(vanity) Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter

Self ^ | 11/11/07 | Kevmo

[Kevmo]

these are the 2 most conservative candidates in the race.

Jim Noble: And therefore the most likely to lose in November.
***Ouch. The republican party continues its centrist march off a liberal cliff with each passing day, even right here on Free Republic. Ouch.

[Kevmo]

Thanks. I do sincerely hope that Hunter wins the nomination because he would be the best president out of all the contenders.

[Kevmo]

Thanks guys:

pissant; Earthdweller ; Hunterite;

for taking that item.

Hopefully puddleglum gets his questions answered.

[Kevmo]

Freds name recognition will keep him alive until his advertising and debates starts boosting his numbers.
***That’s just it, his debates should have boosted his numbers but once people have taken a look, his numbers have gone down in polls and on Intrade. Hunter’s poll numbers are slowly inching upward and soon Intrade should follow suit.

[kevkrom]

if Hunter gets to 4% on Intrade, reflecting his current polling status

You're still incorrectly conflating support numbers with probabilities. Even if the obvious 4% outlier were accurate, Hunter still has an approximately zero chance of winning the nomination, as is reflected in his stagnant and marginal "price" on Intrade.

[Kevmo]

Mogambo: “Duncan’s record on spending is abysmal. Simple as that.”

Hunterite: Really? Prove it.
***Thanks for taking that, Hunterite. I have my hands full.

[Kevmo]

So when I go vote January 3rd in the Iowa caucus; should I support Hunter (who I like) who only has 4-5% support?
That’s the big question.
***Absolutely. Because he is the better man.

The straw poll votes we had here in August didn’t matter as much; but this one picks our party’s nominee for the state.
***And Hunter deserves that nomination. Look at his record. He’s no johnny-come-lately on the big 3 hot-button items of immigration, WOT, Pro-life. Go with the candidate who reflects your vision of America rather than the MSM’s version of it.

[Sun]

Laura Ingraham was saying the other day that this is the primary time, and it’s time to see what we’re made of.

Conservatives need to FIGHT for the best candidate, DUNCAN HUNTER, or we’re going to end up with a globalist and a candidate that is soft on the life issue.

Duncan Hunter voted AGAINST Permanent Trade with Red China. McCain and Thompson voted FOR it, and now we have an approximately $250 BILLION trade imbalance EACH YEAR with Red China - more money for Red China to buy missles and all kinds of weapons to use against our friends and us some day.

Duncan Hunter has the highest COMMITMENT to the life issue. He introduces the personhood-at-concetion bill each year, and Duncan Hunter and Brownback were the only presidential candidates to attend the pro-life march in Washington, D.C. Where were the others that day?

We get the government we deserve.

Fight for Duncan Hunter with all you’ve got for the sake of our morals and our sovereignty.

[perfect_rovian_storm]

You need charisma AND the record to back it up. Rudy doesn’t have both, Romney doesn’t have both, Huckabee doesn’t have both. They’re all missing the record. (Actually, I think Romney is missing both charisma AND a record and Rudy’s charisma is questionable at best.)

Whether you have charisma and a crappy record or a great record and no charisma, you’re still missing 50% of what you need to close the deal.

Think what you want about underdogs, but the media doesn’t pay attention to Hunter because he gives them no reason to.

[Kevmo]

Thanks, Pistolshot. Your post is a question about the efficacy of the prediction markets so I will copy it over on that thread.

One thing prediction markets are better at — their only bias is whether someone can make money trading the futures contracts.

The Efficacy Of Prediction Markets The Liberty Papers ^ | November 8, 2007 | Brad Warbiany http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1922961/posts

Posted on 11/08/2007 12:21:43 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum

[pissant]

Only its better than Freds.

[Kevmo]

I answered your post over on the efficacy thread.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1922961/posts?page=41#41

[normy]

I don't think its sleazy. Whats sleazy is having a way to end abortion and save countless lives in states already prepared to outlaw abortion. Having a way to stop abortion in purple states by using grassroots efforts to force local gov'ts to outlaw it therefore reducing abortion down to only a handful of states but people not willing to back that approach nor give a better solution or even a candidate.

In other words the same people angry at the millions of lives lost in America due to abortion are not willing to stop half of them now and work to stop the other half over the next years. Think of how many abortions would be stopped if the issue went back to the states.

When people question someone who has been staunchly pro life their whole political career because they have a different approach to ending abortion than they do, it frankly makes me sick.

[kevkrom]

Only its better than Freds.

Not according to the National Taxpayer's Union, who consistently scored Thompson higher than Hunter.

[normy]

i like Hunter, I even sent him some money a month or so ago but I also like Fred. I really don't see much different in the two besides their life story.

I have been moving toward Fred since the debates.

[Kevmo]

Interesting points. I think Hunterite is well equipped to take them on, I have my hands full.

One minor note on the
03 drug prescription plans,
is that this was a big deal in Floriduh where there are a lot of retirees, and we all know how important that state was in both elections. It’s unfortunate to suggest that some compromises are worth it and some aren’t, but my radar is set to immigration, WOT/Military, Right to Life, protecting American Jobs and Character. The back & forth deals on spending do not interest me as much, so I think it’s good to have that discussion with Hunterite.

[processing please hold]

Here's what The Federalist has to say about it.

Lautenberg Domestic Confiscation gun ban

Certainly the worst sin Thompson has committed against the Second Amendment was voting for this amendment to the aforementioned Treasury-Postal appropriations bill. It removed the right to own firearms from anyone convicted of domestic violence. CAF of course sensationalizes this by stating that spanking your child could cause you to lose your guns. This is an incredible leap considering spanking is legal in all states. While this is a disappointment, no candidate is perfect.

[pissant]

I know. They are mistaken. They consider votes against WTO/NAFTA/PNTR as negatives. And they include defense and border security spending, which should be excluded, but is not.