The GOP Race to Huckacide!

[maxparrish]

After New Hampshire:

• January 15: Michigan
• January 19: Nevada, South Carolina (R)
• January 29: Florida

Beware the Ides of March...for by then Brutus Huckacides may have already knifed all others who aspire to the Republic's throne...and doomed the GOP.

The coming primaries and the latest polls:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/fl/florida_republican_primary-260.html


New Hampshire - McCain, Romney, Huckabee, Guil

<TABLE class=poll_table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#ffffff>Rasmussen (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2008_new_hampshire_republican_primary)</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>01/04 - 01/04</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>31</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>26</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>11</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>8</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>14</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>5</TD><TD align=middle>McCain +5.0</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

McCain will rise from the ashes, and edge Romeny. At least the Huckster will be defeated.

Michigan - Romney, Huckabee, McCain, Guilianni
<TABLE class=poll_table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#ffffff>Rasmussen (http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/michigan/election_2008_michigan_republican_primary)</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>12/04 - 12/04</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>20</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>21</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>8</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>19</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>9</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>7</TD><TD align=middle>Huckabee +1.0</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Huckabee may edge Romeny and Guilianni in what is a three way race.

Nevada - Guilanni, Romny, Huckabee...

<TABLE class=poll_table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#ffff00>RCP Average</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffff00>11/16 - 12/06</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffff00>23.7</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffff00>23.7</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffff00>15.3</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffff00>9.7</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffff00>7.3</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffff00>TIE</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Here Romeny and Guilanni are Tied, the Huckster a third place runner.

South Carolina - Romney, Huckabee, Thompson...
<TABLE class=poll_table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#ffffff>Rasmussen (http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/south_carolina/election_2008_south_carolina_republican_primary)</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>12/16 - 12/16</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>23</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>23</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>12</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>12</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>11</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>5</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>Tie</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Romney and Huckabee are tied, with Thompson and others splitting third.

Florida - Guiliani, Huckabee, Romney...
<TABLE class=poll_table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle></TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#ffffff>Rasmussen (http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/florida/election_2008_florida_republican_primary)</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>12/13 - 12/13</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>19</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>27</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>23</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>6</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>9</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#ffffff>4</TD><TD align=middle>Huckabee +4.0</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Huckabee with a good lead over Romeny, Guilianni fading to third.

It is clear that while Huckabee cannot obtain the support of more than 25-30% of the Party, he can beat the others in a highly splintered party primary. There is a GOP disaster looming, with only Romney in his way.

There is no choice - every Republican must rally to Romeny to stop Huckabee...

[UnkHiram]

I am just curious, what happened to the Anyone but Rudy sentiment?

[mudmagnet63]

WE need to NUKE HOPE Arkansas :flame:

[jayson]

We are going down in November if either Huckabee or Romney get it. Sorry guys, just the fact of it.

Guess I better get ready for Obamacare and the coming nanny state. Also better dig up all my guns hidden around the house so I won't get arrested when the acquisition squads come to my front door.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

jayson:
We are going down in November if either Huckabee or Romney get it. Sorry guys, just the fact of it.

:moo: HAHAHAHAHAHA. This, coming from a Paul supporter.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

UnkHiram:
I am just curious, what happened to the Anyone but Rudy sentiment?

:unsmile: It has morphed into the Anyone-but-Giuliani-or-Huckabee-or-Romney-or-McCain sentiment. In other words, anyone who might win the nomination.

[UnkHiram]

Lord knows I hate to sound reasonable or be accused of looking at the big picture, but let me remind everyone. The Goal is to Defeat Clinton or Obamma. Personally, I dont care for Rudy, McCain or Huckabee (I am a Duncan Hunter guy) but any of those three would be an improvement over Clinton, Obamma or Edwards.

[DesertFox]

Thompson.

[Teenager]

Thompson.

'Nuff said.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I thought the goal was to get this country going in the right direction again by finally getting a Conservative elected President, :biggrin:?!.

(Of course, DF said in one word (Thompson), what it took me 22, :smirky: to do.)

[jayson]

:moo: HAHAHAHAHAHA. This, coming from a Paul supporter.

Even though I speak the truth, you choose to patronize me for who I support?

[DesertFox]

His real name is Longhorn Patronizer

[maxparrish]

I thought the goal was to get this country going in the right direction again by finally getting a Conservative elected President, :biggrin:?!.

(Of course, DF said in one word (Thompson), what it took me 22, :smirky: to do.)


Home is quite right! Fred is the only American Conservative Union conservative among the lot BUT Romney at least has adopted all the conservative positions with firmness, and Guiliani may not have the correct personal sympathies on abortion he has made it clear that his court appointments will be conservatives like Scalia.

These three are acceptable to most of us, in the order given. Huckabee and McCain are not acceptable. Neither is a conservative. Both support the transformation of America into a overpopulated (1/2 billion by mid century) of primarily Mexican culture, supplemented by 100 million of the least skilled and talented of the 3rd world.

Both have shown themselves willing to raise taxes on dubious issues like global warming. McCain loves international law and wishes to free terrorists; Huckabee has queer (why don't the love us) foreign policy views.

Hillary IS to be preferred over these two poseurs - why should Republicans be blamed for liberal policies? As it is Bush pushed for Amnesty and open borders, do we want another President on our side that will ALSO promote crippling the American economy with higher taxes and restrictions on the US because of global warming?

Anyone supporting McCain or Huckabee is a traitor. I hope no one here is doing so.

[CzechPrince]

We are going down in November if either Huckabee or Romney get it.

Point on. I've been saying this forever, even before Huckatrash became popular (for some god unknown reason.) Romney has a better chance than Huckatrash, but if they elect some stupid populist from Hope AK, the GOP can kiss the White House goodbye in 08, and that's against any of the nominees.

If the GOP is stupid enough to nominate someone like him or flip flop poser Romeny, I have no pity when the Democrats win. It might teach everyone else a lesson on what to look for in a candidate.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

jayson:
Even though I speak the truth, you choose to patronize me for who I support?

:unsmile: It's not "patronizing" when you criticize Huckabee's or Romney's chances? It's only "patronizing" when others do it to your guy?

[Longhorn_Platinum]

CzechPrince:
Point on. I've been saying this forever, even before Huckatrash became popular (for some god unknown reason.) Romney has a better chance than Huckatrash, but if they elect some stupid populist from Hope AK, the GOP can kiss the White House goodbye in 08, and that's against any of the nominees.

If the GOP is stupid enough to nominate someone like him or flip flop poser Romeny, I have no pity when the Democrats win. It might teach everyone else a lesson on what to look for in a candidate.

:moo: HAHAHAHAHAHA. This, coming from a Ghoul supporter.

[Justaguy]

His real name is Longhorn Patronizer
Is it a he? Somehow I always thought it was a she.

[jayson]

:unsmile: It's not "patronizing" when you criticize Huckabee's or Romney's chances? It's only "patronizing" when others do it to your guy?

No, it's the truth. The theory behind Ron's electability is that in the general election, he would pull most of the people's vote who just vote the "R" on the sheet. He would also pull many independents and even some of the not-batshit-insane Democrats. If that were the case, he would get support from all across the board... which is much more than the Democrats have.

The issue with Huckster and Romney... and even with Thompson as well as McCain... is that they are all for the war. When a nation is now 70% against the war, how do you expect any of the pro-war candidates to win in a general election? Paired with the fact that, assuming Obama gets the nod, you will have to compete with legions of misguided youngsters who think that they want "real change" (synonymous with a Nanny State) and are going to vote for Obama.

McCain won't last a month in the general election with the recent remarks he made. In New Hampshire, when confronted with a question regarding what Bush said about being in Iraq for "50 years", McCain instantly retorted, "Why not make it 100!?" That just killed his chances for ever getting elected where a large majority of this country is now anti-Iraq war.

Romney can't be taken seriously. The man's got looks and money, but he is a pushover on the debate stage and his history is chock full of flips and flops. Easy target when the field is narrowed down to one.

Huckster. Do I even have to explain? A bible thumping minister from Hope, AK. He has insane liberal slants and lies on stage regarding his policies. The man speaks in one directions and governs in another. Easy kill for the Democrats.

Thompson seems to be the only pro-war candidate that would have any chance in the general election... but it would take a hell of a lot of work with getting out the vote up to and on the election day to counter the hordes of pinko kids who would be coming out in support of the Big O.

[maxparrish]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width=600><TBODY><TR><TD bgColor=#e5e5e5>New Hampshire Republican Primary (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_primary-193.html)</TD><TD bgColor=#e5e5e5>Rasmussen (http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2008_new_hampshire_republican_primary)</TD><TD bgColor=#e5e5e5>McCain 32, Romney 30, Huckabee 11, Giuliani 9, Paul 11, Thompson 4 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_primary-193.html)</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#e5e5e5>McCain +2</TD></TR><TR><TD bgColor=#cccccc>New Hampshire Democratic Primary (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_primary-194.html)</TD><TD bgColor=#cccccc>Rasmussen (http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2008_new_hampshire_democratic_primary)</TD><TD bgColor=#cccccc>Obama 39, Clinton 27, Edwards 18, Richardson 8 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_primary-194.html)</TD><TD align=middle bgColor=#cccccc>Obama +</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

These are the latest results posted at realclear (see prior link).

McCain still leads Romney, but by only a few points. Huckabee is nowhere to be seen.

Obama looks poised to wax Hillary's sagging ass.

First Guilianni, Romney, McCain, and Thompson are ALL quite capable of beating any Democratic canididate - although McCain and Guilianni seemingly have the best chances.

Romney would NOT be a poor choice; he is articulate and conservative in his policies - hell, he got National Reviews endorsement. Huckabee, who has Morris on his side, is almost certain to lose in a national election. At the moment, MSM is treating him like a golden boy (for obvious reasons) and he gets away with many slips that, in the general election, would crucify him.

Actually I hope the contest presents the GOP with a locked convention. Perhaps cooler heads will prevail, and a solid compromise canididate with conservative credentials might be chosen to replace the likes of McCain or Huckabee.

Guilanni or Romney are the only sane choices that are also likely to win in the GOP primaries. I think FRED is the greatest of men, but it seems he has hit his rhetorical stride too late to impress the voters.

[Kathy30]

After last night, I have doubts about Thompson. Not his ability, his electability. Ron Paul is an out and out loser.

Romney came out best of all.

[DesertFox]

We must notta seen the same debate. I saw Romney flustered and pissed off. I saw Thompson exuding quiet competence and authority. Shocked the hell outta me when Stephanopoulos said just what I was thinking.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Justadick:
Is it a he? Somehow I always thought it was a she.

:idea: You never were very bright.

[dajoga]

I thought the goal was to get this country going in the right direction again by finally getting a Conservative elected President, :biggrin:?!.



Yes, that's the goal, but I'm not even sure a Reagan clone could get elected today! Voters have short memories and usually don't change until something drastic happens. Reagan got in b/c things under the Peanut farmer were going south fast. That's not the case now. And if it hadn't been for the Clintoon recession, GW may not have won either.

[DoctorDoom]

The issue with Huckster and Romney... and even with Thompson as well as McCain... is that they are all for the war. When a nation is now 70% against the war, how do you expect any of the pro-war candidates to win in a general election?Where is your evidence for that statistic, or did you pull it out of your ass like all the other defeatists and surrenderists and terrorist-asppeasers? Answer me this, Paulorrhoid: if the American people are 70% opposed to the war, why has Congress not yet stopped it? Why has EVERY attempt by the House and Senate traitors to force the US into an ignominious loss been an abject failure?

Let me tell you why, Paulbot: the American people want VICTORY against terrorism in Iraq. If they oppose anything, it is the treasonous attempts by Congress to undermine our military, force us into retreat, and render the deaths of our brave warriors there futile. Why is the rating of Congress the lowest it has ever been if the people so strongly support its efforts to end the efforts in Iraq?

Your senile bastard is as loathsome as the RATs, and he merits the same contempt.

[CzechPrince]

:moo: HAHAHAHAHAHA. This, coming from a Ghoul supporter.

What's your point? Do you want to add some substance to your post?

[DesertFox]

Anyone supporting McCain or Huckabee is a traitor. He is? In what sense? Remember that the Constitution has a very specific definition of 'traitor.'

[jayson]

We must notta seen the same debate. I saw Romney flustered and pissed off. I saw Thompson exuding quiet competence and authority. Shocked the hell outta me when Stephanopoulos said just what I was thinking.

The truth of it is that every supporter thinks their candidate did the best. :rolleyes:

[Longhorn_Platinum]

CzechPrince:
What's your point? Do you want to add some substance to your post?

:moo: Sure! You bellyache that "Huckatrash" & Romney aren't electable, yet you support a candidate who isn't electable. Let me tell you something about Giuliani. This race was his for the taking, but he threw it away by refusing to concede that he's wrong about a woman's so-called "right" to kill her baby. It would have been a lot easier for him to change (as Romney did), than to expect millions of pro-life Republicans to change. That arrogance will cost him any chance he has of getting the nomination, or the White House, even if he does. At least HuckaBEE & Romney know how to appeal to the base of their party.

[CzechPrince]

:moo: Sure! You bellyache that "Huckatrash" & Romney aren't electable,

That's a lie, and I don't appreciate it. I didn't bellyache one bit. I stated my opinion.

yet you support a candidate who isn't electable.

I guess most republicans and others, including myself disagree with you, considering he is still the national front runner.

Let me tell you something about Giuliani. This race was his for the taking, but he threw it away by refusing to concede that he's wrong about a woman's so-called "right" to kill her baby.

Incorrect. People have known Rudy has always been pro choice. What people don't like are flip floppers. It hurt Kerry, and low and behold, it appears it's hurting Romney now as well.


It would have been a lot easier for him to change (as Romney did), than to expect millions of pro-life Republicans to change. That arrogance will cost him any chance he has of getting the nomination, or the White House, even if he does. At least HuckaBEE & Romney know how to appeal to the base of their party.

Yes, they know how to lie. And do you think Huckabee is so apt with his soft crime stance and immigration stance? You think abortion is all republicans care about because you do so much?

[Longhorn_Platinum]

CzechPrince:
That's a lie, and I don't appreciate it. I didn't bellyache one bit. I stated my opinion.

:moo: It's not a lie, it's my opinion.

I guess most republicans and others, including myself disagree with you, considering he is still the national front runner.

:moo: The ones in Iowa didn't agree with that. Last I checked Empress Wang is still in the lead for the demonic rats, but her campaign is imploding; same with Giuliani, now that most Republicans realize that we have more choices.

Incorrect. People have known Rudy has always been pro [abortion]. What people don't like are flip floppers. It hurt Kerry, and low and behold, it appears it's hurting Romney now as well.

:moo: People are entitled to change their minds, & I find it refreshing that for once, it's a pro-abortion politician becoming pro-life instead of the other way around. Nearly every politician flip-flops occasionally. And so far, flip-flopping Romney has more delegates to the national convention than steadily pro-abortion Giuliani.

Yes, they know how to lie. And do you think Huckabee is so apt with his soft crime stance and immigration stance? You think abortion is all republicans care about because you do so much?

:moo: Obviously, not all Republicans care about the right to life; Giuliani is proof of that. But it sure didn't help him in Iowa, & before it's over, his pro-abortionness will hurt him elsewhere.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

CzechPrince:
I guess most republicans and others, including myself disagree with you, considering he is still the national front runner.

:moo: This just in on Fox: HuckaBEE is now the front runner, leading Giulitrash by .7%.

[The_Elucidator]

The theory behind Ron's electability is that in the general election,

There is no theory behind his electability outside of his own website! :rolleyes:

The issue with Huckster and Romney... and even with Thompson as well as McCain... is that they are all for the war. When a nation is now 70% against the war, how do you expect any of the pro-war candidates to win in a general election? Paired with the fact that, assuming Obama gets the nod, you will have to compete with legions of misguided youngsters who think that they want "real change" (synonymous with a Nanny State) and are going to vote for Obama.

You really don't know what in the hell you are talking about, do you? "Stuck on stupid," really is the theme that is resonating from the Rupaul camp!

:roar:Theory behind his electability..... :rotflmbo: You're killing us!

[SmellyFed]

After last night, I have doubts about Thompson. Not his ability, his electability. Ron Paul is an out and out loser.

Romney came out best of all.

I like what Thompson stands for - if he makes it through the primaries, he'll have my vote. I think he started too late though.

Huckabee would have my vote as well. It's a shame Tancredo fell to the wayside.

There are other "Republican" candidates however who I'd really struggle to vote for. McCain is way too liberal and way too old. Romney is in a cult. Ron Paul is nuts. Guiliani is more socially liberal then some of the Democratic candidates.

[Lazarus]

He is? In what sense? Remember that the Constitution has a very specific definition of 'traitor.'I think Max was speaking from the Gospel According to Max, not necessarily the constitution... He was on a roll... Just go with it... :biggrin:

[Maggie_T]

We must notta seen the same debate. I saw Romney flustered and pissed off. I saw Thompson exuding quiet competence and authority.

Well, you see, Fox. Some people take that to be laziness and disinterest. Fred does not make those people "feel special" by panting "Elect ME! ... Elect ME! ... Please, elect ME! Pretty please?" Also, he does not portray himself as Super Nanny, the hero that will solve all their problems (forget the country's problems).

Some people are not convinced by "quiet competence and authority." The want drama, fireworks, histrionics. For some inexplicable reason, they trust those who are more competent at conning them.

No, don't ask me, mate. I can't figure it out, either. :rolleyes:

[maxparrish]

He is? In what sense? Remember that the Constitution has a very specific definition of 'traitor.'
Ya, I meant a traitor to the party.

[Venus de Smilo]

Lord knows I hate to sound reasonable or be accused of looking at the big picture, but let me remind everyone. The Goal is to Defeat Clinton or Obamma. Personally, I dont care for Rudy, McCain or Huckabee (I am a Duncan Hunter guy) but any of those three would be an improvement over Clinton, Obamma or Edwards.
The simplicity of common sense is an elegant thing to behold.

[Venus de Smilo]

Rasmussen nailed the % on the McCain win.

[Venus de Smilo]

I thought the goal was to get this country going in the right direction again by finally getting a Conservative elected President, :biggrin:?!.

(Of course, DF said in one word (Thompson), what it took me 22, :smirky: to do.)

That is the goal, but it's not going to happen this election cycle.

[Venus de Smilo]

Home is quite right! Fred is the only American Conservative Union conservative among the lot BUT Romney at least has adopted all the conservative positions with firmness, and Guiliani may not have the correct personal sympathies on abortion he has made it clear that his court appointments will be conservatives like Scalia.

These three are acceptable to most of us, in the order given. Huckabee and McCain are not acceptable. Neither is a conservative. Both support the transformation of America into a overpopulated (1/2 billion by mid century) of primarily Mexican culture, supplemented by 100 million of the least skilled and talented of the 3rd world.

Both have shown themselves willing to raise taxes on dubious issues like global warming. McCain loves international law and wishes to free terrorists; Huckabee has queer (why don't the love us) foreign policy views.

Hillary IS to be preferred over these two poseurs - why should Republicans be blamed for liberal policies? As it is Bush pushed for Amnesty and open borders, do we want another President on our side that will ALSO promote crippling the American economy with higher taxes and restrictions on the US because of global warming?

Anyone supporting McCain or Huckabee is a traitor. I hope no one here is doing so.
You're out of your effing mind.

[Venus de Smilo]

After last night, I have doubts about Thompson. Not his ability, his electability. Ron Paul is an out and out loser.

Romney came out best of all.
Thompson would be a very good president, imo, but his communication skills suck. He just does not connect. In today's molly-coddled, whining, nanny-state, celebrity-worshipping, egocentric me-me-me society driven by 'feelings' instead of logic and pragmatism, a candidate has to be able to grab attention through personality and imagination. Thompson just doesn't have that ability. His 'walk-softly-and-carry-a-big-stick' schtick isn't working for him. His personality and wit are too low-key and dry for the dumbshitz masses in this country, and that includes members of our party. Look at the bozos who voted for Huck, yet Thompson is the one who sat in that recent debate and explained habeas corpus to Huck who wants to BRING GITMO DETAINEES INTO THE U.S. and Huck STILL didn't get it.

[Venus de Smilo]

:moo: Sure! You bellyache that "Huckatrash" & Romney aren't electable, yet you support a candidate who isn't electable. Let me tell you something about Giuliani. This race was his for the taking, but he threw it away by refusing to concede that he's wrong about a woman's so-called "right" to kill her baby. It would have been a lot easier for him to change (as Romney did), than to expect millions of pro-life Republicans to change. That arrogance will cost him any chance he has of getting the nomination, or the White House, even if he does. At least HuckaBEE & Romney know how to appeal to the base of their party.
That's one way to look at it. Others consider Romney a flip-flopper who was perfectly happy to abandon his aforestated principles in order to get in the action.

Also, his solution to any future attacks on our country is to call the lawyers.

I think Romney would be a good sec-treasury or commerce and economic adviser.

I don't think Huck will appeal to the base once they get a load of what he's really about and how NOT ready-for-prime-time he is. Of the current top-tier contenders, he's the worst possible choice.

[Venus de Smilo]

That's a lie, and I don't appreciate it. I didn't bellyache one bit. I stated my opinion.



I guess most republicans and others, including myself disagree with you, considering he is still the national front runner.



Incorrect. People have known Rudy has always been pro choice. What people don't like are flip floppers. It hurt Kerry, and low and behold, it appears it's hurting Romney now as well.




Yes, they know how to lie. And do you think Huckabee is so apt with his soft crime stance and immigration stance? You think abortion is all republicans care about because you do so much?

I agree with you CP. Good post.

I think Romney would sell his grandmother down the river if he thought it would help him.

We have a lot of one-issue voters in our party.

[Venus de Smilo]

I like what Thompson stands for - if he makes it through the primaries, he'll have my vote. I think he started too late though.

Huckabee would have my vote as well. It's a shame Tancredo fell to the wayside.

There are other "Republican" candidates however who I'd really struggle to vote for. McCain is way too liberal and way too old. Romney is in a cult. Ron Paul is nuts. Guiliani is more socially liberal then some of the Democratic candidates.
Which 'rat candidates are more socially conservative than Rudy? Hillary? Obama? Richardson? Kucinich?

[Venus de Smilo]

Well, you see, Fox. Some people take that to be laziness and disinterest. Fred does not make those people "feel special" by panting "Elect ME! ... Elect ME! ... Please, elect ME! Pretty please?" Also, he does not portray himself as Super Nanny, the hero that will solve all their problems (forget the country's problems).

Some people are not convinced by "quiet competence and authority." The want drama, fireworks, histrionics. For some inexplicable reason, they trust those who are more competent at conning them.

No, don't ask me, mate. I can't figure it out, either. :rolleyes:
I can explain it, I think. It's because of the entertainment industry. It's what people are used to seeing now. Look at reality TV, look at all this celebrity crap - high drama every minute, and bang! Slam! Zoom! noise, lights, frenetic racket all the time, car chases, whatever. Look at musicians. Remember when musicians stood on a stage and played their music? And the most bizarre that they got was Halloweenish or sloppy outfits? Not anymore. Now it's huge props, nudity or near-nudity, the foulest language, explosions, displays of or simulations of sex acts and acts of violence, and so on. Thoughtful conversation that requires listening and analytical skills is boring and difficult.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Too many are buying into, and putting to much emphasis on the "electability" bunk, instead of choosing the candidate that best represents the people, party, and platform. I won't be among that number, as I fully intend to vote Thompson come the Flori-duh Primary January 29th.

:fred:

[Elgalad]

:claps:Homes!:claps:

What she said. :thumb:

I have to wait until Feb. 19 here, and since all the big primaries come well before that, the race could be pretty much over by then.

But I'll Still be casting my vote for Fred, no matter what.


-Elgalad

[Venus de Smilo]

Too many are buying into, and putting to much emphasis on the "electability" bunk, instead of choosing the candidate that best represents the people, party, and platform. I won't be among that number, as I fully intend to vote Thompson come the Flori-duh Primary January 29th.

:fred:

We've only had two states speak so far, but I haven't heard much about people admitting they vote strategically in the primary. My concern is how people vote in the general if the candidate isn't sufficiently conservative to suit them.

[CzechPrince]

[/color] :moo: It's not a lie, it's my opinion.

No, it was a lie, and you should admit it as such without trying to spin it. Little smilies and emoticons aren't going to work either and don't excuse intentional misleadings on your part. I never whined or even complained. I'm asking you very politely not to lie about me again.

The ones in Iowa didn't agree with that. Last I checked Empress Wang is still in the lead for the demonic rats, but her campaign is imploding; same with Giuliani, now that most Republicans realize that we have more choices.

I believe Ms Wang just won New Hampshire. Care to reassess that statement? I find it funny that you think Huckabee is some kind of choice. Thompson is a choice. Even McCain is a choice. Romney is a charlatan.

People are entitled to change their minds,

Oh and I'm sure you defended John Kerry very well on here 4 years ago as well.


& I find it refreshing that for once, it's a pro-abortion politician becoming pro-life instead of the other way around. You're not naive, you just don't care because he's A) a Republican and B) "Pro Life"

Nearly every politician flip-flops occasionally. And it happens at the most convenient moments now, doesn't it? He was governor of one of the most liberal states in the country, he was pro choice, he supported gay rights, and now all of a sudden, a short time before he runs for President he changes his stances (after the MA governor elections, he'd never get elected in that state now)?

And so far, flip-flopping Romney has more delegates to the national convention than steadily pro-abortion Giuliani.We'll see, Romeny may drop out before Rudy even gets any delegates if he doesn't win Michigan.

:moo: Obviously, not all Republicans care about the right to life; Giuliani is proof of that. But it sure didn't help him in Iowa, & before it's over, his pro-abortionness will hurt him elsewhere.Iowa is not representative of this entire country. And his pro choice stance really won't hurt him as much as people think it will. If it was going to, it already would have.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

CzechPrince:
No, it was a lie, and you should admit it as such without trying to spin it. Little smilies and emoticons aren't going to work either and don't excuse intentional misleadings on your part. I never whined or even complained. I'm asking you very politely not to lie about me again.

:moo: Whining is in the ear of the beholder. That doesn't make me a liar. And the smilies work fine on my computer.


CzechPrince:
I believe Ms Wang just won New Hampshire. Care to reassess that statement?

:moo: Why should I? Miss Wang won, & Giuliani didn't.

:rotflmbo: He's pulling out of states faster than they can hold their primaries.

CzechPrince:
I find it funny that you think Huckabee is some kind of choice. Thompson is a choice. Even McCain is a choice. Romney is a charlatan.

:moo: You think Huckabee is no choice, but Giuliani is? A pro-abortion cross-dresser? Look, Huckabee isn't my first choice, but he's acceptable. And Romney looks like a big plastic phony, but I'd still vote for him if he got the nomination.

CzechPrince:
Oh and I'm sure you defended John Kerry very well on here 4 years ago as well.

:question: Where'd that come from?

CzechPrince:
You're not naive, you just don't care because he's A) a Republican and B) "Pro Life"

:moo: Well, those are my two main criteria.

CzechPrince:
And it happens at the most convenient moments now, doesn't it? He was governor of one of the most liberal states in the country, he was pro choice, he supported gay rights, and now all of a sudden, a short time before he runs for President he changes his stances (after the MA governor elections, he'd never get elected in that state now)?

:moo: He's not very well principled, I'll give you that, but Giuliani's "principles" include a woman's so-called "right" to kill her baby.

CzechPrince:
We'll see, Romeny may drop out before Rudy even gets any delegates if he doesn't win Michigan.

:moo: Giuliani can't even win a single delegate, & if his Michigan poll numbers don't suit him, he might pull out before primary day. At least Romney sticks around to face the music.

CzechPrince:
Iowa is not representative of this entire country. And his pro choice stance really won't hurt him as much as people think it will. If it was going to, it already would have.

:moo: How has it not hurt him? As of this typing, he has NO delegates.