GrammNet Issue 5/22/98 Dear Friend, I'd meant to send this message two months ago, but have been devoting more time to the real pursuit of teaching history (debunking left-wing myths right and left--well, mostly right) that I've not had time until now, when the semester is over. I think you'll find that the information--supplemented by some subsequent straw poll results--is still timely and relevant. People often ask me if Phil Gramm is going to run again in 2000. I can now offer a definitive answer: I don't know. But I do know that he hasn't ruled out another run, in 2000 or otherwise, and has even sent out a few feelers to 1996 contributors in Iowa. To the best of my knowledge, he won't decide anything until after the November elections. I also know that some of the conservative media pundits who disdained Gramm in 1996 are now singing his praises. After all, Gramm was virtually the lone voice in the Senate criticizing the Lott-Gingrich-Kasich budget sellout to Bill Clinton. (Even as I type, the Senate Republican version of the highway spending bill is $18.5 bill above even the budget sellout spending limit, and Gingrich has warned that the House Republican version will more likely $25 billion about the limit. With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?) Still, don't hold your breath on Phil Gramm running again. Conservative media pundits seem more interested in sex scandals than in reigning in government, so until either Clinton or the sex scandal stories are gone, don't expect too much help from them combating this reprehensible Republican spending spree. And I think that Gramm didn't much like the process of campaigning for president, with each Republican group demanding chapter and verse on every detail, and many so-called conservatives holding their hands out for their own subsidies. And let's not forget the incessant bombardment of lies from Buchanan. (There was one small silver lining in the Buchanan parade of lies: he lied so much and so incessantly about Alan Keyes that no Keyes supporter will ever consider supporting Buchanan again.) I predicted that if conservative Republicans didn't coalesce around Phil Gramm the moderates would nominate Bob Dole, and that's exactly what happened. There's no heir apparent for 2000, so the chances of getting another moderate like Dole are not as great as they were in 1996. Still, with the possibility of two or three supply-side candidates (Kemp, Forbes, possibly Armey) and a host of social conservative candidates (Keyes, Bauer, Ashcroft, Quayle, possibly Buchanan) a repeat of 1996 isn't impossible. Last time around there were five moderate candidates (Dole, Alexander, Lugar, Specter and Wilson) but Dole was the only one who had run for president before--three times--and was considered the heir apparent. Dole also had the support of most of the Iowa Republican political establishment Still Lamar Alexander now appears to have the support of virtually all of the Iowa Republican establishment, and in 2000 he will have run once before, so be on the lookout for him. On the positive side, he got buried (1% of the vote) in a recent South Carolina straw poll, despite being there to speak for himself. He also placed poorly in a poll taken nationally by Young Republican National Federation of its members, garnering a miniscule 0.4%. In any case, I hope you enjoy the intriguing odds reported below. The editorial comments below are theirs, not mine. Sincerely, David B. Levenstam, CPA, MT, MA GrammNet back issues at http://www.geocities.com/Capitolhill/3390/ To subscribe to GrammNet, email me at AdmrlLocke@aol.com, with a message to the effect that you'd like to subscribe. ------------------------------------------- Campaigns & Elections odds for 2000 Prez race: http://www.camelect.com/ President of the United States 2000  Democratic Presidential Nomination 2000: VP Al Gore 3:4  Clear frontrunner, but has lost some edge because of his  handling of the campaign finance matter.    Cong. Dick Gephardt (MO) 5:1  Improving because of Gore's problems and Fast Track derailing, but still a longshot.   Sen. Bob Kerrey (NE) 15:1  Toying with a candidacy but may lack the fire to actually run.  Ex-Sen. Bill Bradley (NJ) 15:1  Would like to run but won't unless he sees a shot.  Sen. John Kerry (MA) 25:1 Taking initial steps, testing waters.  Sen. Paul Wellstone (MI) 30:1  Actively campaigning. If Gore is still clear  frontrunner, he could be one of his major challengers simply because what he has to say is different and appeals to left base of the party.  Sen. Dianne Feinstein (CA) 30:1 If Gore falters, she'd be a serious prospect. Strong VP possibility. Gov. Howard Dean (VT) 50:1 Says he won't run, but is. Very appealing with plenty of potential, especially if Gore slips.  Rev. Jesse Jackson (DC) 50:1  As usual, could have a big impact if he ran. He could hurt Gore among blacks. But not likely to bag the prize.  Someone else 100:1  Republican Presidential Nomination 2000:  Gov. George W. Bush 5:1  Has the best field position of any potential candidate.   Jack Kemp 9:1 Well known, but prospects have dimmed   Elizabeth Dole 12:1  May not even run but could be a major force if she did. Would be strong VP bet.  Steve Forbes 12:1  Doing more than anybody in terms of serious activity. Has done well building credibility with Christian conservatives he lost in '96.  Dan Quayle 15:1 Would be a major candidate but may not be able to go all the way.   Lamar Alexander (TN) 18:1   Working hard but has little left to show for his 96 run.  Sen. John Ashcroft (MO) 25:1  If he becomes "the" candidate of Christian  conservatives, he'll be a top contender.  Colin Powell 30:1  Says he's not running, but he's still the most popular man in America.  Cong. John Kasich (OH) 30:1  Wants to run, but has a long way to go. Fred Thompson (TN) 40:1  Looked like a rising star six months ago but the campaign finance probe hasn't helped him.  Phil Gramm (TX) 40:1  Probably won't run.  Trent Lott (MS) 40:1   Probably won't run.  Gov. Tommy Thompson (WI) 40:1  May consider running if he wins a big  re-election in '98.  Sen. Don Nickles (OK) 40:1  Would like to run but probably won't.  Sen. John McCain (AZ) 40:1   Wants it but the campaign finance issue hasn't been the rocket he had hoped.  Gov. Tom Ridge (PA) 50:1 No national profile, but a solid political figure with a great resume in a big state. Possible VP shot.  Newt Gingrich 50:1   Wants to be president, but getting there may be  difficult given his poor poll ratings.   William Bennett 50:1  In a quirky way, would be an appealing candidate but probably won't do what's necessary to put a campaign together.   Gov. Pete Wilson (CA) 50:1 Wants i