Is Maverick the only man who can save the GOP from Huckamania?
posted at 12:18 pm on January 4, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
A smart, horrifying post from Rich Lowry makes the case. It’s fitting that this should come from the editor of NR since, although they’d never admit it, part of their motive in endorsing Mitt was surely the fact that he used to be the Only Man Who Can Save the GOP from Huckamania. That’s by the boards now and McCain’s poised to finish him off on Tuesday, so who’s left? Like Lowry says, it’s hard to imagine Fred coming all the way back and Rudy’s off the grid entirely until Florida, by which time the Huckabee express may be barreling at him at full speed.
If Huck surprises in Michigan next week, it’s going to throw every non-evangelical in the party into a panic and looking for the anti-Huck to step up and stop him. Giuliani’s too much of a gamble at this point, especially since he can’t unite non-evangelical social cons, so Maverick’s the default choice. Which brings us to two fascinating possibilities: A Rudy resurgence among conservatives starting January 20 if Huck smites McCain in SC, and a call for Fred to get out and start campaigning for McCain if Huckabee wins Michigan and starts to contend seriously for the nomination.
Stay tuned now for both Huck and McCain to tack right and try to stockpile as many non-evangelicals as they can for the coming battle. In the meantime, this much seems certain: The only guy guaranteed to still be in the race on February 5, i.e. Super Ultra Mega Tuesday, is Giuliani. If it does come down to him versus Huck, with Rudy the only thing standing in the way of Huck’s nomination, that’ll be mighty interesting.
Update: Ah, what does it matter?
Update: Slublog notes McCain’s problems in New Hampshire right now with independents, who are likely to split three ways between him, Obama, and Ron Paul. If Romney squeaks past him there, then his status as the Only Man Who Can Save the GOP from Huckamania is restored and he ends up in a death match with Huck in Michigan.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
Not a fan of Mr. maverick bout would take him over Huckashmuck.
Hilts on January 4, 2008 at 12:20 PM
I started out depressed from last night, and it’s sliding downhill.
Thanks AP
conservnut on January 4, 2008 at 12:22 PM
I don’t know who I like more (dislike less) between McShamnesty and the Huckster. I don’t know who’s slightly better on the important issues.
So, maybe this DOES come down to who they pick as running mates, and again it puts back into play the scenario originally posited by Buchanan, about Thompson endorsing and (hopefully) becoming his VEEP. Would that be enough to allay conservative’s doubts about McCain and amnesty?
Is that even worth it?
This is going to be such a hold-your-nose election, it’s not even funny.
Darksean on January 4, 2008 at 12:25 PM
I think it depends on how well Romney does in NH. Right now, McCain is surging on the back of independents, many of whom might go Dem at the last minute to help finish off Clinton. If that happens, the McCain surge crumbles.
If not, then…Senator McCain, ALL IS FORGIVEN.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 12:29 PM
But if McCain(or Rudy) were to win the nomination they would be stupid not to pick Huckabee for the VP slot. In 2004, Edwards good showing in Iowa vaulted him into the VP slot, the same would happen to Huckabee, who just won Iowa. Neither McCain or Rudy are religious enough by themselves to grab all the evangelical votes that Bush had in 2004 and Huckabee just recaptured. Sorry my friends, there is no getting away from Huckatrain.
Complete7 on January 4, 2008 at 12:29 PM
Huckabee still has no money. I don’t know where it is going to come from. He needs money to continue the race.
What in the heck is Rudy doing? Waiting for Florida is certain doom.
gabriel sutherland on January 4, 2008 at 12:29 PM
IT’s NOT the EVANGELICALS! Was it the black vote that got Obama the win in Iowa?
Media and people who really have no concept of the dynamics of politics and social issues love to paint broad brush strokes to sell and create hysteria.
The concept that ‘oooh in order for Huckabee to be defeated, all Republicans who are not evangelical must band together against him’ is absurd. The idea that the only way you could possibly want Huckabee over this otherwise AWFUL field of candidates is that you are evangelical is ABSURD!
Ah yes, you gotta love the oversimplification for the simpleton populous who can’t figure anything out unless the media and government puts people in nice little boxes.
Who’s fault will it be if Huckabee wins New Hampshire? The rabid stealth ‘evangelical vote’? Stop it with the characterizations already.
ThackerAgency on January 4, 2008 at 12:30 PM
It always come down to the lessor of two evils.
infidel on January 4, 2008 at 12:31 PM
It depends on whether Huckabee wins only Iowa, or can pull off a victory in another state. If he’s an Iowa-only candidate with low numbers in other states, then he won’t be on the ticket. If it’s a fight between he and another candidate for awhile that he eventually loses, then a **/Huckabee ticket is likely.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 12:31 PM
I am a veteren, so it was natural for me to support McCain in 2000 before settling behind Bush after he won the nomination. I became enthusiatic about President Bush after September 11, when he responded strongly in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
In comparison, the things I dislike about McCain, I also dislike about Bush. Bush is soft on protecting the borders, so is McCain. McCain wrote McCain Feingold, but Bush signed it.
The difference is, is that McCain is far more competent militarily than the President and has the ability to actually work with the other party, which by the way, whether we like it or not, we better start doing that soon.
All things considered, the world might be a different place today had we elected McCain in 2000.
I am still a Rudy guy, but I can get behind McCain pretty easily.
Unlike some excitable commenters in other threads, I WOULD NOT vote for any Dem is Huck is nominated, but I also will not vote for Huck. I would sit out 2008.
JayHaw Phrenzie on January 4, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Huckabee has no chance.
No offense to Iowans, but you folks have been suckered by a modern-day P.T. Barnum. As he used to remark to critics:
This guitar-strumming, goofy-grinning, Democrat-in-Republican-clothing convinced a bunch of Hawkeyes that his relationship with G-d was more important in this election than actual conservative principles.
If anything this primary proves to me that Iowa Republicans are seriously out of touch with reality. A president should acknowledge G-d; he shouldn’t ever presume to speak for him/her/it. And that’s what Huckabee does: he appeals to the fear of G-d that many religious people have.
This Jew, however, knows a carnival barker when he sees one. For shame, Iowa Republicans; you have made yourselves look foolish, naive and ignorant all in the course of one evening.
HebrewToYou on January 4, 2008 at 12:32 PM
I think you guys need to really consider backing McCain.
bnelson44 on January 4, 2008 at 12:33 PM
I don’t think very blue New Hampshire independents will be able to resisit voting for Obamat. A chance to propel a black man towards a serious run versus voting for an old stalwart would be too much to resist I am sure.
This help Mitt in my opinion.
SouthernGent on January 4, 2008 at 12:35 PM
MUST USE PREVIEW BUTTON!
Obamat=Obama
SouthernGent on January 4, 2008 at 12:35 PM
Evangelicals? Give me a break! Maybe the TBN-TV evangelist vote (and those people can get their base out better than RP anyday), but not true BA Evangis. Huck is just as transparent to any true Evangelicals as a Clinton is to a breathing human.
Editor on January 4, 2008 at 12:35 PM
thompson will save us all from huckabee
and frankly if my choice is between mccain and huckabee, its the former without even a second thought
Defector01 on January 4, 2008 at 12:36 PM
McCain is a RINO. Backing him would be the political equivalent of sticking a fork into a toaster.
HebrewToYou on January 4, 2008 at 12:36 PM
No, it’s not the only way. If you’re a left-wing Republican, that would be another way.
I say again: more than 80% of his supporters yesterday were evangelical. You think all those people are hot for tuition breaks for illegals and pardons and national smoking bans in the workplace? Don’t kid yourself about why he won.
Allahpundit on January 4, 2008 at 12:37 PM
Why??
It was conventional wisdom the McCain could’nt COME BACK either. Yet another fallacy from the media.
If the all powerful media-ah were to give Fred any support at all, he’d cruise to victory over both McCain and Huck.
I think Fred has a great chance. Remember Bill Clinton didn’t win anything til Georgia!
Ex-tex on January 4, 2008 at 12:37 PM
Yeah, this will be a hold your nose-er. Especially if the Dems dump Her Thighness and go for Obama. Which they seem likely to do, to get the first black president.
I prefer Fred! to Huck, but if Huck tacks right on Economics and Foreign Policy he could beat Obama.
To beat Obama, you need someone upbeat and positive. Fred has had moments of levity, but Huck is more consistent. Rudy and McCain come across fairly angry. And lets be honest, Rudy only exists as the anti-Hillary.
Up until now the Republicans have been gearing up to run against Hillary. They’re gonna have to retool to fight a campaign where just by running against Obama they can be painted as racists. We’ve got a lot of things to be anti, but to win we need to have things to be for.
Iblis on January 4, 2008 at 12:38 PM
Look at the candidate field in the GOP. The ONLY viable conservative running is Fred Thompson and he is hanging on for dear life.
Rudy is a moderate
Huck is a moderate
The only way you can call Mitt a conservative is to ignore his past and believe his election campaign spin.
bnelson44 on January 4, 2008 at 12:39 PM
Let me pay the Huckabee supporters a sincere compliment by saying that for all the religious overtones to Huck’s campaign, I’m thankful that he doesn’t inspire this degree of devotion in you. Good lord.
Allahpundit on January 4, 2008 at 12:40 PM
New England and mostly New Hampshire and Vermont love to think of themselves as independant thinkers who would back either party rather than have ties to any one party. Thats why a socialist can get elected in this area and why candidates who have a independant streak themselves attract voters here.
What many in the GOP find to be McCains major fault (his “Maverick” status) many in this area find to be his most likible feature. They want mavericks in Washington not people who are tied to one party or the other. McCains appeal to independants really boosts him in New Hampshire.
So Huck with his alien (to this area) evangelical veiws wont do well. Neither would Fred as his conservatism will be seen as pandering to the right.
That leaves Mitt vs McCain. Mitt being from the region politically helps as does his stance on issues. But its McCain who really is the type of politician that NH loves and would back.
The problem if Mitt wins is that he doesnt “Sell” in the South. He isnt conservatice enough and again his mormonism will hurt hit vs Huck’s evangelical beleifs. So yes we really need a McCain win to push Mitt out of the way to bring things to South Carolina. Remember SC doesnt like McCain as well and it would force the fight back into comparing Fred vs Guiliani vs Huck. That would be an easer lever pull for them than Mitt vs Huck.
William Amos on January 4, 2008 at 12:40 PM
This is from an e-mail I sent a few days earlier explaining why I am volunteering for the McCain campaign in Florida. I would prefer not to back a RINO, but I don’t see a whole lot of options right now.
I was thinking about the entire field during the drive into work this morning when I surprised myself by settling on McCain. I have been as gleeful as anyone else at HotAir in attacking McCain over shamnesty and his “maaaverick” tendencies. But when I look at the big picture, I see McCain as the only Republican candidate who can:
1) Lead the long war on terror with indisputable authority as Commander in Chief
2) Command the respect of both sides of this very polarized country
3) Work with the few remaining adults in the Democratic Party to get things done following the election
That last item is a key consideration that I haven’t seen discussed yet. If a Republican wins the Presidency again, the moonbat wing of the Democratic party will become even more insane with rage, with all of the corrosive effect that has on their enablers in the general media. All of us feel that this country is tearing itself apart over Red/Blue lines, and this will only get worse if a Republican wins over Hillary or Obama. Such divisiveness helps our enemies. I think McCain is the only guy who can fix that problem.
So I am going to go out and campaign for McCain during the primaries. I’ll support pretty much any Republican besides Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee (a proven foreign-policy amateur in the last few weeks) during the general election. But for now, McCain’s my man.
Anton on January 4, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Rudy is a Moderate.
Huck is one policy away from a Kos endorsement.
JayHaw Phrenzie on January 4, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Huckabees vote for Huck because of his relationship with God.
FredHeads vote for Fred because they think he is God.
JayHaw Phrenzie on January 4, 2008 at 12:43 PM
I would vote for Mitt (or anyone for that matter besides Huckabee) in a heartbeat before I would even consider voting for McCain. I’m a veteran as well and I know this will sound harsh, but I consider McCain to be a disgrace to this country. He has literaly done more to damage America throughtout his life that to help it out. Listen to Rush. McCain is not a conservative and he should not have anyone’s support. Helping Kennedy try to get amnesty for illegal immigrants, McCain-Feingold, Keating 5, Gang of 14, opposing Bush’s tax cuts, questionable mental stability, and on and on and on.
davenp35 on January 4, 2008 at 12:43 PM
I don’t buy this crap for a second. Who voted for him then? Evangelical Christians are the majority bloc among Iowa Republicans. Huckabee led the caucus voting. It wasn’t because of old-school conservatives voting for him!
It’s because churches are telling their congregations to vote for Huckabee! The truth about Huckabee — his tax hikes, his clemencies, his lack of knowledge re: foreign policy, his awful stance on immigration — didn’t ever cross the mind of these so-called Republicans.
Huckabee is an insult to conservatives, Christians and the American people as a whole. He is all that is wrong with modern politics.
HebrewToYou on January 4, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Being dragged kicking and screaming by events is support…kind of.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 12:45 PM
And you’re saying he’s not?
TheSitRep on January 4, 2008 at 12:45 PM
finally for once the Californina gop primary might mean something and McKennedy is not loved here and I dont think the huckster has the bread to be able to play in one of the big ball parks .
he might get by in a aaa park but its about time he stand behind his record and let the ships fall where they may .
Mojack420 on January 4, 2008 at 12:45 PM
So what you’re saying is that you’re pretty happy in the GOP as long as Christians shut up and vote for whoever you say.
I’m not really interested in voting for Huckabee, but if I were and I read most of the conservative blogosphere today, I’d vote for him out of spite. The KosKids have nothing on some of it.
Darin on January 4, 2008 at 12:46 PM
Heretic blasphemer infidel!
There will be no 72 virgins for you.
TheSitRep on January 4, 2008 at 12:46 PM
shipsi mean chips .need to hit the preview button more i guess
Mojack420 on January 4, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Threads like this need the steak tartar. Its like throwing hamburgers to piranhas.
Fred!
infidel on January 4, 2008 at 12:47 PM
This is not only wrong but insulting as well.
FredHeads, such as myself, vote for Fred! because he is the only conservative in the Republican primary who stands a chance of winning. Hunter would count, but he was out before he was ever in.
But to claim that we think Fred! is some deity or even a messiah is ludicrous. He’s just an ideal republican candidate. That is all. The anti-Fred! backlash is a manifestation of people’s dislike for their own candidate of choice.
HebrewToYou on January 4, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Acknowledging that I’m an avowed Romney supporter, this whole conversation confuses me. Why are we scraping the barrel for anti-Hucks when Romney remains in fine shape to fill the role? The GOP candidates are all broke, with the exception of Mitt, who has a bottomless purse. Last night was bad, but he still came in second and only missed 1st because 60% of Iowa caucus-goers are evangelicals. How’s McCain poised to knock him off on Tuesday? The NH RCP average has them neck-and-neck. Romney just doubled McCain’s vote share in Iowa and is now heading home to the greater Boston area, with unlimited checkable deposits, the best ground game, and two debates between now and Tuesday. Huckabee may steal the show in one or both, but the events are typically far more beneficial to Romney than McCain, whose out-of-the-mainstream views on taxes, immigration, campaign finance, etc. pop into sharp relief. A Romney victory in NH is certainly not assured, but if it happens, there’s your perfect anti-Huck candidate on a very feassible trajectory toward the nomination. No need to go scrounging among the RINOs and the second tier just yet.
flip on January 4, 2008 at 12:48 PM
As Fred Thompson get his message out and connect with the American people, I think his support will rocket.
And then we will see the Fredalanche© as I predict.
TheSitRep on January 4, 2008 at 12:48 PM
I think the question should be:
Who can save the GOP from John McCain?
Clark1 on January 4, 2008 at 12:49 PM
While I agree too many Fred backers have been too vocal about his treatment on this blog (most of it very silly at times), as a Fred backer I think its unfair to paint us all as being too ridged in backing Fred. I dont think Fred is God but he certianly is closer to my beliefs than any other Republican presidentual candidate.
And while I dont play identity politics I do fight very hard for what I believe in. And what Fred believes in is what I believe in. And to me that isnt about blindly following someone for who he is but rather standing up for what I believe in as represented by the person who best fits my beliefs in Fred.
William Amos on January 4, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Pardon my bad punctuation etc. I am using Dragon NaturallySpeaking 9.52 blogging here. While it works great in Microsoft Word. It’s not as accurate in the blog window.
TheSitRep on January 4, 2008 at 12:50 PM
If so, kill me. Now, please.
It’s just unfathomable that Republicans would be SO FREAKIN’ STUPID to even consider nominating a guy that has gleefully stabbed them in the back time and time again while playing to his natural base (The NY Times editorial board).
Amnesty over citizenship? Check
Voted against tax cuts? Check
Threw good judicial nominees under the bus for GO14? Check
Wiped a$$ with first amendment (McVain-Feingold)? Check
Buys into global warming hoax? Check
Against harsh interrogation techniques? Check
And Republicans are going to even consider this guy as the nominee???
It’s almost like a battered woman going back to the husband that beats her.
Un.
Freakin.
Believable.
thirteen28 on January 4, 2008 at 12:51 PM
I think the question is, who can save the GOP from Fox news!
TheSitRep on January 4, 2008 at 12:51 PM
Exactly!
davenp35 on January 4, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Because Romney’s an awful candidate whom no one except Hewitt really likes and he’s already lost to a guy with no money. Early wins have an inertia all their own, so he’s bound to suffer for this in NH. Although whether he suffers more than McCain does vis-a-vis independents defecting is a good question.
If Mitt wins and recaptures the anti-Huck role, fine. But after having seen him fail in Iowa and there being no reason to think he won’t fail again in SC, he’s not my first choice for that part.
Allahpundit on January 4, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Christians need not shut up. They simply need to wise up.
Religion has no place in this primary. It’s a non-issue. A true conservative understands that religion relationships are personal ones, not to be shared with the world at large. That’s why Huck is such a disgusting politician. He talks about G-d like they are best friends. He appeals to some higher authority that has absolutely no place in politics.
Religion is a great thing. Christians are great people. But Huckabee is turning religion into a party platform and turning christians into partisan hacks. That is wrong on SO many levels. Vote based on you own decisions, not those of your religious leaders.
HebrewToYou on January 4, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Mitt and McCain are very, very close politically. Mitt’s record on the social issues is liberal compared to McCain.
See:
http://www.issues2000.org/John_McCain.htm
http://www.issues2000.org/Mitt_Romney.htm
bnelson44 on January 4, 2008 at 12:53 PM
So far, Thompson supporters are the only ones I’ve seen who are “my guy or no one” in this race. That seems a bit rigid to me.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Geez, when you put it that way….
Ick.
Darksean on January 4, 2008 at 12:53 PM
UMMM- what??
THIS is your response to my post??
Dude, take yer meds. Yer not makin’ sense anymore.
Ex-tex on January 4, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Because this election isnt about money else Ron Paul would be our nominee. Its about backing our beliefs.
William Amos on January 4, 2008 at 12:54 PM
To answer the post’s question: No.
McCain didn’t go anywhere in the last two elections, he won’t end up getting anywhere here. He only was and is pulling big because the drive-by’s like him and prop him up.
Weebork on January 4, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Oh, I think you got my point. Your Fred worship is embarrassing.
Allahpundit on January 4, 2008 at 12:54 PM
davenp35 on January 4, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Probably should point out that Mitt spent more in Iowa than anyone else. His message simply isn’t resonating with voters.
bnelson44 on January 4, 2008 at 12:56 PM
The reason why your logic is wrong is that Blacks only make up 4% of the Iowa vote, so of course Obama didn’t win because of the Black vote.
But the report is that 60% of Republican Iowa caucus goers identified themselves as Evangelical.
You’re right, if Huckabee wins NH, then I’ll be totally wrong. But Huckabee ain’t winning NH.
asc85 on January 4, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Not really I certainly havent followed this formula. I have stated in order of prefernce who Id back It was Fred first, Then Hunter, Then Guiliani, then McCain then Mitt then Huck.
My vote slides down that scale. I will even vote for Huck if he is the nominee but I hope it doesnt come to that.
William Amos on January 4, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Really. How many of you have ever been to Iowa? How many of you have ever been in a *church* in Iowa? Let me give you a tip…it’s not NEARLY as conservative as you’d like to believe. I was just there over the holidays, and the mass-market mainline liberal Christian churches are the majority, especially in the big cities. You’re putting a lot of stock in exit polls that ask people if they’re “evangelical” when I, most of you, and the vast majority of those who study such things can’t even come to an agreement on what that word means any more.
Darin on January 4, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Slublog, that’s because there is no realistic conservative choice aside from Fred!
If Lieberman ran as a Republican in the primary I’d vote for him. I’m not voting for Fred! because he’s awesome. I’m voting for him because what other choice do real conservatives have?
HebrewToYou on January 4, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Iowa voters, anyway. He’ll probably win NH, but the real test is SC. If he can win SC, he’s got legs. If not, he’s done no matter how much money is in the bank.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 12:57 PM
McCain is NO Maverick. He is nothing but a left wing commie idiot! That’s why the media LOVES McCain!
Confederate on January 4, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Possibly not just Hewitt though. As noted in the headlines yesterday, per Rasmussen, more Republicans like Mitt than any other candidate.
flip on January 4, 2008 at 12:58 PM
And there’s the rigidity at work again. Is someone who chooses to support another candidate not a “real conservative” in your estimation?
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 12:59 PM
They prefer him to the rest of the field, yes. “Like,” though? Not sure about that.
Allahpundit on January 4, 2008 at 12:59 PM
And 45% of the 60% voted for Huck.
Probably not, but he could very well win Michigan
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/mi/michigan_republican_primary-237.html
bnelson44 on January 4, 2008 at 12:59 PM
By that logic, American voters don’t like any of the candidates who came in AFTER Mitt either. So everyone is out but Huckabee. Get real! RDS appearantly is not a treatable disorder.
davenp35 on January 4, 2008 at 1:00 PM
There may be trouble for Mitt is South Carolina.
KelliD on January 4, 2008 at 1:02 PM
It will be interesting times, and I just avoided having to ask the “Is conservatism dead?” question last night. I just don’t see McCain getting any real traction outside of New Hampshire (specifically, South Carolina where his campaign died in 2000), and I can easily see Romney slipping to 3rd or even 4th there and really earning the toe tag of “glass jaw” because NH is known for electing Nuts (see Buchanan, Patrick).
The most-likely scenario I see is a Huck v Rudi final beginning in Florida. That will trigger the final conservative split. Never mind that both Giuliani and Huckabee at best offer scraps of conservatism over which the masses can fight. Both halves of the remaining portion of the Grand Coalition (national security and religious; the small-governmental, fiscal and secular-social will have all disappeared) will be fought over like the last bone at the dog pound.
steveegg on January 4, 2008 at 1:02 PM
OK, I’ll get real. He is spending millions more than McCain in NH and he’s tanking:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_primary-193.html
bnelson44 on January 4, 2008 at 1:02 PM
McCain’s no idiot; you’re a moron.
Big S on January 4, 2008 at 1:03 PM
Fair enough. I just figure if we’re getting desperate for a viable anti-Huckabee candidate now that Huckabee won Iowa, some good places to look would be 1) the Iowa runner-up, 2) the highest-polling candidate, 3) the best-funded candidate. Turns out all three are the same man.
flip on January 4, 2008 at 1:04 PM
The Rasmussen national numbers have already been brought up. Your argument doesn’t hold…at all.
davenp35 on January 4, 2008 at 1:05 PM
Wait until the Obama effect kicks in with the independents. I think that will swing the race in the next week.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 1:05 PM
Check todays numbers
Giuliani 14%
Huckabee 16%
Thompson 13%
Romney 17%
McCain 18%
William Amos on January 4, 2008 at 1:05 PM
So where would you rate Huckabee then?
SouthernDem on January 4, 2008 at 1:05 PM
I think you guys need to really consider backing McCain.
=====
Ah, no. As in NEVER EVER EVER. I’ll sit it out before McCain or Huck ever get my vote.
Could “hold my nose” on Rudee (mainly cause I think he’d be tough on crime, and hopefully appoint judges who will be fair.) Also, National SEcurity.
Could vote for Mitt, my fav is Fred.
stenwin77 on January 4, 2008 at 1:06 PM
There is no Ronald Reagan out there, not even a Tom Dewey. There are a bunch of guys who have only one hope. That is to be the antiHillary or just maybe the antiBarack. Guiliani has a rotten personality and that will sink him. Huckabee is a dummy, that will sink him. McCain is a war hero but old now and on most big issues, his views are like Chucky Schumer. Mitt Romney is John Kerry. The only difference is that Mitt has all the money in the Romney household while Kerry is totally dependent on Theresa. Both men said they were hunters. Romney aimed at varmints while Kerry aimed at nonexistent ducks in Ohio. There is only man who can ride in and save us from liberalism (and he is kind of liberal on some issues himself but otherwise the best candidate by a long shot). I refer to Big Arnie, who saved California from oblivion. Yes there is a slight problem with his running for president but he did in a movie with Stallone and Snipes. So maybe its time for an emergency constitutional convention. Big Arnie is the Man.
Larraby on January 4, 2008 at 1:06 PM
Wow. The race can’t get much tighter than that, can it? Wow again.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 1:06 PM
No.
It’s the candidate they support that’s not a real conservative. And shame on them for not waking up and realizing that. If you want a not-so-liberal Democrat, vote for Mike Gravel. If you want an actual Republican, and not some carnival barker, amnesty supporter or Massachusets liberal, then vote Fred!
It’s quite simple.
HebrewToYou on January 4, 2008 at 1:07 PM
I still don’t get how some of you could hold your noses for Rudy but McCain is out of the question.
SouthernDem on January 4, 2008 at 1:07 PM
That’s where yer wrong (on two levels) I don’t worship Fred. And I don’t think I’ve embarrassed myself at all. You- Allah- on the other hand…
I am fighting as hard as I can for Fred. I’m old enough that THIS IS NO GAME to me. This is about my beloved country
and who’s gonna lead it. There is ONLY ONE CHOICE for me and it’s Fred. I think he’s the smartest guy in the race. I think his 17 minute video is A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF HOW I WANT MY PRESIDENT TO USE THE BULLY PULPIT. He shares my conservative views.
I used to trust you and Michelle but I don’t anymore. I think you are both sellouts to the Romney campaign and after the leadership you showed over Shamnesty I am ashamed for you. So WHAT you gonna do now??? SUPPORT McCAIN??
No thanks- I’m stickin’ with Fred. By the way- I worship the Lord, My GOD.
Ex-tex on January 4, 2008 at 1:07 PM
Please note: THE MEDIA AND THE ELITE, WALL STREET CROWD ARE PUSHING FOR ANYONE WHO WILL PASS AMNESTY.
THEY WILL STOP AT NOTHING. WE THE PEOPLE HAVE THE POWER ! (I think.)
stenwin77 on January 4, 2008 at 1:08 PM
Obama will definately affect the race, and yes I can see Independents swinging to Obama. There will probably also be an “electability” swing next week because of Iowa as well and that could benefit McCain.
bnelson44 on January 4, 2008 at 1:08 PM
I love Arnold. He signed my engineering degree from UC Santa Cruz. But he is a TERRIBLE example of a conservative. He’s a California Republican, which is what tends to work well for governing that state. He is not what the GOP needs.
HebrewToYou on January 4, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Eh tex I havent seen Michelle or Bryan or Allah endorse anyone. They equally have attacked all the candidates.
Defend Fred by backing him rather than attacking others for not backing him. Fred can sell himself.
William Amos on January 4, 2008 at 1:12 PM
Personally, I’m a lot less worried about the Gang of 14 or any other past event than I am about the little orgasms of self-approval that most Americans have been conditioned to experience whenever they see Barack Obama receiving support and adulation. Add to them the reflexive positive response virtually all liberals and many conservatives experience when Obama intones his usual string of empty platitudes about coming together and so on and so on.
The guy will have to be destroyed on issues that matter to real people. Hillary probably can’t do it because she agrees with him overall, and voters concerned about staying on offense in the war on terror aren’t, to say the least, voting in large numbers in Democratic primaries. McCain may be the only candidate with the credibility to put Obama on the defensive, to face him down in a debate and explain, for instance, just how disastrous Democratic policies of retreat and surrender would have been if adopted last year. He also has the potential to raid the middle of the electorate – which will be essential since an Obama candidacy could be expected, if not vigorously opposed, to score in traditional Republican constituencies. At the very least, the Republican candidate needs to dissect the financial and economic impact of Obama’s far left liberal policies and plans.
Otherwise, you’re looking at united liberal government under a charismatic, even messianic figure, supported by the mass media which would have to strain mightily to get over its favorable biases, and would likely fail. With major additional sections of the economy semi-permanently federalized; a new generation of liberal Supreme Court justices; and key voting blocs, including new ones, semi-permanently attached to the Democratic coalition, it might be decades before a conservative movement came up for air again.
Maybe McCain, or whoever, needs to select a woman as his VP.
Hillary, come back! All is forgiven! (Until November!)
CK MacLeod on January 4, 2008 at 1:13 PM
The problem is, the voters that are going to swing are going to be independents. McCain’s fundamental problem is that in states with open primaries, he does well. Among GOP voters, though? Not so well.
McCain has a tough road this week. He’s got to be enough of the Maverick to keep independents, but also prove he’s learned from his Maverick ways and prove his conservative/GOP bona fides.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 1:16 PM
You know what? THAT is a great idea. So I’m gonna go back and get my first post and Allah’s response.:
ME:
AND NOW ALLAH’S RESPONSE:
So William- if you could be so kind as to point out exactly WHAT it is in my post that upset Allah. I’d appreciate it.
Because I really don’t know what exactly he found so embarrassin’???
Ex-tex on January 4, 2008 at 1:19 PM
Yeah, I used “prove” twice in the same sentence. Writing about The Maverick™ just brings out my inner rebel.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 1:19 PM
From one “Fredhead” to another… you’re not doing us any favors with stuff like this, duder. Suggesting that AP and Michelle have sold out to the Romney campaign is absurd- you don’t remember all the critical posts about the whole MLK march thing? More than a couple Mitt backers have alleged an anti-Mitt bias.
Fred is my guy, and I’m opposed to Romney but let’s not pretend that Fred doesn’t bear some responsibility for his standings. Even if there does seem to be some media and pundit bias against him, the fact is that he lacks a strong and effective campaign machine and it’s hurting him.
Hollowpoint on January 4, 2008 at 1:20 PM
.
Both quite true.
Ya gotta admit, the MSM has way too much power in these things.
Just 7 days of positive Fred news, real talk on all the issues, and FRED! WOULD be the leader. PERIOD.
shooter on January 4, 2008 at 1:20 PM
Not when the media lies about him ALL THE TIME. We have AP linking to Politico articles that have absolutely no relationship with the truth. We have Fox News refusing to add Fred! to any poll they run. And we have major Iowa newspapers pretty much ignoring all the rather bold statements Fred! has made.
It’s disgusting to see how anti-Fred! the media is. THAT is why Fredheads are so vocal about defending him on blogs. Nobody else in a position of even remote power is willing to do it. Allah Pundit thrives on being the anti-Fred. And good for him for doing so. It only makes me believe more firmly in Fred’s eventual success.
HebrewToYou on January 4, 2008 at 1:20 PM
That’s about where I’m at. Would love to see Fred win, but I just don’t see it happening. I’m not a huge fan of Mitt, but I could accept him, and would find him preferable to any democrat. Rudy … mmmm, even less enthusiasm than I have for Mitt, but good enough compared to any Democrat.
Mitt or Rudy is compromise enough for me. Asking me to go farther than that and accept Mcvain or Huckster is too much. If someone other than Hillary is the nominee for the dems, a Republican ticket led by McVain or Huck will make the decision to go fishing (or 3rd party/write-in) on election day an easy one.
thirteen28 on January 4, 2008 at 1:21 PM
Yes. It’s called white guilt. (Although I do believe they’ve seen minorities on TV both in Iowa and NH.)
Make that a gay Asian woman or tranny. Doesn’t that trump a black or a woman?
JiangxiDad on January 4, 2008 at 1:23 PM
Finally, some common sense!
davenp35 on January 4, 2008 at 1:24 PM
You’re right. I’m sorry AND properly chastened.
Positive only from me from here on in.
How’s about you Allah?
Ex-tex on January 4, 2008 at 1:26 PM
That is if he is expected to be the Republican nominee. There is also the chance that Rudy’s strategy will work.
bnelson44 on January 4, 2008 at 1:30 PM
don’t count on it…
I think Allah gets paid bonus $ on 100+ threads.
shooter on January 4, 2008 at 1:30 PM
“Maverick” is one thing to consider. But McCain is just a RHINO, and besmirches the better inference of the term “maverick”.
As far as “maverick” is concerned, there are those critical of a Fred Thompson position to maintain conservative principles in Senate committee though his fellow party members wimped out in a Lott deal.
Perhaps McCain’s popularity back East is due to his blood-brother alliance with Ted Kennedy.
maverick muse on January 4, 2008 at 1:33 PM
No, but again, you cant redefine conservatism. You cant be conservative on one thing and moderate or liberal on others and call yourself a conservative. Like Rush says:
Rush just said:
Just like there are Democrats and Liberals there are Republicans and Conservatives. On issues, I think Fred is the only true conservative. I will vote for Mitt or McCain or Rudy if thats what it comes down to. But I want an across the board conservative, not a conservative that attempts to redefine the movement. When the republican party runs on conservatism, we win in landslides.
broker1 on January 4, 2008 at 1:33 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »