Unconventional Wisdom on the GOP Nomination

I have a couple of thoughts on the GOP presidential primaries that I think might be "off-beat" enough to actually be somewhat original (I know, it's tough to find anything to say about this presidential race that hasn't already been said).

...They say it's easier to organize voters "against" something than it is to organize them "for" something. But John McCain might not be the only politician to benefit from the "lesser of two evils" theory of political compromise. In fact, it might be a double-edged sword. Here's why: The common wisdom is that McCain is seen as the only candidate capable of beating Hillary, and thus, will attract new Republican voters. Fair enough. But is it also fair to assume that some portion of the conservative base will never support him? And if so, is it possible that some conservative Evangelicals might just be willing to vote for a Mormon (in order to stop McCain)? If so, Gov. Mitt Romney stands to gain ground, too.

...Of course, the other major candidate to watch is VA Senator George Allen. Right now, conventional wisdom says Allen is in trouble. He's facing Jim Webb -- a former Reagan Administration official -- who will, at least, keep Allen busy through November (while the other guys are attending Lincoln Day Dinners in IA and NH). But I believe Allen will win his re-election -- and that this victory may give him more momentum than any of the other candidates. He will have proven he can beat a "moderate" Dem (which may help him if anybody other than Hillary gets the nod). And he will be the fresh-face who isn't "over-exposed" in the early states. In short, the Webb challenge might be the best thing that ever happened to Allen.