I know it [probably] won’t [ever] happen, but the best thing Rudy could do for himself and for the Republican Party is make a run for Senator against Senator Clinton in New York. This would force Senator Clinton to spend a significant part of her war chest in New York, and it would prepare Rudy for a run for the President in 2008. I know I’m dreaming.

Dennis is also right; the words on the page of this report are not necessarily incompatible with the federalist approach. And it’s true that, whether he ends up on the ticket or not, a Republican party that makes itself gratuitously hostile to the Rudys and mini-Rudys out there, is a party that’s got problems. (Non-gratuitous hostility is always okay, of course).

If McCain runs, and if it looks like he’s got a good shot, Rudy becomes worse than superfluous. As one of his biggest boosters I know (I’m only waiting til the midterms, because earlier would be just too damn soon, to get a custom-printed RUDY CAN’T FAIL bumper sticker),

I’ve come to accept that at best one out of Rudy and McCain are going to get their tickets punched.

The reason why I try to tell my self it’s STILL TO EARLY FOR THIS is that prolonged consideration of what’s going to go down brings up the specter of a protracted, nasty McCain/Allen slugfest. 2000 replay. In the words of one of the best Seinfeld episodes of all:

“That’s not gonna be good for business …

That’s not gonna be good for *anybody*.”

But your overall point remains a valid one. I noticed he specified he would make a decision after the midterms. To me, that sounds like he’s saying that he’s more likely to run if the Republicans get pasted this fall, because Republicans might be more inclined to give him a pass on social issues if they think they’re headed for doom in ’08.

I just hope he makes that decision quickly after the midterms. If he pulls some drawn-out Hamlet routine, it’ll be much harder for him to capitalize on his previous image as a decisive leader.

That said, this line does concern me a little:

“..politicians like himself who support abortion rights, gay rights and gun control.”

Nowhere does Rudy indicate that he plans to attempt triangulation on these issues. The modern GOP is the pro-life, pro-2nd Amdt party. That doesn’t mean that every Republican has to agree with those elements of the platform; they most certainly won’t. And it doesn’t mean there should be a litmus test to be a Republican; there shouldn’t (and if there was, I’d probably fail it). But it does mean that the leader of the party has to be able to advance the agenda in some way of voters that care about those issues, as those voters have been an essential part of the Reagan coalition since 1980.

I’ve long suggested that a good way for Rudy to do this without giving up his core principles is to take a stand as a federalist; i.e., Rudy could say he’s personally pro-choice, but he thinks the people should decide that issue, not the courts, and he’ll appoint federalist judges as a consequence. That sort of move would be distinctly conservative. It devolves power away from a central authority, it gives power to the people, and it makes sure that elected officials accountable to voters get to make policy. That would be a move in the spirit of Reaganism. It would be the kind of move that would unite conservatives, libertarians, and a lot of moderates on these divisive social issues.

Instead, it looks like Rudy’s planning on running as a brazen social liberal. If that’s the case, he won’t be the nominee. The minute Rudy informs us that his judges will be no threat to Roe is the minute that his quest for the nomination comes to an end.