A writer who thinks Rudy is the GOP’s only hope in 2008 recently wrote to me, “I think most of the pundits are missing something. Rudy has a distinctive voters profile (think JPod, Derb). That is 25-30 percent of the GOP. So long as he has three main rivals and some spare change opponents he wins. The only way he loses is if two of the three main rivals disappear. Unlikely to be Romney with his money. McCain out of pride will hang in at least to NH and SC. It’s only in a two man race that Rudy is beatable.”

I told this writer that the problem for Rudy is that sooner or later, every primary narrows down to a two-man race.

Look at the way McCain is whacking away at Romney. Clearly Team McCain wants a race between their man and Rudy, because they think they win. Give a conservative GOP primary voting bloc a choice between a guy who betrayed them on campaign finance reform and the Gang of 14, vs. a guy who betrays them on abortion, gays, and guns, and Rudy probably ends up with the short end of the stick. Maybe immigration changes the equation, maybe not.

Rudy vs: Thompson: Can you imagine, “I’m Fred Thompson, and I represent the Republican wing of the Republican party”? Geeks like me get excited about CompStat stuff, but the base, and probably most primary voters, get more excited about the kinds of topics and arguments Fred makes in his radio commentaries, NRO pieces, etc.

Maybe the base values leadership, and will find Rudy a stronger leader than Fred, and/or Giuliani will be able to say, “Fred Thompson has made a film career out of playing no-BS, get-the-job-done butt-kicking leaders, the kind of guy that I actually am.” But Fred will, presumably, be projecting leadership in his ads, his debate appearances, speeches, etc.; Rudy will have to argue, “don’t believe your eyes,” a tough sell.

Rudy vs. Romney: Interesting contrast here, since they’re both Northeastern, non-traditional Republicans, etc. Are religious conservatives more comfortable with the thrice-married cross-dresser, or the Mormon? Do they worry more about Rudy’s in-your-face confrontational leadership style, or Romney’s alleged flip-flopping? I have a feeling the base will prefer somebody who has agreed with them on the big issues for ten minutes to somebody who steadfastly opposes them based on his deepest principles. (The McCain campaign, obviously, staunchly disagrees.)

Here’s one area where Rudy might have the advantage: Most of the losing presidential candidates in the past cycles have had issues with “authenticity”, i.e., voters’ suspicions that they’re trying to sell themselves as something they’re not. Budget hawk and Washington insider Bob Dole ran as a tax-cutting conservative (who was hip to what the kids were into) who was going to clean up Washington in the corrupt Clinton era. Al Gore, the Ecology Professor Who Talks To You Slowly Because He Knows You’re Stupid, tried to sell himself as a man of the people, secretly fun and easygoing, passionate about Tipper (the convention kiss)…. the senator’s son who grew up in a hotel suite was going to represent the people, not the powerful. John Kerry was Thurston Howell III, and he was supposed to be a hunter, a simultaneous war hero and war protester, etc.

If people think Romney is really a golly-gee CEO tech geek who pragmatically changes tactics and policy stances when they don’t work, trying to pass himself off as the embodied blend of the social conservatism of Gary Bauer with the uncompromising intractability of Jack Bauer, his campaign won’t work.

Anyway — I think Rudy has an easy road to getting down to the final two, and then he’s got a tough sell to persuade the party he’s better than the other guy…