Posted on 01/18/2008 2:58:15 PM PST by Maelstorm
RUSH: First, Fred Thompson just got some encouraging news. Dr. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, told the Brody File, which is a blog at the CBN.com website, the Christian Broadcast Network, "My assessment is that at this moment in time it is Fred Thompson's race to lose. It may be a convergence of the right man at the right place at the right time. I have never seen anything like this grassroots swell for Thompson. I'm not speaking for Southern Baptists, but I do believe I have my hand on the pulse of Southern Baptists here, and I think I know where the consensus is." Now, this guy, Dr. Richard Land, does not endorse candidates, but he is a powerful figure in evangelical circles. Why the fascination with Thompson? Land told the Brody File, which is the blog here at the CBN.com, that there are a lot of factors. He believes electability is extremely important, thinks that Thompson may be the best social conservative candidate right now to beat Hillary. He says just look at the head-to-head polling between the two of them, but there's more. It was Land that came up with the term Southern-fried Reagan when describing Thompson, so he's all excited.
(Excerpt) Read more at rushlimbaugh.com ...
No one has any guarantees. A classmate of mine ended up marrying a widower who was at least 20 years older than she was. I remember thinking that she was crazy and would be a widow herself as well as a single mother some day. She died quite young of breast cancer, and the poor man has buried two wives.
January 18, 2008 - South Carolina Primary Preferences
********************EXCERPT*************************
South Carolina
| Republicans | Jan 15-16 | Jan 17-18 |
| Giuliani | 4% | 3% |
| Huckabee | 23% | 33% |
| Hunter | 1% | 1% |
| Keyes | 2% | 1% |
| McCain | 33% | 26% |
| Paul | 1% | 2% |
| Romney | 20% | 9% |
| Thompson | 13% | 21% |
| Undecided | 3% | 4% |
Mike Huckabee leads among Republicans with 37%, followed by John McCain and Fred Thompson with 22% each. McCain leads among self-described independents with 48%.
For details, click on the R or D for each state in the column on the left under 2008 Presidential Polls.
***********************************
Narrative doesn't seem to fit the chart....Hmmm....
*************************************************
I should include this link also:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/sc/south_carolina_republican_primary-233.html
South Carolina Presidential Primary Preference:
And the second chart....
******************************
Preference by party:
| South Carolina | ||
| Likely Republican Primary Voters | Republicans (81%) | Independents (19%) |
| Giuliani | 2% | 5% |
| Huckabee | 37% | 19% |
| Hunter | 1% | - |
| Keyes | 1% | - |
| McCain | 22% | 48% |
| Paul | 1% | 4% |
| Romney | 10% | 5% |
| Thompson | 22% | 15% |
| Undecided | 4% | 4% |
*******************************
About this Survey -
Survey Sponsor: American Research Group, Inc.
The American Research Group has been conducting surveys of voters since 1985.
Sample Size: 600 completed telephone interviews among a random sample of likely Republican primary voters living in South Carolina (487 Republicans and 113 independent voters).
Sample Dates: January 17-18, 2008
Margin of Error: ± 4 percentage points, 95% of the time, on questions where opinion is evenly split.
Question Wording:
If the 2008 Republican presidential preference primary were being held today between (names rotated) Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Alan Keyes, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, and Fred Thompson, for whom would you vote?
Would you say that you definitely plan to vote in the 2008 Republican presidential primary, that you might vote in the 2008 Republican presidential primary, or that you will probably not vote in the 2008 Republican presidential primary?
Here you go Rip:
Married at 17
Married for 25
Divorced for 15
Equals 57
He’s now what? 65?
Sounds about right to me.
I loved Ronald Reagan, but yes, I had the same qualms. It also made me nervous when Jane consulted with astrologers. Reagan having a possibly “homosexual” son bothered me also....as it does with Cheney.
In all of that I think that you have to cut Reagan slack, precisely because he was not a god. It wasn't his idea to divorce Jane Wyman, and it wasn't his idea to have Nancy consult an astrologer or to have Ron Jr. turn out as he has.Ronald Reagan was a great Commander & Chief. However, Ronald Reagan was never the RONALD REAGAN that everyone has made him since. He has grown larger than life, and almost become a god (little g) to many.
Nit: the constitutional phrase is "commander IN chief."It troubles me that so many want to claim the mantle of Reagan. Change doesn’t always have to be bad.
No, change doesn't have to be bad - but if I suggested that I was going to rearrange your face, you would not think, "Oh good, maybe I'll be more handsome!" You would take it as a threat because it just wouldn't be as easy to make a postitive change as it would be to make a negative one.Conservatives know that "change" for the sake of change is destruction. Conservatives have to be willing to change - but they are right to be skeptical about any proposed change before assuming that it has good prospects of being an improvement.
I was initially unimpressed with Thompson until hearing some of his more recent soundbite. If he would just add a little more passion and conviction to what he is saying instead of sounding like “Deputy Dog,” he might just get somewhere.
Sounds about right to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Maybe it is, I never had any idea he was married at 17 but I realize things were different then. I am 63 and I didn’t marry until I was 28 and I clearly remember one 60 year old woman I met at work when I was 23 asking what was “wrong” with me because I didn’t have a wife and children already. You would have thought I had broken some kind of law.
Romney’s flip-flop is based upon nit-picky stories about his stand on abortion. I see his abortion thinking a progression of thought that has “flopped” into the correct,
Constitutional, thinking that values all human life.
I think Romney has his positive points, but the flip-flop label is based on many issues. He is anti-gun (still for an assault weapons ban) yet talks pro-gun. He was pro-abortion as late as 2005. He raised “fees” massively while governor yet talks low taxes. He is weak on national security experience (no track record). See the Romney truth file above for more.
“given that Huck was reportedly on the wrong side of the conservative takeover of the SBC”
That statement is not true. He was part of the conservative resurgence that started full bore in 1979. However, he wasn’t going to be draconian in purging the non-conservatives in Arkansas and that ticked off the more vicious types like Paul Pressler. The moderates/non-conservatives in the SBC have essentially formed their own new denomination since that time called the CBF. It is just a matter of time before they fully leave the SBC. It is actually a moot point now.
I am fully a conservative SBC Christian, and I was always for the cleansing on the SBC. However, since it happened, many of the new paid staff at the convention level have gotten a little to big for their pants and need to be reeled back in. I know many conservative SBC pastors that have no use for Richard Land.
“I’ll bet that not one word makes it to the floor of the next convention in defense of Huckabee (except the sort of resolution that any messenger can throw out from the floor) and expressing displeasure with Land.”
IF Huckabee gets wiped out but Fred still doesn’t get the nod, and especially is Romney is picked....Land is in deep trouble with the convention.
You could see the conventions rules ammended regarding what Land (or whoever holds his position) can say publically.
Well to me looking at a character issue (having principles you stick by) is not nit-picky.
Go Mitt!
The thing is trust. I do not trust that Mitt changed as he has changed on issues even since announcing for President. He also pandered to Michigan voters, offering them billions in tax dollars. This is not a conservative solution.
I actually pray for Thompson for President and Romney as Vice President. This would be the Dream Team. You would have Fred’s sound conservative command of the social issues with Mitt’s money and very convincing way of speaking on the economic issues. If Mitt’s money gives him the Number 1 spot, I still feel he has the broad grasp of the issues to make him one I could support.
I think Rush was trying to steer evangelicals Fred’s way with that quote. Land’s comments were made right before Thompson announced.
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.