If he made the race, Cantor would have distinct operational and political advantages that would bode well for him in a nominating convention. He is known as one of the most prolific fundraisers in the House. He hails from the pivotal Richmond suburbs, which means he can talk to both the southside and Northern Virginia suburbanites. He's a rising star in his early 40s, after just three terms in the House. He is young and fresh just like Mark Warner once was. He's unapologetically conservative, scoring 82 percent on the Club for Growth's RePORK Card, the highest of the House GOP leadership. And he gives as good as he gets, making him an exceptionally tough foe for Warner.

Mark Warner's camp agrees. They polled a Cantor vs. Warner matchup, and hinted that he would be a stronger opponent than either Davis or Gilmore despite what has to be his lower name recognition statewide. But a Warner adviser adds this, "But Cantor isn't getting into this race." Ri-iight. You don't spend hard dollars polling a prospective opponent you don't fear and won't run.

The Warner camp's attempts to talk Cantor out of the race notwithstanding, a Senate run would probably fall outside of Cantor's expected career trajectory. Cantor's colleagues widely expect he'll lead the House some day. When and if he does, it would be the best hope in a generation for unalloyed conservative leadership at the helm of that body. So this is understandably a difficult decision: risk the relatively safe path of leadership in the House, or embark on a riskier path by holding a Senate seat that should rightfully be ours, possibly setting up a future run for governor or a spot on a national ticket?

The lesson that should transcend Eric Cantor is that conservatives must think boldly about recruiting the right candidates to run for office in the first place. We also need to think about why the Democrats clean our clocks when it comes to electing Senators in red states, when the natural conservative majority in the Senate is 60 -- if all we do is win in the states President Bush carried in the dead-heat 2000 election.

It starts by not limiting ourselves to an existing menu of options concocted by the political establishment. In every race we need to identify the ideal candidates both in and out of politics, years in advance if necessary, and work tirelessly to get them to run. It's easier to get elected officials to vote conservative if they're one of us to begin with. Some of conservatism's brightest young leaders came to politics not through working their way up patiently through the ranks, but by making a mark on issues. Think of governor-in-waiting Bobby Jindal running Louisiana's health system at the age of 25, or anti-earmark hero Jeff Flake leading the conservative Goldwater Institute in Arizona.

Rampant careerism and playing it safe gives you Tom Davis and Jim Gilmore, undoubtedly fine men whose brand of politics was desperately needed at one point in their careers, but whose candidacies now serve as little more than empty vessels for party factionalism. The powers that be in Virginia would be wise to stay on the sidelines, and bide their time for a candidate who can begin the process of rebuilding a shaken Republican brand in the Commonwealth.

The criteria for supporting candidates is not: Who can help me even up the score with a fellow Republican? If this is about winning back the majority and not local fiefdoms, it must be: Why not the best?