Although these four veteran conservative activists range over the whole political

landscape--from the imperative for Reagan to run a national campaign rather than one focused on electoral votes, to the wiliness of Jimmy Carter as a political campaigner--it is particularly illuminating to hear them on the title question. PJB: "I see your argument very clearly. It's an argument that's been made against the Ford idea, which is that it is sort of going back to the past, and Reagan represents a clear break, something new.... Whom would you list if you had to list the four or five that Paul mentioned?" WFB: "... It seems to me that Bush is, in virtue of a kind of earned seniority, the obvious candidate, even as Kefauver was the obvious candidate in 1956 to go with Stevenson." PJB: "The Stover of Yale, huh?" WFB: "Well, there is that, yes." PJB: "He has done well, he has a certain claim, and he's got a certain support that Reagan doesn't have." WFB: "That's right.... One of the things that offended people most in San Francisco in 1964 was when Goldwater turned to Bill Miller.... It was felt to be a kind of a defi

hurled in the face of everybody else, saying, 'We can do it all by ourselves.' "