Can you summarize what the problem is here? I don’t have time to go through that entire thread to try to figure it out.

The Opinionator on January 6, 2008 at 2:15 PM

I could not agree more.

Mojave Mark on January 6, 2008 at 11:27 AM How will he do in MI? csdeven on January 6, 2008 at 12:33 PM

I haven’t gotten up to speed in how the polling is going there in MI. To be a contender, though, Fred needs a number one showing somewhere. If he doesn’t get it at least in the Southern Primaries it’s hasta la vista for my boy.

I could see us going to convention without a nominee and that would be exciting. All this fighting is good for the Republicans. It will sharpen whoever is our nominee.

I think Hunter and Steele are more likely VP choices.

Buy Danish on January 6, 2008 at 11:55 AM

Oh Lordy, please let it be someone without some gosh awful skeleton in the closet!

Mojave Mark on January 6, 2008 at 11:27 AM

How will he do in MI?

I don’t think Fred would want to be VP. He’s not in the race to pad his resume.
Mojave Mark on January 6, 2008 at 11:27 AM

Fred doesn’t seem to be in the race to win either, but I digress.

Romney is not a likely VP contender. For McCain? Huck? No way. It’s more likely that Giuliani could get a VP spot if Huck were the nominee to fill out his hopelessly lacking resume’, but that would anger the evangelicals who think Rudy is a heathen.

I think Hunter and Steele are more likely VP choices.

I think the Republicans should use the VP slot to groom someone for a future election. We get a LOT of our presidents from the VP position. This would rule out a “dead-ender” like a Chaney. Romney, Giuliani, and the Huckster all fit the demographic just fine. Fred and McCain are too old and eventually the health care providers that let Paul slip away will find him and get him back.

So, Fred has a third place and a second place (Wyoming) now. He won’t do well in N.H. but then we head down South. Hmm.

The point I’m trying to make is that a prediction that a candidate will drop out is not a dirty trick, and the idea that that one vague paragraph from Novak had some impact on Iowa voters a huge stretch.

Buy Danish on January 6, 2008 at 10:47 AM

Agreed.

csdeven on January 6, 2008 at 10:03 AM

You’re probably right. I made my prediction awhile :-) McCain needs someone more youthful than Fred on his ticket anyway.

The point I’m trying to make is that a prediction that a candidate will drop out is not a dirty trick, and the idea that that one vague paragraph from Novak had some impact on Iowa voters a huge stretch.

I’ve already predicted that it will be a McCain/Thompson ticket.

IMO, I find that highly unlikely in light of Fred’s slam on McCain concerning amnesty. He said McCain supported amnesty and I don’t see Fred sacrificing his stated policy positions just to be the VP. Remember, Fred never wanted this and if he can’t do some things that only a president can do, he wont change just to do some things a VP can do.

It wouldn’t have taken much for him to have a public meltdown, and NH needs to see it.

doriangrey on January 6, 2008 at 2:23 AM

If desire was all it took every candidate would stay in until the convention. But unfortunately for the candidates that don’t resonate with the electorate and can’t raise money, it isn’t a matter of desire, it’s a matter of their HAVING to drop out because they are out of money. This is where Fred is. He can garner all the weak seconds and thirds all he wants, but people wont send him enough money to continue.

The very fact that Lindsey Graham is throwing his support behind McCain is a turn-off. They both lost all my respect during the amnesty bill debacle. I found McCain to be old, angry and weird, too.

I just can’t trust Huckabee, in spite of of the fact that he’s a Christian. Giuliani is entirely too liberal and though I like Thompson, he doesn’t seem to be fighting hard to win. Thus far, the only one who is appealing to me is Mitt Romney.

FloatingRock on January 6, 2008 at 2:42 AM

That Buchanan story is nothing but a pundit’s prediction of what will happen based on how the horse race was shaking out!

I could have made the same prediction – Maybe WND should hire me! I’ve already predicted that it will be a McCain/Thompson ticket. I think I’ll brush up my resume’ and put it in the mail to Joseph Farah :-)

If Mitt put it out it’s a nasty trick. But it could just be Novak’s spaghetti/wall.

Spirit of 1776 on January 6, 2008 at 2:29 AM

Novak doesn’t seem to have much to go on here. What the heck does “in part” mean? Anyone, including anyone of us, could speculate that Fred was going to drop out and endorse McCain.

Did someone make anonymous phone calls, or was there conversation where speculation was misconstrued as some sort of inside knowledge? We don’t know what happened, and for all we know this could be a phony story dreamed up by another campaign to make Romney look like a dirty trickster.

I think it’s unlikely the Romney did this since there was not much of a motive. Fred was not first and foremost in the Romney campaign’s list of priorities, and if anything Fred could take votes away from McCain at this point so it would be to the Romney campaign’s advantage to have him stay in the race through NH.

I also don’t think this hurt Fred in Iowa because the fight was between Huckabee and Mitt and Fred was never in serious contention. For it to have made any difference, caucus voters who had planned to vote for Fred would have had to have heard this very vague rumor that was hardly a mainstream news story and then switched sides at the last minute. Hard to believe that happened.

I don’t know anything about Buchanan…

Buy Danish on January 6, 2008 at 2:16 AM

Here’s the original HA post.

I also don’t have a clue as to what Novak means by “in part”.

I could only speculate.

doriangrey on January 6, 2008 at 2:32 AM

Yeah, you said that to me the other day. I think you might be right. Either way, I’m not going to hold Mitt accountable until I see something more than Novak’s column.

If Mitt put it out it’s a nasty trick. But it could just be Novak’s spaghetti/wall.

Spirit of 1776 on January 6, 2008 at 2:29 AM

Personally I doubt it was team Romney, seems more like a Clinton machine tactic to me. But regardless of whomever is responsible it was a dirty trick designed to hurt Fred in Iowa.

What happens if Fred does withdraw at some point and endorses McCain? Is it still a dirty trick at that point or just reasoned conjecture?

If Mitt put it out it’s a nasty trick. But it could just be Novak’s spaghetti/wall.

Uh huh. Morris has been pushing Huckabee with nearly as much enthusiasm as Hewitt has for Mitt, so Morris was objectively reporting his assessment of the issue.

See the difference?

Buy Danish on January 6, 2008 at 2:07 AM

You misunderstood me, I was only referring to Hewitt, not that Dick.

I already did on an earlier thread. I don’t think it helps him much because Mitt got 8 and Fred got 2.

csdeven on January 6, 2008 at 2:19 AM

3, thank you very much. And until a nominee is chosen coming in second and third is a good reason to stay in the race.

What happens if Fred does withdraw at some point and endorses McCain? Is it still a dirty trick at that point or just reasoned conjecture?

Buy Danish on January 6, 2008 at 2:16 AM

Fred came in second in Wyoming today. If Mitt’s campaign put it out it was a dirty trick, not reasoned conjecture. At some point all of the candidate except whoever gets the nomination are going to drop out and endorse someone else.