1. McCain is now ahead about everywhere but Arkansas, Utah, and Massachusetts--the home states of his two opponents.
2. One (deviant) poll does have Romney and McCain tied in Georgia now, and Huck fading. In general, Romney is doing (for me, unexpectedly) better in the South, and so it might make more sense now for even Southerners to vote for him as part of the "tough love" project described below.
3. Huck’s campaign has become repulsive. It’s not directed against McCain at all and it’s all about questioning Romney’s conservative credentials.
4. Still, remember that McCain remains the second choice of (probably) most Huck voters and (certainly) most Romney voters. Taking one out wouldn’t help the other all that much. So maybe my advice is to stick with your favorite non-McCain choice.
5. There’s something valiant and tragic about Romney’s current campaign. He’s desperately trying to figure out and focus his resources where he might win, but he just doesn’t have time to get his strategy or message right. And of course he had to take time out for Gordon Hinckley’s funeral.
It’ll take a miracle for him not to be thinking very seriously about dropping out next Wednesday.
It's true that Huckabee is no longer running in good faith. Giuliani could have continued as Huckabee has, trying to get himself a VP nod, but he didn't. And Hunter could have stayed around, just to get his face on television during the debates, but he didn't.
And I don't think Huckabee is going to get the nod either.
A} Whatever promises McCain might have made to him aren't to be relied upon;
B} He's pissed off a good many Conservatives by his clearly fraudulent campaign, and right now he's as loathed in some quarters as McCain himself. Thus attaching him to the ticket would only compound the offense of McCain topping the ticket, and instead of assuaging opposition, it would inflame it.
C} There are other true Conservatives who wouldn't inflame, wouldn't irritate, and are much better articulating the Conservative cause, and it would make sense for McCain to reach out to them, instead of saddling himself with old Huckabee.
Thus there are two men who I think delude themselves that they're going to be seriously considered for the VP spot, and they are Lindsay Graham and Huckabee houndog.
Thompson didn't run in "good faith" in SC either.
Everyone dislikes Romney. The guy is a real dud.
Huck's campaign is stronger than you think. He will run strong 2nds in most of the south, winning Arkansas and probably 1 or 2 among AL, OK, MO, TN, GA.
Yea, I've some mixed thoughts on Thompson's "candidacy" too.
I don't really care how "strong" Huck runs right now, he's not running in good faith. And instead of going after McCain, the guy everybody has got to stop, he's going after Romney. Huckabee's actions leave little room for ambiguity. He's made some kind of deal with McCain, or at least he thinks he has. McCain will disabuse him of that foolish notion soon enough. Too bad the cameras won't be there the moment that Huckabee understands that McCain double-crossed him.
Part of what seems to hurt Romney's campaign so much is this mercurial attempt to combine a kind of technocratic, data driven, policy wonkishness with a bold message of transforming a "broken" Washington...his recent strategy is a good example of how Obama's rhetoric has impacted the entire election on both sides of the aisle, or even how youth can help fashion the terms of the debate without any reliable promise they will actually vote.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good; remember that the enemy of freedom isn't an imperfect John McCain so much as it is the illiberal left. They use power to indoctrinate the public, especially the young, so as to retain power.
If you want to expose a scandal, look into the state of the education of future teachers.
I don't understand why so many people on NLT seem to think that Huckabee is the "real" conservative, but McCain is some sort of liberal interloper. Huckabee is a bigger fan of big government than many Democrats. We should be glad he isn't winning.
Quote from an article way back in 1984: "I've never actually seen a lemming ... but when I do, I expect to see more than one."
That explains the McCain poll numbers.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good; remember that the enemy of freedom isn't an imperfect John McCain so much as it is the illiberal left.
John McCain is the illiberal left. Why is that not obvious to everyone? He supports civil rights for foreign terrorists, and opposes free speech for Americans. That is the illiberal left in a nutshell.
His economic views are pure eat-the rich liberalism.
His economic views are pure eat-the rich liberalism.
There is some truth to this. Is Huckabee any better, though? As near as I can tell, he favors increased taxes and regulation, and would be lukewarm on trade (at best). He's basically a 17th century mercantilist.
We're screwed. Period. Bush could be at 55% approval, and we still couldn't win with this field. We should start talking about Senate and house races.
I know Huckabee and McCain each has decent supporters with good motives, but considering a comment made in the last thread on this, where someone was convincingly saying that McCain's support is far less pro-business than it is anti-Christian right, and considering the strange way Huck has been as much about evangelical red-state Idenity as he has been about social conservatism, it seems to me that for many voters, McCain and Huck seem to be functioning as some weird anti-matter/matter polar opposites, as the politics-as-the-organization-of-intra-party-hatreds. The Huckabeeans vote to send a message to the "Republican establishment" and the McCainites vote to get control over the nutty religious right. Alas.
Is Huckabee any better, though?
No, but Romney is.
I'm afraid that "fiscal conservatism" has been tarnished in any case. I can't blame a lot of people for being hostile to it, given some of the things done in its name.
I intensely dislike McCain, but look at it this way--his lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union is 82.3. Granted, his rating for 2006 was only 65, but even that means usually on the right side. By contrast, Obama and Hillary both received the same score from the ACU: 8.
Is that difference enough for me to get excited about John McCain? Hardly. Is it enough to get me to the polls on Election Day? Hell, yeah.
Romney has violated the twelve conservative commandments, not necessarily in order or directly related to the Biblical ten commandments, yes I know the real ten commandments are nothing like these:
1. I don't understand how anyone can support Romney after he "loaned" another 10-20 million to his campaign. The operative word being loaned. He expects his supporters to pay him back. "Thou shalt not steal"
https://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/06/25/romney-says-he-will-loan-his-campaign-more-money/
2. He certainly is not a fiscal conservative considering he left his state with fewer jobs and an amazing deficit. His campaign seems to be on the same road to bankruptcy. "Thou shalt not misrepresent your record"
https://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/12/30/state_could_face_1b_deficit_in_07/
3. His dishonest negative campaign ads set the tone for a divisive non-issue focused primary season: "Thou shalt not slander the name of other republicans for your own personal benefit"
https://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/31/romney.ads/
4. He left Huckabee and McCain no choice but to unite against him in opposition. If politicians join together to call someone dishonest he/she must really be dishonest. "Thou shalt not complain about what you forced to happen"
5. While Romney fans and Romney bought Fox News have filled the airways with dishonesty and name-calling we are left with no choice but McCain or Huckabee or McCain/Huckabee. "Thou shalt not lie"
6. Furthermore, McCain is not as bad as 50 million dollars of attack ads make him out to be. "Thou shalt not waste ridiculous amounts of money and go 35 million dollars in debt in the primaries"
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp
7. Huckabee is more conservative than Romney on fiscal issues based on "fiscal" facts: "Give honor to whom honor is actually due"
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/11/huckabee_is_a_fiscal_conservat.html
8. Romney chokes and almost cries on national CNN debate when someone questions his record on his constant flip-flopping on Iraq time-table. "Thou shalt not do Kerry like flip-flops"
9. Huckabee has been for a right-to-life ammendment from the get go... Romney not so sure. "Thou shalt not kill or support killing when you are governor and donate money to planned parenthood like Romney has"
10. The fact is when Romney calls himself a Regean conservative and has to buy 25 million dollars worth of ads to try and prove that, there is something wrong besides the obvious fact that he is clearly not from his record, a conservative.
11. He claims to be a life-long hunter when his record on gun rights is nothing to be shouting about. Furthermore, the right to bear arms has nothing to do with hunting and everything to do with freedom. "Thou shalt not threaten the right to bear arms"
https://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-04-05-romney-hunting_N.htm
12. He asks Huckabee to give up when he is in a statistical tie with Huckabee in national republican primary fox news poll: "Thou shalt not ask your opponent to give up when his beating you in several states and tied with you in national polls"
https://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/020108_election_release_web.pdf
The fact is Romney brought this situation on himself, the candidate that should of, could of and would of won the nomination had he not broken all twelve of the conservative commandments. So please give me some facts, backed up by links to prove at least some of what you say about Romney or better yet please cease the useless name calling about Huckabee and McCain. Lets make this about the issues not who has more money.