Reconsidering Giuliani

Good mottos for political columnists might be "Quick to judge, quick to change" and "Don't go down with the ship." That is, don't hang on to a theory or prediction that you no longer believe in or that is increasingly likely to be wrong.

As political analysts, we are supposed to figure out what is going on and maybe even venture a forecast. But, let's face it, from time to time, we're wrong. And I'm now very much questioning the wisdom of declaring in February that "I am more likely to win the Tour de France next year than Giuliani is to win the GOP presidential nomination." I could still be right about that, but there's a more than fair chance I'm wrong.

At the outset of this presidential race, writing off Giuliani because of his moderate positions on abortion, gay rights, and gun control was easy. The idea that someone with Giuliani's colorful personal life would win the GOP presidential nomination seemed equally unlikely. Combine the two, and betting against him seemed very safe.

It wasn't clear who would win the GOP nomination, but it seemed clear who couldn't, right? Well, a year later the unwritten rules for winning Republican presidential nominations appear to have been amended by the party's dire circumstances.

The GOP is demoralized and in disarray. The party has had majorities in the House and Senate for 11 of the past 12 years and has controlled the White House for more than six years, yet in many ways it is now in the worst shape since Watergate.

The GOP's reputation for competence has been battered and bruised by the Bush administration's handling of Hurricane Katrina and the Iraq war. In addition, the party has been hurt by profligate federal spending and mounting deficits that built up while it controlled both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. What is most embarrassing to Republicans is that they did this after President Clinton handed them a balanced budget.

Many religious conservatives in the party have been dismayed by the endless stream of Republican morals scandals, and they feel let down by the people they helped to elect. At the same time, secular Republicans, those whose conservatism focuses on economic and foreign-policy issues, became enraged by their party's positions on embryonic-stem-cell research and Terri Schiavo. They complain of a hostile takeover of their party by the moralists.

Against this backdrop, maybe it's possible that some of the traditional litmus tests can be waived, that someone who comes across as a principled leader and a fiscal conservative can be given special dispensation for other transgressions.

Also working in Giuliani's favor is that the alternatives to him have failed to catch on. Sen. John McCain's campaign collapsed last summer for a variety of reasons. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, probably the most talented of the bunch, couldn't raise enough money to be a real contender or to be taken seriously. And former Sen. Fred Thompson got in too late and too tentatively. He is lackadaisically playing a poor game of catch-up.

But it's former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, whose campaign seemed to have so much promise, who is most perplexing. That Republican core value of competence should have been Romney's strength. A world-class, proven manager with a keen, analytical mind who promised to make important decisions based on data and listening to the best possible advice, Romney should have been the candidate of competence.

Instead, he has projected the image of an ideologue, and a pandering one at that -- parroting the bottom-feeders in the primary field in a way that raises questions about his authenticity. Some observers question whether even he knows who he is anymore. Romney's lurch to the right by saying things he would never have said three or four years ago, juxtaposed with Giuliani's insistence on pretty much sticking to his guns, even on some positions unpopular with many in the party, makes Rudy look like the leader and Mitt the pandering pol.

This nomination is definitely still up in the air, and I'm not shopping for spandex yet. But working out and losing a bit of weight, just in case, might be a pretty good idea.