Contact The Editor
Articles By This Author
"Oh, come on," you're inclined to respond. "It's not that much of a problem. After all, Donald Trump and Ben Carson aren't really the leading GOP presidential candidates, are they?"
Yes, they are. Donald Trump is averaging about 30 percent in national polls and has been rising steadily since announcing his candidacy. Ben Carson started to move into double digits a month ago and is now at 20 percent. No one else is above single digits. In fact, if you take a look at the Real Clear Politics averages, you'll find none of the others is above 7.8 percent. The ones who have briefly visited the land of double digits have since fallen back. No one has shown sustained momentum.
"Well," you're tempted to retort, "why should we believe that neither Trump nor Carson is qualified to be president?"
Did you watch the debate? Neither Trump nor Carson has much of a grasp of the issues. Neither has a demonstrated ability to govern. Trump is certainly the less qualified of the two, a self-regarding blowhard who's not much of a conservative to boot, who is not now and will never be qualified to be president.
Carson is a Christian gentleman and a genuine conservative. But he's not yet prepared to be president, and he'd have to show an awful lot of growth to be ready a year from now. What's more, for either Trump or Carson to win the general election, voters would have to conclude that he is so extraordinary a figure that for the first time in American history, they would send a man to the White House who had neither held elective office nor served as a general officer or cabinet officer.
"But, hey," you might say, "it's early. One of the other candidates might hit his stride. That much-heralded Republican 'deep bench' might yet produce one or two or three major-league starters."
It could happen. But ask yourself which of the candidates you're more impressed with today, after months of campaigning, than you were back when they were warming up in the bullpen. There is one: Carly Fiorina. It will be great if she continues to perform as well as she has so far. All the other potential rookies-of-the-year have been either disappointing or remain merely promising. Of course that could change. One or two of them may yet shine.
So one hopes for the best. But let's be honest. It's all a bit worrisome. It was conventional wisdom a year ago that this Republican field of 2016 was going to be infinitely superior to that of 2012, and for that matter to that of 2008. That now seems less certain. Is Jeb Bush really a stronger establishment-type candidate than Mitt Romney? Are the first-term senators as exciting when articulating their visions as one had anticipated? Are the second-term governors as compelling when describing their achievements in office as one had imagined?
And of course everyone agrees it's too late for someone else to enter the race. We suppose that's right. Or is it?
The good news is the Democrats are probably in worse shape than the Republicans. There's no good reason either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders should be our next president, and it's very likely that belief is shared by a majority of Americans. The likeliest late entrants into the Democratic field-one or more of the septuagenarian group of Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and John Kerry-don't exactly inspire either.
So it's not yet time to panic. On the other hand, if in another six weeks or so we still have a two-man race for the Republican nomination between two men neither of whom can win the presidency, panic won't be a bad idea. Halloween's a good time to get scared.
Comment by clicking here.
William Kristol is editor of The Weekly Standard, which, together with Fred Barnes and John Podhoretz, he founded in 1995. Kristol regularly appears on Fox News Sunday and on the Fox News Channel.
