Rich, you may recall that we talked about McCain’s chances in early December. I said that he could still win the nomination, but that if he did, we wouldn’t be saying, Wow, what a brilliant strategy. We’d be wondering just how the heck that happened. But then Huckabee destroyed Romney’s early-state strategy. One might have expected Giuliani to benefit from Romney’s fall. Instead, he continued to fade. Once Iowa and New Hampshire had voted, McCain became the most likely nominee.

It has seemed a bit like the 1996 race. McCain is Dole: the old war hero who has run before, who does not enthuse either economic or social conservatives but has a pretty conservative record. Giuliani is Forbes: the socially liberal, economically conservative New York candidate. Huckabee is Buchanan: the social conservative with rhetoric that scares economic conservatives. Romney is Gramm, the movement-oriented candidate with boatloads of money but difficulty connecting with grassroots conservative voters. (I’m not sure where Thompson fits in this scheme.) Romney has gotten further than Gramm, but much of the story is the same. The social-Right candidate takes out the movement candidate, the economic conservative ends up not playing a huge role, and the nomination goes to the old guy whom much of the Right distrusts.

I hope the story doesn’t end the same way.

(There’s a more hopeful ‘88 parallel. Kemp replaces Gramm/Romney, du Pont is Forbes/Giuliani albeit from Delaware instead of New York, Robertson is Buchanan/Huckabee, and Bush is Dole/McCain.)