Do you think more of Barbour, Daniels and Newt's chances to overcome their liabilities?  Or are you thinking someone off the radar?  I am waiting for a self-funded businessman to jump in.

Well, maybe not quite 1 in 3, but in that ballpark.  There is some chance that a Barbour or Daniels could overcome their liabilities, but I'm thinking more someone off the radar (or someone sort of "on the radar" like Christie, but who we're currently convinced isn't going to run).  I don't know who that would be, but there's a chance it could happen.  An alternate reality version of Fred Thompson could have conceivably won the nomination in 2008, if he'd actually cared about campaigning, and if you assume different decisions being made by the other candidates, to split the vote differently.  And he was certainly off the radar in late 2006.

2012 is as good a race as any for someone unexpected to come in like that.  It probably won't happen, but I wouldn't rule it out.

[tik 🪀✨]

2012 will be keyes fever, people! If not him, it'll be an obama landslide.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

1. Dr. "No" Ron Paul
2. Mitch Daniels
3. Sarah "Mama Grizzly Palin

VP
1.Rubio
2.Pawlenty
3.a surprise

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

1. Dr. "No" Ron Paul
2. Mitch Daniels
3. Sarah "Mama Grizzly Palin

Lol.

[albaleman]

1. Romney
2. Huckabee
3. Palin

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

1. Dr. "No" Ron Paul
2. Mitch Daniels
3. Sarah "Mama Grizzly Palin

Lol.

Really.

Where's he going to win? Nevada? The South will be dominated by Palin, Gingrich, and Barbour; Romney, T-Paw, and others will take the North-East; Romney will take Nevada because of the Mormons; Paul has no real geographical base of support that could possibly launch him into the nomination. Besides, Paul's foreign policy views will do him in with the GOP, which is mostly comprised of war hawks like me. I want to see a primary map where Paul somehow wins the nomination.

[California8429]

Why are you people saying Pence? He's running for Governor

[tpfkaw]

I want to see a primary map where Paul somehow wins the nomination.

He'd have to win Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and (most likely) South Carolina back-to-back, then maintain the momentum through Super Tuesday.

[feeblepizza]

Pres

1. My Man Mitch
2. Mittens Romney
3. The Grinch

VP

1. The Cuban Wonder
2. That one Polish f**k
3. My Man Mitch

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Pres

1. My Man Mitch
2. Mittens Romney
3. The Grinch

VP

1. The Cuban Wonder
2. That one Polish f**k
3. My Man Mitch

Polish? Are you talking about T-Paw?

[feeblepizza]

Pres

1. My Man Mitch
2. Mittens Romney
3. The Grinch

VP

1. The Cuban Wonder
2. That one Polish f**k
3. My Man Mitch

Polish? Are you talking about T-Paw?

Yes, he's of Polish and German heritage.

[Liberalrocks]

Way too soon to say considering Obama was barely on the radar at this point.

What?  Yes he was.  He was second to Clinton in basically every Democratic primary poll taken in Nov. 2006.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

However Obama trailed Clinton badly that was my point. In 1980 George Bush won the New Hampshire primary. So while Reagan had substantial support he was not the standard bearer just yet at this point in 1980.

[Bull Moose Base]

my own personal intrade...

Romney 33%
Palin 25%
Pawlenty 9%
Pence 8%
Huckabee 7%
Thune 6%
Gingrich 4%
Barbour 3%
FIELD 3%
Daniels 2%

Revising...

Romney 44% (seems guaranteed to be one of final 2 or 3 by Super Tues. if he hasn't already won)
Palin 22%
Huckabee 10% (low because he seems likely to skip the race.  If he's in, I rank him above Palin)
Thune 6%
Pawlenty 6% (Paw and Thune seems most likely 2nd tier guys to take Iowa if Huckabee is out)
None of the above 3%(Christie or Jeb gets talked into it, or self-funder off radar, turns race on head)
Gingrich 3%
Barbour 3% (Newt and Barbour have image problems but could sneak a win in SC and then?)
Daniels 2% (Too many positions will hurt him with bases + Romney too strong on moderate side)
Pence 1% (only this low because of guber. rumors)

[Ben Romney]

1.Thune
2.Romney
3.Palin

[Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey]

Way too soon to say considering Obama was barely on the radar at this point.

What?  Yes he was.  He was second to Clinton in basically every Democratic primary poll taken in Nov. 2006.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

However Obama trailed Clinton badly that was my point. In 1980 George Bush won the New Hampshire primary. So while Reagan had substantial support he was not the standard bearer just yet at this point in 1980.

No, Reagan won New Hampshire. It's Iowa that Bush won in 1980.

[Liberalrocks]

Thanks for the correction. My initial point is often times candidates who are not on the radar can and do emerge from crowded fields. Also people tend to forget that they built coalitions that got them to victory and were not just simply appearing out of thin air.

Its way too far out to know what is going to come down in 2012.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Pres

1. My Man Mitch
2. Mittens Romney
3. The Grinch

VP

1. The Cuban Wonder
2. That one Polish f**k
3. My Man Mitch

Polish? Are you talking about T-Paw?

Yes, he's of Polish and German heritage.

You seem to have some racist sentiments when it comes to Polish people and Cubans.

[Mr. Morden]

Thanks for the correction. My initial point is often times candidates who are not on the radar can and do emerge from crowded fields.

Yes, of course, but you can still make judgment calls at any given time about which candidates are more likely to win than others.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, of course it's too early to *know* what's going to happen in 2012.  We don't know for sure who's going to win.  But some potential candidates are a lot more likely to succeed than others.  That's all that's being asked here.  Which candidates have the greatest probability of winning?  It's hardly too early to ask questions like that.

[Bull Moose Base]

Thanks for the correction. My initial point is often times candidates who are not on the radar can and do emerge from crowded fields.

Yes, of course, but you can still make judgment calls at any given time about which candidates are more likely to win than others.

Maybe off the radar of the inattentive public, but not really off the radar of a junkie board like this.  Even considering a Pawlenty or Thune, (a) Republicans have no record of going with someone that obscure in a pres. primary (b) even Democrats who did it in '92, didn't have so many big names in the field as the GOP is likely to have in '12.  Clinton would have had a much tougher time if Gore and/or Cuomo had run.

[Mr. Morden]

(b) even Democrats who did it in '92, didn't have so many big names in the field as the GOP is likely to have in '12.  Clinton would have had a much tougher time if Gore and/or Cuomo had run.

I guess I would still frame it slightly differently.  A year before the primaries start, I would just ask one question:

Is there one candidate who is widely regarded as the overwhelming frontrunner in all dimensions of the game?  That is, leading all the polls by like 30 points, leading overwhelmingly in support from the party establishment, expected to trounce the competition in fundraising, etc.  That's the kind of frontrunner Bob Dole was in 1995 and GW Bush was in 1999.  That's the kind of frontrunner Republicans usually have and Democrats usually don't.

If the answer is yes, there is such a person, then that person is likely to win.  (They'll still lose some primaries, but they'll eventually win)  If the answer is no, then the race is extremely unpredictable, and can go any number of ways.  The 2008 GOP race was one of the rare times when the GOP had no strong frontrunner, and the race was extremely chaotic, with several large shifts of momentum.  The fact that the eventual winner was someone who already had a high national profile before the campaign was pretty much just a coincidence IMHO.

2012 looks like it'll probably be another race with no strong frontrunner.  So I'm once again expecting chaos.

[Psychic Octopus]

1. Romney
2. Palin
3. Field

Can't believe I forgot to put my rankings in. "Field" is very loosely defined, since field collectively has the strongest chance. It is indicative of whoever breaks out of the pack, be that T-Paw, Daniels, Barbour, Thune, or someone else. This isn't an easy race to predict, and I am sure we are in for a few surprises.