Skip to comments.(vanity) Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
Posted on 11/15/2007 3:43:17 AM PST by Kevmo
click here to read article
“Duncan’s record on spending is abysmal. Simple as that.”
Really? Prove it.
“Hunter talks a good game, and votes well on many issues dear to social conservatives, but he spends like a beltway boy. In addition, his ties to the military industry would have the media digging out stories like this, and more:”
He gets money from the military industry because he is in the Armed Services Committee. If he were in the Forestry Committee on tree-hugging, he would be getting campaign money from loggers or greenpeace. If you got a problem with the way campaign finance is done, why don’t you join McCain and the rest of the Totalitarians who want to shut down free speech.
Go, Duncan Hunter- the man America needs!
Did anyone say otherwise?
That’s the big question.
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.
Here is my left-wing source on federal budgets:
“Did you get out your home edition of word-twister? No, ties to the miltary industrial gravy train can be a bad thing. Ties to the military and its ethos and spirit of service is an excellent thing. But big military budgets by the Fed Gov are as prone to mismanagement and lobbying shenanigans as any other government spending program.”
Yup, the ‘military industrial complex’ has become a political ciche which has negative feelings attached. Mooshy moderates and liberals are cliche-monkeys.
“Military spending is the third biggest line item in the federal budget, after interest on the debt and entitlements.”
Not if you seperate it into Army, Airforce, Marines, Coast Guard spending. Heck lets seperate it down into Armies and Brigades, so its no longer a big number. Christ. Try looking at the percentages of entitlements ADDED TOGETHER IN TOTAL in comparison to other spending.
Only a Dem would be dishonest enough to support Kerry and his fake military record and in the same breath tell us that Hunter can’t win the election because he has been part of the Military.
“Here is my left-wing source on federal budgets:
$305 billion on National Defense, out of $1,862 billion in total. 1/6th
Everyone here has been saying his lockout was a done deal.
Now I can watch it.
“So when I go vote January 3rd in the Iowa caucus; should I support Hunter (who I like) who only has 4-5% support?
Thats the big question.”
Would you rather have politicians leading you by a leash, or would you rather lead the politicians with a leash? Who’s the boss anyways, you or them?
Good post mogambo.
I know McCain isn’t too popular here on FR, but his stand against pork barrel spending has to count for something. I like Duncan Hunter & I expect to vote for him sometime in the future - I see this campaign as a “practice run” for him. He’ll be a real contender down the road. Meanwhile, McCain has more experience & a greater sense of fiscal responsibility, while attempting to continue the “Reagan Legacy” in many ways. THAT’S who we need in office! (Besides, wouldn’t you just LOVE to see him go toe-to-toe w/ Hillary? She wouldn’t stand a chance!).
Even though Duncan is an honorable man, his campaign has failed from the begining. It is honorable not to 'need consultants, or have people do work for you, or write your own speeches', but the downside is you are too busy doing the small stuff to concentrate on the major stuff, like RUNNING for POTUS.
When you run a NATIONAL campaign, the objective is to get your message out to the people, not just in specific localities, but NATION-wide. And that takes people, and a management that understands what a NATIONAL campaign entails.
To that end, his campaign management has failed their man, and those of you who cannot see that are fighting a losing cause, as noble as that is, it is still a lost cause.
I know that pains you and the responses will be what they always are, childish and delusional. You will respond with all the failings of every other candidate just to make your self feel better and your guy look good, but only to you.
There will be those who say... "it's a conspiracy'...."the powers that be are not letting Duncan get his message out"......"the MSM is in cahoots with the Bush administration to muzzle Hunter" No matter that the MSM hates GWB, and there is no basis for them to even be in the same room.
The truth, as painful as it is, is still the truth.
When the NRTL endorsed FDT earlier this week, the Mitt fans, Duncan supporters, Huckabee promoters, and Rudy ravers had a complete breakdown on this forum. More inconsequential, minor-league obscure articles appeared to try and promote 'your' candidate.
Face it. The NRTL endorsement is one of the biggest chips to have on your side of the table in this high stakes game.
Next for Fred will be the NRA endorsement, with it's 6-7 MILLION members. And that will be a very big chip, indeed.
I think you misunderstand. I’m not a Huckabee fan by any stretch of the imagination. However, policies and record aside, Huck managed to do what any presidential candidate needs to do to gain traction: He displayed the charisma necessary to get people to vote for him.
Huck has the charisma, but not the record to back it up. Hunter has the record with ZERO charisma. Neither is going to win anything, but charisma goes a long way, which is evident by Huck’s rising from the back of the pack.
If Hunter had what it took, he could have done what Huckabee did. He’d be a viable contender now who would be on his way to winning the nomination, rather than winning the nomination in someone’s delusion. Huck won’t succeed, because he doesn’t have the record to back up the charisma. Both are necessary.
The age old question. Hunter hasn’t been able to generate support.
If I vote for him and am with 4% or 5% of the voters, what good does that do? Candidates with that level of support will be gone very soon and your vote will have been wasted.
The candidates must be able to generate support, good ideas are essential, but good ideas without support do not really mean a lot.
Hunters organization at the straw here was embarrassing, it was almost nonexistent. I say the organization, not the candidate.
His message is good, he sounds good in the debates.
Posting on internet message boards supporting a candidate is one thing, but actually putting an organization together and getting people to vote for you is another thing entirely.
“If I vote for him and am with 4% or 5% of the voters, what good does that do? Candidates with that level of support will be gone very soon and your vote will have been wasted.”
My vote will be wasted if I vote for someone who will wreck the middle class with free trade, insourcing and outsourcing.
has made deals with the Dems -ex. Gang of 14 which undermined the simple majority requirements for judges,
wrote McCain Feingold (with Thompson’s assistance) to silence conservatives,
was integral to the amnesty attempt, while making comments about the need to do it quickly before “extracurricular” politics occured (read: before the people get home from work or the unemplyment line and notice)
and he’s been way too cozy with the liar’s bimbo-eruption manager.
No, I do not want him to represent us against her.
Now close your eyes and picture Duncan Hunter looking at her while she tells her lies.
Picture her squirming as he recalls, from his amazing numerical memory, specific dates and statements of various relevant actions that expose her as the liar she is.
Then, picture the stage as he offers clear, specific proposals to her nonsensical empty platitudes.
Duncan Hunter- the man we need to lead!
$1,000 burning a hole in my pocket? Not since I’ve had children :P