Romney wins CPAC straw poll

posted at 7:55 pm on February 9, 2008 by Michelle

Nope. John McCain is not yet The Uniter:

Former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney narrowly beat John McCain, 35 to 34 percent, in a straw poll of conservative political activists gathered Saturday in Washington — a vote that is viewed as a barometer of support from that major GOP voting bloc.

The announcement of Romney’s win was greeted by cheers from the crowd at the Conservative Political Action Conference. McCain is the frontrunner for the Republican nomination.

Roughly three-quarters of the votes in the three-day CPAC 2008 straw poll were cast before Mitt Romney dropped out of the presidential race, and one-quarter after his withdrawal.

In votes cast before Romney left the race, he beat McCain 44 to 27 percent. Among votes gathered after Romney’s withdrawal, McCain led Romney 37 to 32 percent.

Mike Huckabee received 12 percent of the vote in the straw poll overall, and Ron Paul received 10 percent. Those results were virtually unchanged among just those votes taken after Romney’s withdrawal.

Thirty-one percent said that if John McCain were the GOP presidential nominee, they would either vote for someone else, or not vote at all.

Tags: , , ,

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

All this talk of standing on core principles is invalidated when your “principles” enable the victory of socialism. Like I said, losing is losing…..you may see a McCain defeat as your “moral victory”, but it’s really just a victory for the leftist candidate, whether it be BHO or HRC.

It’s hard for me to believe that some people can’t see that.

Priscilla on February 10, 2008 at 1:37 AM

Ya right, no sense in letting your principles get in the way of victory. I believe it’s that kind of thinking that tore our GOP apart in the fist place.
McRINO cannot win this election regardless of what you believe. The country is screaming for change and the RNC gives it’s support to a crusty old RINO that hasn’t changed his mind about anything in 20 years. He’s a I’m right, everybody else is wrong, screw you candidate from hell.
That’s a winner, ya right.

leanright on February 10, 2008 at 8:49 AM

I like Mitt Romney and believe that he would govern conservatively. However, he has “suspended” his campaign.

The real threat to a Republican victory at this point would be if Romney “resumed” his campaign. In a three man race, McCain wins the nomination and we lose the general election. In a two man race, Huckabee wins the nomination and we win the general election.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 9:27 AM

Al-Ozarka on February 10, 2008 at 8:27 AM

If McCain v. Hillary/Obama is a route…..
Huckabee v. Hillary/Obama is a landslide.

Huck is a novelty act, a plaything for Colbert and the entertainment media. Up against their true heroes, Huck will be exposed for the televangelist he is. Huck is at the 14:30 mark and he is doing his damn best to milk it. It’s touching to see the true believers stand in with him. He has no form or substance. He posited trivial and euphemistic positions at the debates. He doesn’t even carry all evangelicals. He might carry some any-but-McCain votes, but this one trick pony is headed for the glue factory.

Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 9:38 AM

Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 9:38 AM

Huck defeated the Clinton/Democratic attack machine not once, not twice, not 3 times, but 4 times in Arkansas. He would beat Hillary/Obama or Obama/Edwards in November.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 9:46 AM

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 9:27 AM

If Huck wins the nomination: he might want all “his” churches that he shook down to get their paperwork in order. The MSM will go scorched earth on him and start checking tax-exempt issues. Huck has been flying under the radar. Once they light up his plane, it’s going to come down quickly. Romney illustrated differences and issues with Huck and McCain. The MSM doesn’t debate, they assassinate.

Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 9:49 AM

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 9:46 AM

He won’t be in Arkansas any more Toto.

Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 9:50 AM

I am by no means a McCain supporter. I ‘m still not sure I can even give him my vote, But those here that think Huck would be better, really need to take a look at his record. On Amnesty, for instance, not only did he propose college scholarships for illegals,but we also have a Mexican embassy in down town Little Rock. Guess who foots the bill for not only the rent but expenses of that building. The taxpayers do. the Mexican government does chip in. Their side of the cost is a whopping $1 a month. I know what he he saying about the issue now, but you have to look deeper into his record to find the real answers. Like I said early, I am not a McCain supporter but at least I know where he stands and can fight him on the issues I disagree with. I can’t say the same for Huck.

modin5540 on February 10, 2008 at 10:16 AM

Huckabee is not a serious general election candidate.

McCain is in serious trouble.

My big question is: Why is this not on any MSM headlines? All I read was “McCain greeted warmly at CPAC!”

The fix is in folks.

BadBrad on February 10, 2008 at 10:28 AM

My big question is: Why is this not on any MSM headlines? All I read was “McCain greeted warmly at CPAC!”

The fix is in folks.

BadBrad on February 10, 2008 at 10:28 AM

The MSM craves a showdown between McCain, who represents the Washington establishment, and the Messiah, who carries no baggage. They don’t want Huckster, because in spite of his Arkansas baggage, he doesn’t present the insider image. Obama will smoke then both, but the McCain-Obama matchup hurts the GOP worse.

a capella on February 10, 2008 at 10:36 AM

The party better get together because if Clunton/Obama win and we get two or three liberal judges on the Supeme Court not to mention all the lower court spots the right will be blamed for years and years and may not be able to be fixed in some of our life times if ever.

KBird on February 10, 2008 at 10:45 AM

if Clunton/Obama win and we get two or three liberal judges on the Supeme Court not to mention all the lower court spots the right will be blamed for years and years and may not be able to be fixed in some of our life times if ever.

You are absolutely right. And the suicidal purists don’t get it. They’re all about going down with the ship….and we’re all on the ship, by the way, although they don’t seem to care about that. They’ll pound their fists, stamp their feet and scream into the wind about how righteous and pure they are , but they won’t try to keep the ship from going down.

Priscilla on February 10, 2008 at 11:16 AM

Priscilla, maybe the kids are all right after all…they may have succeeded in talking one tantrum thrower back off the window ledge:

A GULITY PLEASURE DIMINISHED
I enjoy listening to Ann Coulter, partly because I usually agree with 80 to 90 percent of what she says and partly because of the guilty pleasure I get from much of the other 10 to 20 percent. However, watching the replay of her speech explaining to the Young America’s Foundation why Hillary Clinton is preferable to John McCain, I found that those percentages were reversed. Moreover, though I did take guilty pleasure from her attacks on McCain, it became increasingly difficult fully to enjoy the spectacle of Coulter attempting to persuade college-age conservatives that a McCain defeat at the hands of Clinton would be just fine.

Fortunately, judging by the questions, at least some of the college-age conservatives were skeptical. Indeed, Coulter seemed to be backing off by the end of the Q and A session — even to the point of allowing for the possibility of being persuaded to prefer McCain — as it became increasingly evident that her position is untenable.

For example, in response to a question about Iraq, Coulter responded that McCain wants to close Gitmo and end waterboarding. But Clinton wants to close Gitmo, end waterboarding and, more likely than not, get out of Iraq without having won. McCain wants to close Gitmo, end waterboarding, and win in Iraq. How is that even a close call for Coulter?

Similarly, when asked about judges Coulter reminded the audience that McCain was part of the Gang of 14, and added that there was no assurance McCain would appoint judges like John Roberts (whose nomination Coulter was no fan of at the time) and Samuel Alito. But McCain voted in favor of Roberts and Alito, and (though I disagree with the Gang of 14) supported restricting filibusters of Bush nominees to exceptional cases. Clinton voted against Roberts and Alito, and thought there should be no restrictions on filibusters of their nominations and the nominations of like-minded appellate court judges. Again, this seems like a no-brainer for conservatives.

I also noticed that Coulter frequently praised Mitt Romney yesterday. But, if I recall correctly, when she spoke at the National Journalism Center last fall, Coulter found little to like in any member of the Republican field. It’s understandable that Romney looks better to her now that McCain has moved to the forefront. McCain may likewise look better to her if Clinton or Obama is elected.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/

funky chicken on February 10, 2008 at 11:26 AM

In your dreams buddy. No safe employment for illegals = self-deportation. Amnesty=death of America. It’s an existential struggle, take it seriously.

Igor R. on February 10, 2008 at 1:06 AM

Oh, I take it seriously. I question the seriousness of the folks fantasizing about a fence securing a 2000 mile border, or telling us very gravely about how 100 million illegal immigrants will be here by 2020. These phantom conservatives that have materialized in the last year to save us from the illegal immigration problem that never existed for them until they realized it might be worth a few votes. At least McCain offered a solution, stood behind it, and was rejected. What did the true conservatives do?

RightOFLeft on February 10, 2008 at 1:30 AM

McCain solution is like “solving” a high-crime problem in a neighborhood by withdrawing all police presence. This problem existed for many for a long time. McCain isn’t serious about solving it, in fact he is serious about rewarding the criminals.

Igor R. on February 10, 2008 at 11:53 AM

Priscilla on February 10, 2008 at 11:16 AM
funky chicken on February 10, 2008 at 11:26 AM

This entire mess is not our creation. We did not put McCain up for the nomination. We did not pressure him to let in millions from south of the border. We did not ask him to limit our free speech. We did not ask him to bastardize the party by selling out to the most liberal senators in the senate. McCain and the RNC have made this. My vote is my choice. McCain, his minions, and all his newly-minted and battered friends will not scare me into voting for him. McCain and the RNC daily do their best to ensure that I will not check his name. Plus, I don’t know why so many on this site are so worried. McCain proves on a daily basis that he doesn’t need the Conservative vote. He only pays lip-service to conservatives. He thinks he doesn’t need me.

Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 12:29 PM

Conservative Cat:

You cite a million reasons, some legit, some questionable as to why McCain is an undesirable candidate. But what you need to do, I think, is make a similar list of Hillary’s and Obama’s lack of desirability. And Obama’s, particularly, has an enormously vast bullet point, which eclipses all, under the simple banner of “no experience”.

Remember, there is no such thing as a neutral inaction. In elections, particularly, doing nothing is casting a vote one way or the other. You can’t run from it and you can’t posture your way out of it, no matter how passionately you make your case. “Sending messages” is living in a fantasy: a message needs force and momentum and dissemination and repetition to even be noticed by a small percentage of the population, and any voter “sending a message” to Washington with write-ins might as well be spitting into the wind.

If you write-in, or sit-out or whatever – in other words, if you don’t actively support the candidate you dislike so badly and the opposition wins, and the opposition postures and gives orders which make us weak and vulnerable and 80,000 people are killed in a major city by a dirty bomb, and many times that made ill and debilitated, can you still look at yourself in the mirror and say, “I was right to vote my conscience?”

It’s what every Republican voter and/or conservative needs to ask his or her self. It isn’t a rhetorical question and it isn’t asked for dramatic effect. It’s a real question.

If by the inaction of putting your “feelings” above the good of the nation (an illness some conservatives seem to have caught from liberals these days, it appears), you contribute your little share to the deaths of 80,000 of your innocent, hardworking fellow Americans, and breaking the hearts and destroying the lives of hundreds of thousands more as those killed will be grieved, will you still, knowing what you did, be able to look at yourself in the mirror and say “Yes, I was right and I’d do it again.”

Let me give you a head’s up from where I stand: if your answer is “yes”, then in my opinion, knowing the potential in advance, you are self-aggrandizing delusional to the point of having very serious issues with reality.

Your feelings are important. Your sense of ethics and morality are important. But your little feelings do not trump the needs of your country. If every soldier in our military thought like you do, then we’d have no heroes. We all have to do lousey things for our Country, shi*ty things we simply hate. But you and I, by the Grace of God, are not called upon to go out and die while doing them. But as you know, our soldiers do.

For you to say that voting for a candidate you detest is too difficult and too painful for you to do, you and like-minded soulmates should take another spin around Arlington National Cemetary sometime. Look at each grave. In that instant of death, as realization hit, I’ll bet all of them wished with all their heart that they were instead home with their loved ones, but I’ll bet not one regretted doing what needed to be done.

So again, if you write-in or otherwise contribute to the opposition winning the general election and it results in the deaths of many thousands of your fellow citizens, will you still be able to look yourself in the mirror and say “I did the right thing”, knowing beforehand , as you do right here and now, that your personally-driven motivation could indeed result in exactly such a disaster?

It isn’t a happy question, but it’s a legitimate one.

An election is a choice between 2 candidates. You choose the best of the 2 flawed choices you are given.

McCain is better than Obama or Hillary. It’s a no-brainer.

funky chicken on February 10, 2008 at 1:01 PM

So lets reason together…

If McCain wins the presidency, he will continue to pursue his liberal views (minus Iraq) that he pushed while in Congress. He will sign the amnesty that the Democrats (and him) want passed. Republicans in Congress will be pressured on all sides to support the Republican President in his crusades. He will take the Maverick stance and yell at Conservatives that we are bigots and racists, and he won’t let us influence his opinions. He will oppose everything that Conservatives value most about our country. He will work with Democrats “across the aisle” to recommend judges that would pass their scrutiny. He will push for more restricted speech (see FCC and McCain/Feingold).

And in 2012, he becomes the incumbent and a guaranteed lock for the Republican nomination. And we get more pressure to continue to vote Republican, even as the party slides into the slime of the sewer.

BUT…

If we get a Democrat as President… suddenly the Republicans in Congress will know to fight against the liberal judge nominees, and the amnesty plans, and socialism…

And in 2012, we have a chance at a REAL conservative. The the Republican party has a chance at survival.

Hold my nose and vote for McCain? Sorry, I’m not that blind and stupid.

dominigan on February 10, 2008 at 1:23 PM

It’s amazing how much demonizing is going on when it comes to who a person votes for. The democrats accuse me of voting for killing gays, starving people, kicking old people out of their homes, etc. etc. Now the RNC/McCain/his new buddies on this and other threads accuse me of killing soldiers, hating Mexicans, hating blue collar workers, etc. etc. There are many principled people that don’t vote out of fear. There are many principled people who vote “FOR” someone and not “AGAINST” someone. Funky and others: don’t project the insecurity of your choice on my right to vote. This blind pseudo-patriotism for the RNC is misplaced, illogical, and without warrant. At best it is co-dependency. Don’t think I can’t look in the mirror. A punched, scared, and battered electorate is the group with the self-esteem issues.

Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 1:32 PM

dominigan, you really ought to contact someone about your very special power to predict the future.

Maybe also do a Google search on “Nixon’s visit to China” … you probably would have known that that was going to happen!

Priscilla on February 10, 2008 at 2:12 PM

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 9:46 AM

Perhaps you should lay off those red pills…

infidel4life on February 10, 2008 at 2:18 PM

It’s amazing how much demonizing is going on when it comes to who a person votes for. The democrats accuse me of voting for killing gays, starving people, kicking old people out of their homes, etc. etc. Now the RNC/McCain/his new buddies on this and other threads accuse me of killing soldiers, hating Mexicans, hating blue collar workers, etc. etc. There are many principled people that don’t vote out of fear. There are many principled people who vote “FOR” someone and not “AGAINST” someone. Funky and others: don’t project the insecurity of your choice on my right to vote. This blind pseudo-patriotism for the RNC is misplaced, illogical, and without warrant. At best it is co-dependency. Don’t think I can’t look in the mirror. A punched, scared, and battered electorate is the group with the self-esteem issues.

Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 1:32 PM

Well said. Worth seeing again. As a vet with service in 5 military adventures since 1986 (and still counting) I get very angry when the McLunatics accuse me of hating and punishing the troops. They need to pull their heads out of their asses and recognize that MANY of us have looked at McCain and decided there is no way we will vote for the man because his prior ACTIONS in the political arena.!

jwp1964 on February 10, 2008 at 2:28 PM

There are many principled people that don’t vote out of fear.

And that is what you think it it to vote for the most experienced, most conservative candidate available….fear?
I think the problem here is that you equate pragmatism and strategic voting with fear and lack of principles. I would venture that most conservatives who will vote for McCain are as principled and patriotic as you are. We simply recognize that there are often forced choices in life, and when the outcome is as important as who will appoint the next 2-3 Supreme Court Justices, determine whether or not the government takes over the health care system, or who will be the Commander in Chief during war…well, you’d better make the best possible choice, AMONG THE AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES.

I understand that your position is that, if the forced choice is among poor alternatives, it is acceptable, even desirable, to abdicate. And, further, you have faith that by
abdicating, you will punish only the people who brought about the forced choice in the first place, and that will bring about better choice in the future. Faith alone does not mean that it will happen….and there is an equal possibility that the perfect choice will never present itself.

What I fail to understand is this: Why was the RINO Bush ok, but the RINO McCain is not?

Priscilla on February 10, 2008 at 2:43 PM

infidel4life on February 10, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Perhaps you should take the red pill and leave the Matrix.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 2:49 PM

Today Bush called McCain a true conservative. Isn’t this like a dark-gray pot calling a dark-gray kettle white?

Igor R. on February 10, 2008 at 3:34 PM

Huck is a novelty act, a plaything for Colbert and the entertainment media.

Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 9:38 AM

Yesterday proves Huck is no novelty act. The reason Huck has been on Colbert, etc. is to get Dems to like him without watering down what he stands for. (Unlike McCain, who will give any concession to get Dems to like him). Even though I’ve predicted Obama/Edwards on the Democrat side, I’d actually prefer to see Hillary at the top of their ticket. She is as disliked by many Democrats as McCain is by many Republicans. Give it some time and Huck will unite conservatives in a way that McCain hasn’t and can’t, and Huck will even draw some Democrats to his side (more if it’s Hillary, less if it’s Obama). Watch and see. I seem to be one of the few posters here is who is upbeat, positive, and enjoying this contest. Many are defeatist. The funny thing is, you get to choose. Choose wisely. Vote for Huck if for no other reason than 5 of the 9 Supreme Court Justices are 68 years old or older. Huck will appoint more like the 4 we like. No other candidate will. With McCain or a Democrat, you will get more Souters and Ginsbergs. And you would regret that for the rest of your life.

Huck will win this David vs. Goliath battle.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 3:57 PM

Today Bush called McCain a true conservative. Isn’t this like a dark-gray pot calling a dark-gray kettle white?

Igor R. on February 10, 2008 at 3:34 PM

Just curious – did you vote for Bush?

RightOFLeft on February 10, 2008 at 4:02 PM

Today Bush called McCain a true conservative. Isn’t this like a dark-gray pot calling a dark-gray kettle white?

Igor R. on February 10, 2008 at 3:34 PM

I love it. Bush’s comment was meant to help McCain, but it will help Huckabee more.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 4:05 PM

Huck will appoint more like the 4 we like.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 3:57 PM

Huckabee’s stated position on Judges.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 4:09 PM

Prediction:
Huckabee serves two terms, gets three strict constructionist justices confirmed to the Supreme Court (as well as multiple lower judge-ships) and by the time he leaves office in 2017, the court has a solid 7-2 conservative majority.

We are on the verge of victory, folks. Don’t be like the Defeatocrats who try to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 4:37 PM

Michelle Malkin, if you are still reading this thread, please interview Huckabee and post the video on HotAir. Ask tough questions. Get to the meat of who he really is. Find out once and for all if he is a “snake oil salesman” or “the real deal”. I’m absolutely serious about this. HotAir readers deserve to know, and there’s no one better than you to go find out.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 4:42 PM

By the way, Huckabee doesn’t just promise to build the fence, he puts a date on it.

Ensure that the border fence construction is completed by July 1, 2010.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 5:23 PM

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 5:23 PM

Keep enjoying the moment in the sun. Huckabee represents a small fraction of the party. He will not get the mandate he needs to win the White House. Someone with his ethics and pandering doesn’t have the juice to call down any miracles. It takes more than talking about the Good Book. You actually have to apply it for it to work.

Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 5:55 PM

Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 5:55 PM

Cold Steel (does that describe your heart?),
Write down the top 5 issues that are most important to you in selecting our next president. Then compare what you want to Huckabee’s stated positions.
Winning the War vs. Islamofascists?
Securing our borders?
Judges?
Taxes/Economy?
Sanctity of Life?
2nd Amendment Rights?
Etc., etc.
If Huck’s positions, repeatedly stated and committed to in writing, match what you are looking for, and you choose to vote for another candidate who’s words and actions aren’t what you are looking for, I think that’s the definition of a fool. Challenge your assumptions and preconceived notions about Huckabee. He’s not looking to be McCain’s VP. He’s looking to win and take this country in the right direction.

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 8:30 PM

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at 8:30 PM

What a candidate pledges and what he does are 2 different things. I’ve tried to point this out to you on several occasions. I assume you are not interested in a serious debate about Huckabee,s stated positions and those with witch he governed. It will take more to convince me, and many others, to support Huckabee then just posting links to his numerous pledges.

modin5540 on February 10, 2008 at 9:26 PM

Any Posts from:

ITookTheRedPill

If you have a lot of extra red pills, can the rest of us get one so we can join you in LaLa Land.

PrettyD_Vicious on February 10, 2008 at 10:12 PM

If we get a Democrat as President… suddenly the Republicans in Congress will know to fight against the liberal judge nominees, and the amnesty plans, and socialism…

dominigan on February 10, 2008 at 1:23 PM

The republican congress etc. rarely filibusters, block judges, etc. That is what democrats do. Democrats call fowl when we republican president fires a few Democrat judges, but no complaint at all when Clinton fires all the judges, most of them appointed by Reagan and Bush. Don’t hold your breath when republican congress people go in the fetal position when the MSM attacks them for not going along.

PrettyD_Vicious on February 10, 2008 at 10:20 PM

ITookTheRedPill on February 10, 2008 at oh, a bunch of different times

Either you’re working for the Huckabee campaign, or you’re the biggest fan I’ve ever seen.

Hey! Come to think of it, why do we never see your posts when we see Harald Hardrada or alpacalips or huckfan. (sorry, can’t remember the exact mis-spelling of apocalypse being used.)

I know Harald Hardrada was finally banned. Are the others still shilling?

theregoestheneighborhood on February 10, 2008 at 10:40 PM

PrettyD_Vicious, theregoestheneighborhood,
You, too, can take the red pill and leave the Matrix world where Senator McAmnesty is the best choice to represent our party in November.

I am not Harald Hardrada or alpacalips or huckfan. I have posted with this one and only id since 9/25/2006.

I am not working for the Huckabee campaign, but I did decide this weekend to donate to his campaign for the first time, after he won Kansas and LA.

My first choice was Thompson. I could have supported Romney if he were the clear front-runner. The problem is, in a three-way race, Romney and Huckabee split the Mormons and the evangelicals (who otherwise vote very similarly), leaving McCain as the front-runner. In a three-man race, McCain wins. In a two-man race, McCain loses. So either Huck or Romney needed to go in order to have any chance of having a nominee other than McCain. Romney bowed out first. That’s when I took a more serious look at Huckabee. I like what I see. Huckabee has committed to the conservative principles I care most about. Huck is in it for the long haul. Huck will win a majority of the remaining states. It will go to a brokered convention, and Huck will be the nominee. You don’t have to believe me now. With every state Huck wins you will believe it more. When it happens, will you take back the nasty comments?

ITookTheRedPill on February 11, 2008 at 12:29 AM

Just say “No!” to amnesty.
Just say “No!” to liberal judges.
Just say “No!” to higher taxes.
Just say “No!” to John McCain.

Say “Yes!” to Huckabee/Thompson (or Huckabee/Steele)

(Huckabee/Romney could work politically, but their religious differences probably prevent either one of them from wanting to share a ticket)

ITookTheRedPill on February 11, 2008 at 12:43 AM

I have posted with this one and only id since 9/25/2006.

ITookTheRedPill on February 11, 2008 at 12:49 AM

I know Harald Hardrada was finally banned. Are the others still shilling?

theregoestheneighborhood on February 10, 2008 at 10:40 PM

I hope this isn’t some nuanced suggestion that I be banned, too. If so, it’s nice to see that you support free speech for those whose opinions differ from yours. /sarc.

ITookTheRedPill on February 11, 2008 at 9:51 AM

ITookTheRedPill on February 11, 2008 at 12:29 AM

If Huck gets the nominee, I would say a lot of voters have taken your red pill and they are in LaLa Land. I’m not for McCain, and I really don’t like what I see in Huckabee. (There is no true conservative left in the race.) A Huckabee nomination will likely results in Utah actually voting and giving their Electrical college votes to a democratic. History in the making.

PrettyD_Vicious on February 11, 2008 at 4:06 PM

Hey! Come to think of it, why do we never see your posts when we see Harald Hardrada or alpacalips or huckfan. (sorry, can’t remember the exact mis-spelling of apocalypse being used.)

I know Harald Hardrada was finally banned. Are the others still shilling?

theregoestheneighborhood on February 10, 2008 at 10:40 PM

Oh, Apacalyps is alive and well talking with me in a dead thread about theology. You’re free to drop by and lurk only as I work… ;)

SkinnerVic on February 11, 2008 at 4:43 PM

Just for the record, Cold Steel and PrettyD_Vicious are Mormons/LDS and their comments about Huckabee need to be read in that light. Mormons don’t like what most evangelical Christians think about the Book of Mormon…evangelicals believe that the end of the New Testament is the “last word” on the subject:

For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book;
Revelation 22:18 (New King James Version)

While the Mormons/LDS believe that in addition to the Old Testament and New Testament, a 3rd Testament was given to Joseph Smith:

Book of Mormon
ANOTHER TESTAMENT OF JESUS CHRIST

Normally Mormons/LDS and Evangelical Christians vote very similarly. In this race, however, the presence of Mitt Romney meant that a very high percentage of Mormons/LDS were going to vote for Mitt and dislike anyone who stood in his way to the Presidency. It also didn’t help that Huckabee asked publicly, “Don’t Mormons believe that Satan and Jesus were brothers?” While it is true that Mormons believe that Lucifer and Jesus were brothers, it is more important to focus on what we have in common than our differences. I am on record saying that I would trust Mitt Romney with the Presidency more than I would trust John McCain. I may have faith differences with Romney, but at least he hasn’t shown the socialist tendencies that John McCain has.

I still believe that, by a miracle, Huckabee will be the Republican nominee. I hope that Mormons/LDS will be able to vote for Huckabee over Obama in the general election.

Red Pill on April 20, 2008 at 4:15 PM

Just for the record, Cold Steel and PrettyD_Vicious are Mormons/LDS and their comments about Huckabee need to be read in that light. Mormons don’t like what most evangelical Christians think about the Book of Mormon…evangelicals believe that the end of the New Testament is the “last word” on the subject:

For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book;
Revelation 22:18 (New King James Version)

While the Mormons/LDS believe that in addition to the Old Testament and New Testament, a 3rd Testament was given to Joseph Smith:

Book of Mormon
ANOTHER TESTAMENT OF JESUS CHRIST

Normally Mormons/LDS and Evangelical Christians vote very similarly. In this race, however, the presence of Mitt Romney meant that a very high percentage of Mormons/LDS were going to vote for Mitt and dislike anyone who stood in his way to the Presidency. It also didn’t help that Huckabee asked publicly, “Don’t Mormons believe that Satan and Jesus were brothers?” While it is true that Mormons believe that Lucifer and Jesus were brothers, it is more important to focus on what we have in common than our differences. I am on record saying that I would trust Mitt Romney with the Presidency more than I would trust John McCain. I may have faith differences with Romney, but at least he hasn’t shown the socialist tendencies that John McCain has.

I still believe that, by a miracle, Huckabee will be the Republican nominee. I hope that Mormons/LDS will be able to vote for Huckabee over Obama in the general election.

Red Pill on April 20, 2008 at 4:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3