Posted on 11/21/2007 2:21:25 AM PST by wastedpotential
Signs of progress for Huckabee in the South: Nature Boy sides with him, and Nathan Deal says he might Tuesday, November 20, 2007, 10:00 AM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
You have to hand it to Mike Huckabee, the dark horse Republican in the presidential field. He’s got a good ear for the blue-collar vote.
While Rudy Giuliani wandered around NASCAR pits, Huckabee collared Chuck Norris, and cut an entertaining 30-second spot with the star of “Walker: Texas Ranger” and countless B-grade shoot-‘em-ups.
On Saturday, Huckabee got himself tickets to the Clemson-South Carolina game in Columbia, S.C. He’ll be escorted to a tailgate party by 16-time World Wrestling Heavyweight champion, Ric “the Nature Boy” Flair.
Nathan Deal, the congressman from North Georgia, may be among those Huckabee is impressing.
Yesterday’s Congressional Quarterly had a piece bemoaning the alleged failure of Fred Thompson to leave other Republican candidates for the White House in the dust.
It includes these paragraphs:
The late entry appears to have contributed to the loss of one possible endorsement in the House.
Rep. Nathan Deal , R-Ga., was once on the brink of declaring for Thompson but ultimately chose to keep his powder dry.
Deal said that, like others, Thompson waiting so long to get into the race disconcerted him.
“He really hasn’t caught fire,” said Deal, who has not committed to a candidate. Deal did not rule out the possibility of endorsing Thompson, or at least voting for him, later on.
But he also said former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee , who is outpolling Thompson in Iowa, might get his help. Huckabee and Thompson are in direct competition for social conservatives.
A Huckabee endorsement by Deal would leave the Georgia’s GOP delegation
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
I’m praying for Macho Man Randy Savage to endorse Romney. If he endorses Huck, I’ll have to change my handle. LOL
Are people more concerned that Fred Thompson didn't invest more effort in Iowa and New Hampshire? I'm just not clear on it.
I have to say I support Fred Thompson's positions well and above what I've seen Tom Huckabee promote from a historical perspective. The only problem I have with Fred Thompson's past is his support of McCain's CFR. He's since explained that position. Tom Huckabee has promoted nanny-statism by promoting smoking bans and has a problem with his record on taxes. I just don't see where Huckabee comes off as a better alternative to Thompson.
At least I don't get it beyond seeing that the liberal media gives Huckabee plenty of free press. Thompson's pretty much been blacked out.
I know of another ‘Chuck’ that has endorsed a presidential candidate and it’s odd that the drive-by media (and even conservative media) seem to overlook it:
General Chuck Yeager endorsed Congressman Duncan Hunter early in the game.
As fine a man as Chuck Norris is, given the choice, I’ll trust the judgment of Chuck Yeager ANY day.
lots of freepers have many reasons against Huck. My primary reason for his rejection is his support for illegals. He even wants to give them subsidized tuition. That’s called selling out this country.
My issue with Thompson is this: He is more “show” than “go.” I like his style and his “presence” which I think comes more from him having played certain roles than anything he has actually done politically. I also think his past as a lobbyist, in which he seems to work for the highest bidder not necessarily out of principle. I believe that this can and will be used against him in an election to undermine his message as being insincere.
Now, when Soulja Boy turns out for Huckabee, he'll be a winner, fo sure.
Who has Baron Von Rascke endorsed?
I’ll say this for Huckabee...that Chuck Norris endorsement commercial was pretty clever. As clever as Fred Thompson’s Michael Moore video. My 19 year old didn’t have a clue who Huckabee was (he only knows the leading players at this point)...but when he saw the Norris/Huckabee spot on youtube he emailed it to all his friends. Not a reason to vote for Huckabee, of course, but pretty smart marketing. Who’s running his campaign, anybody know?
In the end, he can't vote in our primary (he will be 2 weeks short of 18), but come November, his mantra is "Anybody but Hillary".
BTW, I should have included the link to the Norris endorsement of Huckabee in case somebody hasn’t seen it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDUQW8LUMs8
Your son should be able to vote in the primary if he will be 18 prior to the general election.
I don’t think he can in Wisconsin. There was some discussion about changing the law a few years ago, but I don’t think it ever passed. I will look into it though, Thanks.
LLS
Give me Fred to Huck, anyday.
At some point maybe the Fred supporters will acknowledge that ridiculing the social conservatives and evangelical community wasn’t a good strategy. They were so happy their man “stood up” to Dobson that they simply refuse to see the clear evidence that Fred’s “courage” in fact has stopped him in his tracks, at least for now, and has given rise to the Huckabeee movement.
The Fred supporters can respond all they want with how unfair Dobson was to question Thompson’s christianity, how Dobson shouldn’t have a place at the table, how Thompson shouldn’t have to “kiss the ring” of anybody.
They may be exactly right, but coulda-shoulda-woulda doesn’t win elections, doing what you need to capture the votes of the constituents is what wins you elections.
It wouldn’t have killed Thompson to respectfully disagree with Dobson and meet with him to discuss matters of mutual interest, to show that Thompson, who doesn’t otherwise APPEAR to put much stock in his faith, would be open to the concerns of the evangelical and social conservative community.
By dismissing them without a care or concern, he gave them cause to dismiss HIM without a care of concern. You may think them irrational to do so, but they still are lost votes Fred can’t afford.
Meanwhile, Huckabee’s rise may give evangelicals a place other than Romney to go to, at least in the south, meaning HE might not be able beat Rudy. Rudy was NEVER counting on social conservatives, he just needs them to split their vote and he can win.
Fred Thompson was going to unite the fiscal, social, and limited-government conservatives. I think he did an OK job on the limited-government folks, and seems to have won a good number of fiscal conservatives. But he failed with the social conservatives.
Hopefully (for Fred fans), the NRLC endorsement will correct that. But given that the social conservatives TEND to like “good government interference”, and Fred certainly can’t give an inch on that point, he still has a tough road to win them back.
I’m not joyful at this, or expressing this to tear down Fred, but offering my honest assessment of what I see happening. The penchant for Fred supporters to attack the messengers isn’t helping them one bit.
Meanwhile, I’m collecting signatures to get Fred Thompson on the ballot in Virginia. I haven’t given up on him.
That’s the story, which would make one wonder how he got Chuck Norris on his side. Is Chuck seen as pro-illegal?
It’s cute, but then you think President is a pretty serious job. On the other hand, Chuck carry a lot of credibility. Not just as an actor (maybe not much as an actor, really), but because of his opinion columns he’s been writing lately, which seem to be well-received here.
I loved Walker Texas Ranger, one of my favorites shows ever. And Norris is a class act as far as I can tell. I think he was born Carlos Ray. I’m not sure if his parents were from Mexico or if this would impact his thinking on immigration. But I admire than man nontheless. While so many so-called conservative actors are unwilling to stand up and be heard, Norris walks the walk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.