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.
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 »
McCain/Romney ’08!
ctmom on February 9, 2008 at 7:57 PM
Huck with 12%!?!? BWAHAHAhahahahaha!!!!!!!!
Greenhorn on February 9, 2008 at 8:01 PM
So “thirty-one percent” of CPAC is All-Or-Nothing Republicans.
jgapinoy on February 9, 2008 at 8:01 PM
I hope Romney has enough sense to not taint himself by running second fiddle to McCain.
TOPV on February 9, 2008 at 8:01 PM
I’m with Mitt!
That’s right, I still am.
madmonkphotog on February 9, 2008 at 8:02 PM
All we know for sure is that we cannot be sure of anything. This is a remarkably fluid situation and I can’t help but wonder much much will change by the time of the convention.
What are the odds that this convention will be brokered? When was the last time the Republicans had a brokered convention?
Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?
NemoParticularis on February 9, 2008 at 8:02 PM
p0s3r on February 9, 2008 at 8:08 PM
Sorta off topic, (still CPAC related) and a sign of the state of the sorry Republican party:
TOPV on February 9, 2008 at 8:09 PM
No we are not “all or nothings” We just want our candidate to be good on more than merely one or two things that we value.
That’s why we were willing to ‘hold our noses’ and support Romney after the two actual conservatives dropped out.
LegendHasIt on February 9, 2008 at 8:10 PM
When was the last time the Republicans had a brokered convention?
I think it was 1948.
Pal2Pal on February 9, 2008 at 8:10 PM
Hmmmm.
Deety on February 9, 2008 at 8:11 PM
I’m tired of thinking about it.
Let’s just hope those with common sense eventually stand up and do what’s needed.
Gregor on February 9, 2008 at 8:11 PM
I agree with your statement totally (same reason I won’t vote for McCain or drink the Republican poisoned Kool-aid this year). Blaming others when McCain loses to Hillary or worse, Obama, gives some a reason to overlook the fact that the party stand for nothing, has no foundation, believes nothing and will vote for anyone with a R behind their name.
TOPV on February 9, 2008 at 8:11 PM
Where was all this support months ago? It`s all your own fault, deal with it.
ThePrez on February 9, 2008 at 8:14 PM
So…at least 75%, but probably closer to 90-100% of the votes were cast before they even heard Huckabee speak today. If 100% of the votes were cast after his speech, I believe he would have won the straw poll.
Watch his speech and see what you think:
Mike Huckabee Speaks to CPAC – 2/9/2008
ITookTheRedPill on February 9, 2008 at 8:22 PM
Mitt, largely by suspending his campaign, seems to have made himself the darlin of us conservatives.
CONGRATS, Mitt! MITT 2012 !
petefrt on February 9, 2008 at 8:23 PM
I hope Romney has enough sense to not taint himself by running second fiddle to McCain.
TOPV on February 9, 2008 at 8:01
I am with you. Why should he lower himself to that level ?
SIJ6141 on February 9, 2008 at 8:25 PM
Deety on February 9, 2008 at 8:27 PM
Really? Read the rest of Michelle’s link. Here’s another snippet.
I feel the same way. I would never vote for Hickabee. McCain is still a maybe. At least McCain isn’t running for National Pastor.
Greenhorn on February 9, 2008 at 8:27 PM
I still think he is a pseudo-conservative Huckster.
All these people: left, center and right, (even Hillary), can say stuff in a speech; tailored to a specific audience, that sounds great to that audience and to those who ‘have drunk the Kool-Aid’ deeply already and don’t much care what their candidate says.
Unfortunately, the reality of their actual record all too often belies their pretty little speeches.
LegendHasIt on February 9, 2008 at 8:33 PM
How meaningful!
Hiney Von Pewps on February 9, 2008 at 8:34 PM
You know, I was listening to O’Reilly the other night and he mentioned C-PAC, Romney, and McCain. During his discussion he said that C-PAC represents the ultra-right wing of the Republican Party and equivocated it to moveon.org. If my memory servers me well enough it was in context to O’R defending the criticism aimed at John McCain by conservatives.
Fascinating.
Weebork on February 9, 2008 at 8:40 PM
At least I’m not alone…
Zorro on February 9, 2008 at 8:40 PM
Yea but he has great hair like the “silky pony”.
mred on February 9, 2008 at 8:44 PM
Thirty-one percent of conservatives support withdrawing from Iraq. Interesting.
RightOFLeft on February 9, 2008 at 8:50 PM
McCain picks up endorsements from Gilmore, Bolton
bnelson44 on February 9, 2008 at 8:54 PM
My Man Mitt
Congratulations Mitt. Stay Strong. Deliver 2012.
How’s that conservative cred Pastor Huckabee? Mitt can and will continue to deliver.
Cold Steel on February 9, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Hmm, McCain violated his oath of office, and the First Amendment with CFR in 2003. Then he sued the FEC in 2005 to try to spread this to the internet. Now he’ll be picking FEC Commissioners for another try.
And we’re “all or nothing”? Give me a natural break.
McCain is the worst candidate on the Constitution, bar none.
McCain was the leader of the Shamnesty mess a while back.
McCain and the “Gang of 14″ was non-productive, as it blocked 3/10 judges immediately, while claiming it would give everyone a vote. It certainly gives credence to the notion that he’ll ask for “opposition input” on SCOTUS nominees.
McCain was talking the “class warfare” spiel when voting down the tax cuts better than any Democrat. He’s changed his tune now, but which is the real McCain? As he voted against the tax cuts, and is still talking class warfare in other areas… I suspect he was honest then.
McCain wants to close Gitmo, and give terrorists (and not just their lawyers, as is practice now) access to the evidence against them. Damaging our intelligence gathering in the War on Terror, and making our intel more risky, and open to the terrorists.
“All or nothing”? Well McCain doesn’t give Conservatives “nothing”, he gives us a black eye, increased damage to the Constitution, open borders, and class warfare rhetoric.
So, from my viewpoint, 69% of Republicans at CPAC are Masochists and like being kicked.
gekkobear on February 9, 2008 at 9:04 PM
Oversimple /Simplistic (and incorrect) analysis.
But since you like things made very simple; Here’s my new bumper sticker that might help you begin to understand complex situations in a simplistic way:
LegendHasIt on February 9, 2008 at 9:06 PM
They got this reversed.
If you look at CPAC’s site, it says 24% were cast before Romney dropped out, the remainder after.
Now THAT is damning.
linlithgow on February 9, 2008 at 9:07 PM
Yes, Bolton did yesterday.
They’re going to start endorsing McCain now, though strangely they only started to after he became the presumptive nominee. Strange that…
Their choices are between Huck, which has little chance of winning, or John McCain, which is the likely nominee.
amerpundit on February 9, 2008 at 9:07 PM
Cap & Trade, Shamnesty, and Taxes are bigger issues for me. Iraq is not my number one issue.
p0s3r on February 9, 2008 at 9:08 PM
It must be a McCain/Romney ticket or I will not vote.
sinsing on February 9, 2008 at 9:09 PM
gekkobear on February 9, 2008 at 9:04 PM
Don’t forget gekko: McCain has also hired a conservative PR firm to re-invent and reshape his conservativeness. They’re playing the typical memes: well Reagan did amnesty, Reagan did taxes, Reagan hated Romney (sorry, I added that one.)
Cold Steel on February 9, 2008 at 9:11 PM
The original article fixed it; might want to update the text for this thread to reflect that.
linlithgow on February 9, 2008 at 9:14 PM
America needs you,
Ronald Reagan.
Ronnie, could you please come home?
Things are looking bad
I know you would be mad
To see a herd of RINOs
Prevail upon the land you love
Americas calling,
Ronald Reagan.
Gipper, you’d know what to do.
America’s fadin’ fast and losin’ lots of ground
Oh Ronnie what we can do to save the land we love?
NemoParticularis on February 9, 2008 at 9:15 PM
Cold Steel,
No single PR firm can undo history.
p0s3r on February 9, 2008 at 9:15 PM
Though Hillary’s get close.
amerpundit on February 9, 2008 at 9:16 PM
Well when Obama is mooovin on up to the white house dont complain.
TroubledMonkey on February 9, 2008 at 9:16 PM
I’m with you on that. McCain is, to me, further demonstrating his Maverickness. Instead of changing his positions and recognizing his errors, he is trying to reframe the argument, re-invent history. This illustrates his character.
Cold Steel on February 9, 2008 at 9:19 PM
That is quite MoveOn.Org-ish.
Include me out of that sort of extremism.
Buy Danish on February 9, 2008 at 9:27 PM
Nice. But Mitt could have used your support a month ago.
WasatchMan on February 9, 2008 at 9:30 PM
Noteworthy:
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.
DannoJyd on February 9, 2008 at 9:32 PM
The only possible way that this is going to work,
is to have Mitt Romney as the Vice President ticket.
Because it’s the only way to keep McCain,”Captain
Queeg”from causing the “Caine Mutiny” within the
Republican party!
canopfor on February 9, 2008 at 9:36 PM
Reminds me of a scene from the movie Strange Brew, when the brakes on their van go out and they’re careening down a hill, the driver, Doug, crosses his arms and tells Bob, “No point in steering now.”
What’s the point of defending our own national sovereignty let alone our freedom and liberty if the Democrats pull us out of Iraq, eh?
FloatingRock on February 9, 2008 at 9:53 PM
McCain/Romney will not work because the 3rd leg of the Republcian party…the evangelicals…will not vote for Romney. Sad, but painfully true as evidenced by the southern primaries.
SouthernGent on February 9, 2008 at 9:55 PM
McCain/whoever ’08
With the hope that MCain will not suffer an “event” that makes him incapable of serving in office!
Seriously, this is an issue. McCain’s running mate will be much more important than Obama’s.
highhopes on February 9, 2008 at 9:55 PM
Goosebumps…. Goosebumps I tell ya!!!!!!
SECOND LOOK AT SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION /Sarc
Check out Gregor’s Link
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on February 9, 2008 at 9:57 PM
Talk about loser candidate. McCain can’t even win and he’s 99.9% the nominee. More poison kool-aid please Mr. GOP.
TOPV on February 9, 2008 at 9:59 PM
I’ve said before that I can see Cindy McCain in the White House, I just can’t see Juan with her.
For what it’s worth, Bill O’Reilly would truly like to think he’s engineered who will reside in the most coveted house in America. Along with Geraldomundo, they’ll both claim they engineered the amnesty that is on the horizon.
24K lady on February 9, 2008 at 10:00 PM
Fair enough. Not lumping you in this group, because I don’t know you, but I think a lot of the conservatives staying home really do want out of Iraq. I think a lot of them are secretly relieved McCain took the nomination so they have an excuse to let the Democrats end the war.
Hate to break it to you, but nobody is building any fences for at least 4 more years. It’s not just McCain. The Republican party – which, legend has it, was conservative on immigration before McCain came along – stood by for decades and did absolutely nothing to stem the tide of illegal immigrants spilling over our borders. The great conservative icon Ronald Reagan even signed his own “shamnesty” law. What makes you think now would be any different?
Of course so-called conservative congressman were happy to crusade against the McCain-Kennedy bill. They could claim to be tough on the border and stick to the long-standing Republican policy of doing nothing whatsoever. McCain-Kennedy wasn’t amnesty, the status quo is amnesty.
Conservatives are willing to forgive the erstwhile Republican congresses that have been ignoring border security since the Contract With America, why not show McCain the same leniency?
RightOFLeft on February 9, 2008 at 10:01 PM
If conservatives don’t want to fight against complete Democratic control of our legislative process, that’s fair. Just don’t expect anyone to trust conservatives to fix the problems it’s going to create, when we couldn’t trust them to help us prevent them in the first place.
RightOFLeft on February 9, 2008 at 10:03 PM
TOPV on February 9, 2008 at 9:59 PM
yep….how sad! Thank God we have 8+ months to figure this Shi% burger out….
dmann on February 9, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Actually, I’ll complain about Obama if I want to; because if Obama is President, I’ll still have Freedom of Speech.
But if McCain wins, you won’t be able to complain here about anything political near an election; without risking an “issue advocacy” fine from the newly picked FEC Commission.
Personally, I’d rather be upset, yet able to be heard than have a “republican”, be upset, and get silenced to boot.
I don’t know, lets look at two historical events.
1) The Vietnam War. The country suffered significantly in its defensive positioning, and is still suffering some; but it has been letting up slowly. To repeat that again with Iraq would be awful.
2) The “New Deal” rewriting the Commerce Clause to allow Government intervention in any event that might potentially have an economic effect (without requiring a study or proof). Has that one “let up” yet? No, it got worse. The country traded away some of the Constitutional protections to the Federal Government, and the Federal Government has been encroaching further into this area ever since.
So, apparently I have to repeat one of these two tragedies again. Well, one is getting better, and one is getting worse. Why is the one that gets worse the one that we need to repeat to prevent the other?
gekkobear on February 9, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Perhaps the time has come. I just never figured it would happen in my lifetime.
NemoParticularis on February 9, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Huckabee on track to win Louisiana AND Washington state? OMFG!
Lady on CNN was gushing about the high democrat turnout for their caucuses. Children selling cookies, excitement in the air, whole families participating, birds singing (okay, I made that last one up), but still it was slightly over the top.
SouthernGent on February 9, 2008 at 10:07 PM
I am taking your suggestion. McCain is Democratic control…and I’m fighting. I guess I should say you can’t be trusted to help clean out the garbage posing as conservatives …oh well…
Obama 08′ (if you are going to vote for a liberal, get a real one)
TOPV on February 9, 2008 at 10:07 PM
Vote for McCain.
Not vote for McCain.
He is gonna lose so badly in November it is not even funny.
The Dhims are energized. They have a chance to make history.
I would have preferred to go down voting for someone I believed in. But instead we are left with the angry RINO fossil. Good job!
SimplyKimberly on February 9, 2008 at 10:09 PM
We should really try out that closed primary/caucus idea next go around.
liquidflorian on February 9, 2008 at 10:11 PM
Exactly. Why is it so offensive to some people that I want my vote to go to someone who represents me?
p0s3r on February 9, 2008 at 10:17 PM
I have a theory that as long as there’s something good on TV, people will stay home and watch it instead of participating in revolution.
FloatingRock on February 9, 2008 at 10:18 PM
You just won’t be able to do it on Talk Radio. Fairness Doctrine, dontcha know…or didn’t you realize that?
NemoParticularis on February 9, 2008 at 10:18 PM
After 8 years of getting kicked to the curb by Bush, Rove and the “establishment”, on the immigration issue, yeah for me it’s all or nothing.
And please, don’t try to justify the party with it’s handling of the war when we have millions just walking into this country at will.
I’ll vote conservative in every race I am able, except I won’t vote for McCain. You have no right to scold the 31%.
voiceofreason on February 9, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Considering McCain’s track record with the 1st amendment, he’s just as likely, if not more likely, to enact the fairness doctrine than either of the Democrats, although I’ll admit that I haven’t scoped out the odds in Vegas yet.
FloatingRock on February 9, 2008 at 10:23 PM
I’m inclined to agree and I believe that is the premise behind our little military excursion in Iraq. Think about it…create an enclave of free market Democracy in the Middle East. Once prosperity takes hold, Achmed will be too wrapped up in watching soccer and his son Mohammed too wrapped up in the new x-box or gameboy to ever be bothered with Jihad.
What the heck…it worked for the West: prosperity has all but destroyed Christianity in Europe and gutted it here in the U.S.
Human nature is human nature. Why should it be any different in the Middle East? The surest way to destroy Islam is not from without but from within.
NemoParticularis on February 9, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Disregard any of the candidates, Democrat or Republican. Based on historical trends alone the Republicans would have a hard time winning the White House in 2008.
Two term Republican President.
A war.
A troubled economy.
No viable VP to run (Cheney could run, but remember, he became VP out of a sense of duty to country and loyalty. He wants to retire. He deserves a wonderful retirement with his family and his hobbies. Thanks you Vice President Cheney!)
I am bracing for a Democrat President, but as others smarter than I have stated, we need to be active in support of our Senators and Representatives–and after voting them in, we need keep their feet to the fire.
We must defeat the perilous ideas of socialism, we must restore the concept of individual responsibility and rights, and we must preserve our ability to succeed or fail based on our merits or faults.
It takes a village to raise a socialist; it takes parents to raise a child.
Montana on February 9, 2008 at 10:29 PM
Oh, you are right about that….. Because people like you have seen to it that an open borders idiot like McCain is the only choice besides Hillary or Obama.
But just because your nominee and the rest of the established RINO and liberal whores in Washington refuse to do what is necessary, what 80% of us “Citizen Commoners” desire, is no reason for me to have to suck it up and support the 5th worst RINO open borders jerk in the Senate to be President.
I refused to vote for McCain for Senator during the 3 elections of his while I lived in Arizona…. I’m darn sure not going to vote for the guy for President. I’m not going to give up my desire for Sovereignty; for ‘National integrity’ just because there are enough idiots in the early primary states to force one of the worst possible candidates down the rest of the Republican Party’s throats.
LegendHasIt on February 9, 2008 at 10:38 PM
If Huckabee would agree to a sex change, there might be hope with a McCain-Huckabee ticket.
Getting the GLBT vote, the evangelicals, the weird conservatives, the confused dems, and the old folks who wouldn;t remember who Huck was in the first place.
He says he has a sense of humor.
Prove it, Huckster!
profitsbeard on February 9, 2008 at 10:40 PM
Doesn’t bode well for Mitt.. Only beating “liberal” John McCain by 1%?
LOL
Chakra Hammer on February 9, 2008 at 10:43 PM
Here’s the conundrum:
We know Hillary is one of the main driving forces behind the “Fairness Doctrine”, and while it is safe to assume that Obama would like that too,I’m unaware of any official position by him on it.
YET;
YET:
McCain is the only one that has actually written legislation and gotten it passed that so limits the practice of free speech, AND has sued to enforce free speech limits on the internet as well.
Kind of hard to make a wise choice in that situation, isn’t it?
LegendHasIt on February 9, 2008 at 10:46 PM
I know I’m not going to convince their are vital differences between McCain and the Democrats, but just think about this: The Democrates see the difference. The moderates see the difference. Even traditional conservatives like, just to name one, Laura Ingraham see the difference. I’d suggest that you’re suffering from a kind of conservative parallax; you’re seeing things from so far to the right that you can’t make out the details of the political tapestry unfolding in front of the rest of us.
I get that McCain is far from the ideal conservative, but he’s even further from being Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.
RightOFLeft on February 9, 2008 at 10:49 PM
the results tonight show that the rank and file GOP will vote for anyone that is not McCain. Mccain “won” the delagtes he has with only ~33% of the vote. If you only have 33% of your party’s support when you enemy has 100% of their party’s support. you lose. It’s simple. McCain has no chance to win the election. save your money, your time and try to get good congresspeople elected to head off the liberal crap that is coming.
unseen on February 9, 2008 at 10:51 PM
There are certainly differences, but the reason people tend to overlook them is because, just like with the Democratic candidates, a McCain presidency will also be destructive to our nation and our way of life. Would you rather die of cancer or a bullet in your brain? Sure, you’ll live a while longer with cancer but it will be a slow, painful death. Both options would suck, but which would you vote for? Cancer would give you time to say goodbye to your loved ones but the bullet would probably be instant and painless.
FloatingRock on February 9, 2008 at 11:02 PM
We just prefer being kicked by McCain to what Hillary’s going to do. She’s gonna grab you boys(particularly our guys in the military) where you don’t want to be grabbed, and then she’s going to twist until you squeal like girls. Then she’s going to keep twisting. I will vote for McCain, but I’m not going to like it one bit.
sheesh on February 9, 2008 at 11:02 PM
It could be a McCain/Rush ticket and I still will not vote for a Pro-Amnesty idiot McCain.
Since Mitt is out, I’m with Huckleberry. When he is gone, I have a hard decision… (Clinton / Obama / Other (Not McCain)
livermush on February 9, 2008 at 11:03 PM
I suppose I could enthusiastically support a McCain/Thompson ticket IF and only IF I had assurance from the Almighty Himself that McCain would be summoned home to stand before the fearsome Seat of Judgment an hour after his inauguration.
Otherwise, I will continue to wait to see what shakes out at the convention.
NemoParticularis on February 9, 2008 at 11:08 PM
Oh, give me a break…. even McCain has said that Hillary would be a good president. If McCain thinks so, who are his own supporters to contradict him?
FloatingRock on February 9, 2008 at 11:13 PM
Not hard at all.
Huckabee/Thompson defeats Obama/Edwards in November.
You’re right McCain has no chance of winning, but you’re wrong about giving up and expecting a Democrat president. Support Huckabee. Listen to what he is saying; look at who he has chosen to be on his team (as a reflection of what he really believes…notice Juan on McCain’s team is a reflection of what he really believes). Huck will win the nomination, and Huck will be a great president. This is going to be a fun ride.
ITookTheRedPill on February 9, 2008 at 11:13 PM
I could not vote for Huckabee.
McCain is barely tolerable as it is, but nobody else is left.
sulla on February 9, 2008 at 11:15 PM
You’re worse than all or nothing. You’re willing to hand the country over to socialists who have pledged surrender in a war that we are winning, have guaranteed citizenship to every illegal in the country, have promised huge expansions of government power and control, and consider conservatives to be greater enemies to our country than terrorists. All because your guy didn’t win.
“All or nothing” is not the term that comes to mind….spiteful, hateful, vindicative, arrogant, suicidal, idiotic – words like that seem more appropriate under the circumstances.
Priscilla on February 9, 2008 at 11:15 PM
The only States that Romney won outside of a caucus were
Michigan
Massachusetts
Utah
All places that he as lived, signs of flawed candidate, with a flawed message.
Chakra Hammer on February 9, 2008 at 11:17 PM
Priscilla, the only thing in your entire statement that doesn’t also apply to McCain is the surrender part.
Sorry, but that’s the truth.
p0s3r on February 9, 2008 at 11:20 PM
what would have happened to McCain if instead of Fred/rudy/Mitt/huck all being in the race only one of the 4 was in the race. Well we are finding the answer in Kansas tonight. 60% of the people would rather vote for Huck than McCain. I’m sure the results would have been the same if it was only McCain vs Mitt or McCain vs Fred. McCain would lose ANY GOP election he has if it was him aganist anyONE else. He may now be able to win a few elections with the party leadership behind him but what if he only wins 10 of next 27 primary/cacus? will the GOP understand what they are doing and ask McCain to step aside for the good of the party and select a real conservative in the Convention? Why should 60% of the party have to hold its nose so the 30% of the elite snobs can stay in power. I would vote for Huck in NC and most other people I know will too if he stays in the race. Thus you have a great deal of pressure for Huck to drop out because the elites know that if the primaries continue McCain will be shown for the minority canidate he is. What happens if McCain does not carry one southern state the GOP’s stronghold? McCain will never win NY,PA,NJ,CA in the general his only chance is if he can carry the South and push into the purple states. If OBH can carry some of the South McCain and the GOP are done. It is imperative for the good of the party for McCain to step aside.
unseen on February 9, 2008 at 11:22 PM
Update. Obama wins 4 states.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23068044?G1=10856
Not lookin’ good for the GOP.
a capella on February 9, 2008 at 11:30 PM
Nebraska ain’t your basic hotbed of liberalism.
a capella on February 9, 2008 at 11:35 PM
Well said. McCain will not be the nominee. Huck will get it to a brokered convention, and people there will realize:
1) Huck beat McCain in head-to-head primaries and caucuses from February 9th onward.
2) If you remove blue states from the picture (ones that Bush lost in 2000 and 2004), Huck is the clear delegate front-runner.
Huck will be the Republican nominee. I believe he will choose either Fred Thompson or Michael Steele as his running mate. And we will win in November. Wake up, smell the coffee, and stop being defeatist.
ITookTheRedPill on February 9, 2008 at 11:35 PM
I doubt it.
But even if you are right, I’m not going to vote for a guy who wanted to have the taxpayers of Arkansas pay for college scholarships for Illegal Aliens, or who wants “to change the Constitution so that it is more in line with the Bible”.
Besides, The Huckster is not going to win the nomination, and Thompson wouldn’t accept the VP slot…. ESPECIALLY under The Huckster.
LegendHasIt on February 9, 2008 at 11:36 PM
unseen, I’m not saying you personally are being defeatist, it’s the majority of other posters who are…
ITookTheRedPill on February 9, 2008 at 11:36 PM
All because your guy didn’t win.
Priscilla on February 9, 2008 at 11:15 PM
it has nothing to do with “our guy didn’t win” We could support about any canidate out there excpet for maybe Rudy and McCain. What part of this is so hard to understand. Conservatives are not people that switch their postions at the drop of a hat. We have core beliefs. We believe in the founding documents. We think the smaller the government the better, we believe in free and open debates, we believe in the 1st 2nd and all amendments. We think the documents mean what they say and should not under any circumstance be ignored or changed by fiat because it is political expediant to do so. we believe in NATIONAL sovergenty not a new world order. We believe in a a classless society and a melting pot not a fracture society with an illterate subclass of low wage earners. We believe in kick ass military war not slow grind diplomactic war. We believe in the idea that the family should decide what is best for it and not the government decide that it knows best. Sadly ALL of our leaders have no idea what the country wants anymore they have become elites and out of touch. Mitt at least sensed this hunger and tried to change his postions to reflect what the country wanted. Fred tried also and so has Huck in his own way. They did not lose, added together their precentage was 60% or more than the status quo canidate got. McCain has won nothing. He is in the minority and will be shown the door in his own time. His quest for persoanl power will fiinsh what bush started and destroy the GOP.
unseen on February 9, 2008 at 11:38 PM
Scroll up, young man. Huck has even less chance of beating Obama than McCain. I suggest we all start learning how to speak Persian.
a capella on February 9, 2008 at 11:38 PM
America has survived a lot worse than a bad president, and I don’t concede that McCain would make a bad president. He’s serious about listening to the American voters who finally spoke up about immigration; it’s at least unfair to hold him personally responsible for a problem that everybody ignored for decades. He’s serious about curbing spending. He’s consistently championed limiting government spending – which is the only sure way to limit government. He has voted in favor of strict constructionist judges, even saving the nomination of Samuel Alito. Yes, I mean the gang of fourteen, which somehow infuriated both conservatives and liberals, even though it clearly worked to the benefit of conservatives. He’s committed to winning in Iraq, and he’s committed to maintaining our powerful military. He rejects the large scale entitlement programs the Democrats have promised.
None of that is going to destroy America. The Democrats’ policies won’t destroy America, either, but they’ll leave a hell of a mess that we might not be able to clean up in our lifetimes. Try rolling back socialized healthcare once it’s passed. Or un-surrendering to the Iraqi insurgents. Un-appointing judges that not only “don’t wear their conservatism on their sleeve,” but wear their contempt for the constitution – for the very law – instead. None of these are far-fetched scenarios if the Democrats prevail – these are their campaign promises.
RightOFLeft on February 9, 2008 at 11:39 PM
Dang. That loser McCain can’t even win with a considerable margin in liberal Washington state… with an “almost” guaranteed nomination. Talk about fonder for the general and the media.
This is downright funny.
TOPV on February 9, 2008 at 11:40 PM
ITookTheRedPill on February 9, 2008 at 11:36 PM
I understood your post. I fear our elites have no idea what they are doing. They believe we are stupid and thus they can ram McCain done our throats. It may work but the outcome will not be what they hope unless we have a major attack on the homeland between now and Nov 4. It is the only possible way McCain can win at this point.
unseen on February 9, 2008 at 11:41 PM
Go read his website issues section on immigration. Come back and tell us what he has “learned”. Don’t be surprised when all you find is platitudes, generalities, and liberal double-speak.
After that, explain to us how much McCain-Lieberman’s cap & trade system is going to boost our economy.
p0s3r on February 9, 2008 at 11:44 PM
LegendHasIt, go read the lyrics to the Battle Hymn of the Republic. Then read the Declaration of Independence. Huckabee’s desire to sign a Human Life Ammendment to our Constitution is in line with both the Bible and the beliefs of the founders of this great Republic.
ITookTheRedPill on February 9, 2008 at 11:45 PM
Really? How? Cause he said so? You obviously didn’t listen to ALL he has said abut immigration (or lack of facts on his stance). What proof do we have he heard the voters (as he claims)? None, nada. I’ll place a wager with you. I am betting on how fast the ol’ immigration bill will be magically resurrected if McCain wins. A day? And guess what? The RINO’s in congress will be right behind him on it.
The GOP is passing around RINO kool-aid now.
TOPV on February 9, 2008 at 11:46 PM
TOPV is an Obama supporter, just repeating that in case any newbies read the comments and become alarmed by the strangeness.
funky chicken on February 9, 2008 at 11:48 PM
Red Pill, I had shrilly announced a month ago that I would never, never vote for Huckabee if he were the nominee. Well, that was crap.
If Huck is the GOP nominee, just like with McCain, I’d be an idiot to vote for Obama certainly, and Hillary as well.
funky chicken on February 9, 2008 at 11:50 PM
a capella, actually, NE has become more liberal recently. Look at their US Senators. Chuck Hagel? Ewwwwww
Omaha is super liberal, which is really odd since it’s, well, in NE and is home to a very large USAF base. But it’s pretty wackadoo there.
funky chicken on February 9, 2008 at 11:52 PM
The best thing to happen for immigration is if McCain loses and loses big. It will send a great big red flare up the rest of the GOP in congress that they need to stop it in its tracks. When you vote against McCain in the primaries and answer the exit poll make immigration you 1 one reason. Hell the economy is the way it is because of illegal immigration and unfree trade rules with poor nations.
unseen on February 9, 2008 at 11:53 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »