More fearless and ridiculously premature prognostication
With my satellite radio temporarily on the fritz, I heard a few minutes of Sean Hannity during drive time yesterday. He was talking with Dick Morris about the Republican field of presidential hopefuls. Morris has already written off McCain and Romney, and predicts the field will winnow down to Rudy and one of the conservative dark horses (who at the moment are very dark indeed.)
But this is Dick Morris, of course, who's nearly always wrong, so I doubt the McCain camp in panicking yet.
Comments
You know what I think. McCain will win the nomination and then go down in a big loss because of Iraq. I have five bucks riding on McCain getting the nomination.
Posted by: DBK | February 16, 2007 12:36 PM
You know I've agreed with you on this for some time now, but lately I've been growing less and less confident. I'm still not ready to take your bet, but if you ask me in a few months I might.
Posted by: BNJ | February 16, 2007 12:40 PM
Another cycle of damaged and weak candidates, both Dem and Repug.
Choose between two turds.
Posted by: Bailey Hankins | February 16, 2007 12:46 PM
> Choose between two turds.
I think the preferred metaphor is a giant douche vs. a turd sandwich.
Posted by: BNJ | February 16, 2007 12:53 PM
McCain is too old.
He should have been President in 2000.
Posted by: CRB | February 16, 2007 01:26 PM
CRB, I certainly agree on the second, and I probably agree on the first.
Part of my fondness for McCain is probably a lingering resentment of the injustice done him in 2000. The most popular politician in America didn't even make it onto the ballot, and I found that infuriating.
Posted by: BNJ | February 16, 2007 01:33 PM
Why anyone gives Dick Morris a platform is beyond me. A consistently incorrect political opportunist. My most recent favorite of his was last year when he assured Hannity that people in New York were gonna fall in love with Sen candidate Jeannine Pirro and that she'd win.
Posted by: fred | February 16, 2007 01:45 PM
Fred, you're right, but you've got to remember: A consistently wrong predictor is just as valuable as a consistently right one -- you just interpret the results differently.
Posted by: BNJ | February 16, 2007 01:49 PM