What really bugged me about the Luntz thing last night was how some of those people said it was too late. They don’t vote for another ten days, how is it too late? Maybe SC is NOT as independent as they claim they are.

If we end up with a steaming pile of Huckabee as our nomineee I will have the evangelicals, MSM, and a weak as hell GOP to thank. What kind of nut-job does the Constitution party have running?

Or maybe you weren’t being snarky. I can’t tell these things very well.

Hmmm….
Why does Iowa have anything to do with the SC primary and the polls in SC?

Methinks you don’t quite grasp what I wrote.

It`s different.

There is on poll that counts, the one cast on primary day. All else is fantasy

.
Iowa proved that!

How many times do the polls have to be wrong before you accept that do not accuratly reflect the will of the people?
There is on poll that counts, the one cast on primary day. All else is fantasy.

Last Time I remember there are 48 more to go.

Bingo! We need to push the 2 most coservative people, Romney/Thompson, and stop letting the MSM lead us around by the nose!

Being President is alittle more different than being a C.E.O. I would assume.

ThePrez on January 11, 2008 at 1:35 PM

The president IS a CEO. That is why a Mitt/Fred ticket makes much more sense. Fred can be Mitt’s rhetorical bulldog and Mitt can run the country through delegation.

Catholicism is at least in theory a hierarchichal church, where the 1:1 thing does not apply.

Karl on January 11, 2008 at 12:51 PM

Incorrect. I am Catholic and a 1:1 relationship with God is the core of our belief.

Christian is a much broader term than evangelical. For example, the latter (as noted above) refers to a type of Protestant. It thus excludes, for example Catholics. And there is a difference, as the Irish will tell you.

For that matter, iirc, Catholicism is at least in theory a hierarchichal church, where the 1:1 thing does not apply. ADAIK, that’s kinda what that whole schism was about with Martin Luther and such.

Again, it’s not my field, so I’ll glad to be corrected.

NellE on January 11, 2008 at 12:25 PM

Probably because ideologically he is only about 33.33% conservative. I asked about governors vs legislators because of election history. Also it will be interesting if there ends up being a semi-precedent made, with a legislator being elected our next president in November.

I just don’t believe it’s too late for anyone yet.

Rogue Traveler on January 11, 2008 at 11:57 AM

Agreed.

Perhaps the reason Fred focused more on Huckabee is that Huck is the most liberal of all of them and Fred finds it the most outrageous that Huck is doing so well? Seems logical to me. I’ve always had the impression that Fred is simply against anything that isn’t conservative, and he’ll point it out when he sees it much like Rush. Huck therefore should be the #1 target for everyone. Huck also probably has the highest percentage of “followers” that could be torn away, because many have chosen him believing him to be conservative because he’s christian and not for what he actually believes. Therefore, telling people what Huck stands for is a great strategy for getting the most votes the quickest. No one is chosing McCain or Romney for their label (ie. Christian).

bburridg on January 11, 2008 at 11:36 AM

Exactly! Fred is trying to SAVE the true conservative Reagan coalition and the contrast between him and Huck is STARK and easily defined. Huck is clearly trying to liberalize the GOP and he must be stopped. Then we get to McCain who is definitely a hawk and we need someone like that in this time of global terror…I think that is why Fred will pound on him last, because Fred gets the Terror thing. Finally, going against Mitt and Rudy is a little more difficult because they keep changing their stances…or continue to become more conservative as the days go by…except “Change” boy Romney.

Fred is the proverbial Tortoise and he will win it when the TRUE CONSERVATIVES stop worrying about “Fire in the Belly” and start focusing on the only candidate that truly represents what this company and THIS PARTY really needs!

Gregor on January 11, 2008 at 12:01 PM

Yes, I got that and should have made that clear. I agree.

As long as they weren’t funded by the ACLU and beholden to them once elected : -)

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

That is a consideration. The ACLU would certainly endorese the first atheist candidate, but there is no question in my mind that most of the crazy positions the ACLU are shunned by most atheists. I guess AP could give us some insight into that, but I don’t expect him to give us his personal beliefs on the subject. It’s too personal.

SECOND LOOK AT AP FOR POTUS?

Ha! Just goofing on ya AP.

I have met a significant amount who think they can decide who does have that 1:1 relationship. Huck is one of them.

csdeven on January 11, 2008 at 11:44 AM

I agree with that. Evangelicals tend to believe they have the answer to everything related to God while the rest of us know nothing.

My point was in response to what appeared to be a suggestion that only Evangelicals believe in a 1:1 relationship with God. To my knowledge, all Christians believe this.

Let’s try not to go overboard with the stereotyping.

I should clarify…..

People who knowingly vote on the basis of religion rather than qualifications are, IMO, zealots.

I just don’t believe it’s too late for anyone yet. Conservatives can’t come up with a winning strategy until we have a clearer view of who is going to last in the primaries.