Posted on 12/12/2007 11:31:53 PM PST by Kevmo
HELLOOOOOO DUNCAN HUNTER!
Saving for later.
Cool, with that I’ll keep it. :)
1. Fred is a GLOBALIST
2. Fred is for NAFTA, CAFTA.
3. Fred VOTED FOR the Chicoms to receive Most Favored Nation trading status
Fred buys in to the Free Trade crappola, while Duncan Hunter calls for FAIR trade. That's the difference!
Call Duncan Hunter a hawkish protectionist, if you must. But I personally can't find fault with a candidate who puts America first everytime. We will never be able to restore our fractured industrial-manufacturing base if we continue running up our trade deficits and submit to unfair practices of other nations, esp. China. Duncan Hunter is the only presidential candidate who understands this and is calling it to light.
I'll concede and must give credit where credit is due. Fred did great during the debate yesterday. Stellar! Magnifico! But until Fred abandons his GLOBALIST ways, I'll stick to Duncan Hunter.
Update
2008.GOP.NOM.HUNTER
Duncan Hunter to be the Republican Presidential Nominee in 2008 M 0.1 0.3 0.2 30386 +0.1
Hunter’s contracts continue to move, there was a large block at 0.2 that has been bought up, so now the ask price is tripled.
I think you hit it. This election is all about globalism and how it effects our safety and sovereignty. America should never be the last consideration for our own US President, even with globalization as a reality.
Excellent response. Note the reply, almost automated:
“but, but, name recognition”
.
.
.
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
Yes, the MSM efforts to censor the authentic conservatives get a little too blatant sometimes.
there was a large block
and how do they compare to the other candidates? In other words what the interest level among them?
Aren’t they the ones that had Kerry at 80% chance of winning on election day?? It’s pure emotion
***Read the efficacy article. It’s amazing to see someone with an axe to grind calling some other process “pure emotion”. Pot, meet kettle.
If anyone has it wrong, it’s Free Republic. In 2006 we showed 8% who believed we’d lose the house & senate, while the prediction markets had the reverse at 80%.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1922961/posts?page=22#22
Fred is a good 2nd choice. But a CFR^2 candidate isn’t as good as a stalwart conservative. And the stalwart conservative won the debate yesterday, by an objective rather than subjective standard.
No one quibbled with my analyses when I was saying Huckabee was the winner in the pre-post snapshots of intrade. But if the stalwart conservative wins the debate, we see the naysayers coming out.
Of course it’s beyond you, because your standard is subjective. Intrade is an objective standard. The only bias is whether or not one can make money on the contracts, so it heavily favors liquidity. That means its bias is AGAINST the low end candidates who don’t move much.
In Poker, if you can’t beat the board, you fold. Yesterday, Hunter beat the board.
.
.
.
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
Fred-hater alert!
***Baloney. I will vote for Fred if he gets the nomination. But the way I see it, he stands in Hunter’s way, he’s a lousy candidate. He’s dropping in the polls, lost 30 points at Intrade, and now he’s All-In at Iowa and his debate performance yesterday was greeted by a 0.1 drop in the face of 100% climb for Hunter.
Hunter is the better conservative and the better candidate.
.
.
.
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
“Call Duncan Hunter a hawkish protectionist, if you must.”
Duncan is my congressman, I never called him anything.
Someone ignorant of the candidates histories, posted that Fred had zero credentials for leading the U.S. in a foreign policy sense and I corrected that in post 19. Pointing out that until July when some people thought his only activity was acting, actually Fred was chairman of the International Security Advisory Board at the United States Department of State September 2005 — July 2007 along with the rest of the long list of his extensive foreign affairs experiences. That is all.
Pay no attention to the troll.
.
.
.
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
Again I say Pay No Attention to the Troll.
Petronski had his say, overplayed his hand and he chose to call so many involved in the process liars that there is no reason to listen to him.
.
.
.
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
That’s actually a good point about McCain, though I don’t like to admit it much. He suffered torture at the hands of the North Viet Namese. Unfortunately, I think he left some of his sanity in that prison camp.
.
.
.
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
Hunter’s a good guy. If he were the one with Huckabee’s traction I’d be singing from the rooftops. But he’s not, and doubling your support when you’re at a half-point doesn’t mean much.
“No one quibbled with my analyses when I was saying Huckabee was the winner in the pre-post snapshots of intrade. But if the stalwart conservative wins the debate, we see the naysayers coming out.”
The only thing on this thread that has interested me was correcting that silly post #18, the rest of it doesn’t matter to me.
And Hunter would make the best president. So show him your support.
Yesterday he won the debate by an objective standard, not necessarily a subjective one. Today his contracts continue to move.
.
.
.
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
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.