I always have to laugh when I see the polling pair-ups -- and the most amusing question is whether Clinton/Edwards/Obama can beat Guiliani.
What's the point of asking low-information voters that question? Once the dirty laundry is out, Clinton wins Giuliani in a landslide. So does anybody in the field, with the exception of Kucinich or Gravel.
Giuliani is one of the most profoundly unlikeable people on the planet. If you think Giulani is going to be the nominee, just vote your heart. Electability is not going to be an issue.
If the nominee is someone else, it might pay to be more strategic. You know the drill, and I won't repeat these debates here. But I do believe electability is a valid subject of debate.
Instead, I'll just ask a question I haven't seen asked yet: if Huckabee becomes the nominee, how does that change (or not change) the electability question?
Personally, I think that a candidate with a high level of domestic experience and a higher likeability than anyone in the race presents some interesting opportunities and challenges.
(and no, I'm not saying that should be your primary decision criteria -- just interested in how this might play out...)
What do the different candidates bring to the table in a fight against Huckabee?
And to show you why it's important to know the answer to this question, watch this guy at work:
|