Jan. 21 (Bloomberg) -- The Republican Party prides itself on order. So why is its presidential-nominating process bordering on chaos?

One explanation was evident in the candidates' debate in South Carolina on Jan. 10. The six aspirants cited Ronald Reagan 34 times; they mentioned George W. Bush once -- Rudy Giuliani extolling tax cuts and citing ``the Bush program, the Reagan program, the Kennedy program.''

The Republicans are trying to recapture a past that many voters only vaguely recall, while running away from the present. That is challenging for a party that values good organization and heirs-apparent.

``It is tough enough after your party has been in power for eight years,'' says political scientist Stephen Hess. ``But it's really tough when you have a president this unpopular and a party that is unraveling, having a hard time figuring out what it is all about.''

For the first time since Gerald Ford and Reagan battled all the way to the summer convention in 1976, there isn't a clear front-runner after the initial rounds. It will be surprising if John McCain, Mitt Romney and at least one other candidate don't slug it out well into the spring, maybe even summer.

A look at these men and their relationship with the party's governing coalition -- small government, tax-cutting economic conservatives; anti-abortion and anti-gay-rights social conservatives; and hard-headed national-security types - - shows why consensus is so elusive.

Uneasy About McCain

The national-security-first crowd is largely with Senator McCain, who won the South Carolina primary on Saturday, yet even some of these tough-minded ``realists'' worry about his unbridled enthusiasm for the war in Iraq.

Even though he has a consistently conservative voting record on economic and social issues, McCain is distrusted by most leaders of those factions. Cutting taxes and opposing abortion, part of the Holy Grail for these activists, are of secondary concern to the Arizona Republican.

Romney, on paper, should satisfy all three elements of the Republican coalition, as candidates Reagan and Bush did. And he is the central-casting version of what a president should look like.

Yet his Mormon religion remains an issue. He has also changed so many positions that his credibility is minimal, and he doesn't quite connect with ordinary voters. On top of that, the other candidates genuinely resent him.

Petrified by Huckabee

Mike Huckabee, natural and engaging, petrifies the national-security Republicans who view him as a know-nothing. Further, he infuriates economic conservatives because he seems to worry about poor people and doesn't believe tax cuts for the wealthy are a God-given right.

Huckabee also has some pretty wacky views on social issues; he questions the theory of evolution. (``If anybody wants to believe that they are descendants of a primate,'' he said at one debate, ``they are certainly welcome to do it.'')

Then there are Giuliani and Fred Thompson. The most interesting question is which has been the biggest dud in failing to live up to his lofty potential?

Bush aggravates the inherent problems for each of the candidates.

While McCain is the president's strongest supporter on Iraq, he loses few opportunities to assail what he considers the disastrous performance of ex-defense chief Donald Rumsfeld or question Vice President Dick Cheney's value. He still pays a price for his unqualified fealty to Bush a few years ago.

Mitt's Not Bragging

In any other election year, Romney might be able to parade his Harvard MBA credentials; the incumbent president, who holds the same degree from Harvard, makes MBA bragging impossible. In his victory speech following the Jan. 15 Michigan primary, after the obligatory association with Reagan, Romney reached back to President George H.W. Bush, the 41st president, omitting any mention of his son.

Huckabee, with little subtlety, suggests to his evangelical followers that they've been taken for granted for the past eight years. He blasts Bush's foreign policy as ``arrogant.'' When Giuliani is asked about the president, he'll be quick to note he served in the administration -- of Reagan.

These Republicans are hardly the first to try to resurrect a hero of yesteryear; for years the Democrats invoked Franklin Roosevelt. There is little to suggest it helped them much in presidential elections, and it's hard to believe there are many fence-straddling Republican voters, who, thinking of Reagan, are asking, ``Where would the Gipper be?''

Out of Steam

More significant, this reflects the reality that the party's conservative governing coalition has run out of steam. The cohesion that held Republicans together -- anti-communism and tough foreign policy, small government and tax cuts, traditional values -- has become unglued.

During much of the past half-century, the most divisive issues in American politics have plagued the Democrats: civil rights, the Vietnam War, abortion. Today, the schisms are greatest among Republicans: immigration, gay rights, Iraq, and even the size of government. In none of these areas has Bush left a legacy with which his potential successor would wish to associate.

The best guess is that multiple Republicans will engage in hand-to-hand, or delegate-to-delegate, combat through Feb. 5, when more than 20 state primaries are held, and beyond. This struggle is likely to exacerbate the strains within an essentially leaderless party.

Talk to Republican politicians and one of the few optimistic scenarios they can even imagine is a general election pitting McCain against Hillary Clinton. (The 71-year- old McCain against the 46-year-old Barack Obama, some of these same Republicans fear, could be a disaster, with an electorate clamoring for change.)

Come October, the rallying cry for McCain or any other Republican nominee is likely to be, ``Win one more for the Gipper.'' It'll be a rough reprise.

(Albert R. Hunt is the executive editor for Washington at Bloomberg News. The opinions expressed are his own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Albert R. Hunt in Washington at ahunt1@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: January 20, 2008 11:02 EST