FLASH: RASMUSSEN Florida poll to be released: Romney 25, McCain 20, Giuliani 19... Developing...

Drudge report ^ | 1/21/08 | Drudge Report

[kabar]

Arkansas, Missouri, Virginia, and Florida were close enough in 2004

Bush won AK with 54.3%; Missouri with 53.3%; Virginia with 53.7%; and Fl with 52.1%.

[N3WBI3]

Reminds me of John Kerry. No wonder Kerry considered McCain to be his running mate.

Wow we have a lefty politician from MA who changes his opinion with the political winds and its *McCain* who reminds you of kerry...

LOL

[N3WBI3]

Do as you wish but any ticket with Mitt will die nationally..

Hell I could up and vote for Trudy before willard at least he is honest about his social issue standings..

Willard: Pro Abort, Anti Gun, Pro Illegal ... that is until its time for a national election..

[CommerceComet]

Bush won AK with 54.3%; Missouri with 53.3%; Virginia with 53.7%; and Fl with 52.1%.

Which puts them within range for the Democrats. Those margins are not so large that they cannot be reversed, particularly when considering that an imcumbent President was running. For example, Virginia which has had dramatic growth in the D.C. bedroom communities. Northern Virginia has been trending more and more toward the Democrats since the last Presidential election. The national Republican Party is worried about Virginia both in the Senate race and the Presidential race. A higher than normal turnout among those who vote overwhelming Democrat and a lower than normal turnout among the traditional Republican voting blocs could spell doom.

The same troubling trends are also present in the other states listed, perhaps more so with Missouri and Florida, less so with Arkansas. Any state where the winner wins in low 50's is an electoral target for the other side in the next election cycle.

[Man50D]

Judging by your tagline you are a Huckles supporter, no? Compared to Huckabee Thompson is like Reagan x 100.

No. The Fair Tax is not a Huckabee idea. The Fair Tax began in 1995 by a group of private citizens, long before Huckabee was in the spotlight. He supports the idea because he recognizes the large and increasing Fair Tax grassroots effort is gaining too much momentum for politicians to ignore.

[Primetimedonna]

Jane, I owe you an apology (will also apologize on other thread)! As my dear FRiend Fox pointed out, I went all Rambo on you, when I actually AGREE with you on the Romney vs McCain argument. I misread your post as saying McCain is going to win Florida and then become the Rebuplican candidate for President. I gave you a snippy response, for which I apolgize! Actually I’m hoping you’re right and Mitt Does win Florida and go on to be the candidate. Promise to try to get more sleep, and read posts correctly in the future!! ;>)

Thanks, Fox, for pointing out that Jane was friend, not foe!! ;>)

[Mojave]

Willard: Pro Abort, Anti Gun, Pro Illegal ... that is until its time for a national election..

Not to worry. He'll switch back afterwards.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

I have a feeling that McCain will choose Huckabee as his Veep pick. It’s just gut instinct, nothing more.

But you may find this interesting. DeLay says he’d consider sitting it out if McCain got the nom........

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1957329/posts

[WFTR]

How he does in on the I-10 corridor (the Panhandle of Florida) will be interesting. The Florida Panhandle is a lot like south Georgia and Alabama — Huckabee land.

Considering that Pensacola is one of the bigger cities in the Panhandle and is the home of so much Naval aviation, McCain might have an advantage in that area. I wish he didn't, but I'm afraid that he will.

Bill

[Reily]

To all

My personal preference is Fred.
BUT anyone of the GOP is preferable to Hillary!
(Yes even Huckster and Paul!)
(Hillary plus a compliant democrat Congress (with a even larger democrat majority!)is to horrible to contemplate! The GOP will to too shell shocked to anything other then suck their thumbs and make gurgling noises!)

Look if we want to collectively blame anyone for the fix we seem to be in I suggest we all look in the mirror!
We are the electorate that created this mess!
Looking at the candidates, as far as conservative principles, electability etc & in no particular order of preference.

Hunter probably the best fit for my conservative principles but supporting him would violate my initial “rule-of-thumb” on electability. My electability “rule-of-thumb” is where I look at a candidate and ask, ‘Can he win a state-wide election in his home state?’. The answer with Hunter is ‘no way!’, and thats a recurring problem with presidential candidates coming from the House. Usually they are popular in only one particular part of the state (Their district!)

Paul, in some sense satisfies my libertarian impulses but then there is his “moveon.org” notions about national security. (If the stories about his newsletter are correct he may some other disturbing notions!) Also he fails the “rule-of-thumb” test! Hillary, Obama or Paul, at least he would let me be armed to shoot the 'terrorists' who would no longer be trying to kill us if we just sang kum-ba-ya!

Guiliani, satisfies my “rule-of-thumb” test. (Which I would wish he would actually do rather then run for president!) Has the right stance on WOT in fact might actually prosecute the war with more vigor! I also believe that the war is the seminal issue for our nation right now. His weaknesses are obvious, way to the left of me on social issues. Also his illegal immigration stance is all over the place, I think the illegal situation is so bad that we have reached a point where only a “strong approach” can get the situation under any sort of control. His economic views are pretty much “free market” and similar to mine. (At least I have heard or read nothing to the contrary!) I could unhappily vote for Guiliani.
Huckabee, one governor from Arkansas is enough in my lifetime. Another economically illiterate politician, socialism GOP-style will work no better the normal democrap socialism. At least democraps are the socialist party so I expect it from them. His foreign policy views are comical until you realize he is serious. He is better then Hillary or Obama. Not a ringing endorsement! McCain. Well he supposedly has a 85% rating by ACU on conservative issues. If he hadn't sponsored McCain-Feingold (Don't any of these clowns read the Consitution!) & been a major supporter of the last illegal immigration bill, I would gag less when I consider pulling the lever for him. He is right on the WOT, of course he does it in manner that is smarmy & self-centered. Team player are not words in vocabulary, unless team player means I am the team captain & you do as I say! Again he is better then Hillary or Obama. Again not a ringing endorsement! Romney, is probably the most talented of all the candiates GOP Deomcrap, Vegetarian party etc, anywhere! He has actually made a payroll without using the force of law to reach deeper into another individual's pocket! As far as being a conservative well he could be more so, but was probably as conservative as is possible in the 'Land-o-Kennedy'! He is right on the WOT, in the ball-park on illegal immigration. What I have heard on the debates & read makes him 'acceptable'.(Ok could he be lying well yes, so could Ron Paul. Paul might secretively want to imitate Napoleon for all I know.) Fred Thompson, well he is just better ! He fits my personal views much closer then the others. So for me, and this is an exponetial decay in my preference! Fred Romney McCain & Guiliani (Tie) My number 3 depends who of the two has annoyed me recently Huckabee (Gag!) Paul (double double gag!)

[Young Scholar]

McCain has a pro-life record, but I think he has indicated he would be open to appointing “qualified” judges with a range of views and so might be a less effective advocate of the pro-life position than any of the other Republicans (even pro-choice Rudy has consistently expressed his support for strict constructionist judges, though I doubt his sincerity).

[Man50D]

Hunter probably the best fit for my conservative principles but supporting him would violate my initial “rule-of-thumb” on electability.

Electability is subjective at best. It is based on the presumption one candidate can or cannot win. It might be a reasonable decision if we were well into the electoral process. There might be some validity to such a decision as it would be premised on actual voting results. This scenario also presumes the people made well informed decisions due to the candidates being given equal time and exposure before the people. This however has not been the case. Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich were arbitrarily omitted from one or two debates by one or a select few in the media or GOP or Democrat parties. This is anathema to the intent of our founding fathers when they drafted the Constitution. It was crafted to prevent too much power concentrating in the hands of too few people and ensure that power was and is disbursed to the people. Knowledge is power. The people have no power if they are not provided with the information necessary to make a well informed decision. This affront to the Constitution appears to be lost on many in the GOP and here as Free Republic.

Duncan Hunter has consistently championed the Conservative cause for nearly three decades. He has never wavered on Conservative principles. It is for some inexplicable reason Republican and Feepers determined the socialist media driven polls were valid to the point where they indicate the actual outcome long before the primary season had begun. This prompted many to suddenly supplant the Conservative principles they claim to espouse for the perception by a tiny minority comprised from the socialist media Duncan Hunter could not win.

Imagine if George Washington had heeded the words of many prior to crossing the Delaware that the Colonists could not win because they were vastly outnumbered and were militarily inferior not only to the British but also the German Hessians Washington was planning to attack not to mention the treacherous crossing of the Delaware on a brutally cold night. His convictions would not allow him to quit or surrender. Washington's example has been lost on many in the GOP. It's reprehensible enough people abandon a staunch Conservative in Duncan Hunter but compound by denouncing him. The sincerity of people who claim to support Conservative principles will abandon those principles for the sake of a perceived winning or losing candidate.

This has been the problem of the Republican party for decades. This type of thinking has incrementally infiltrated the GOP. Rationalizing it is acceptable to expand the voter base to those who are not Conservative only allows socialism to eventually permeate the party. The strategy of holding one's nose only empowers socialism as was evident with the Socialists taking control of Congress in 2006. In the end candidates are presented with the appearance of being Conservative even though their history proves otherwise and the one candidate who is actually a Conservative , Duncan Hunter is pushed aside.

[WOSG]

Who are you FOR in the primary?

[Mojave]

Not Romney.

[WOSG]

I already know who you are against.
Who are you FOR in the primary?

[Mojave]

Not Romney.

[Reily]

In modern history candidates who are from Congress both the House and Senate have NOT done very well. Legislative political careers generally don’t lend themselves well to make the case for for a executive position. Since you brought up the Washington & the Revolution, Washington showed up at the 2nd Continental Congress wearing his Virginia militia uniform. He was telling/reminding the Congress that of the Continental leadership he alone had the required military(executive) experience. For example, John Hancock fully expected to be nominated for the Continental Army command by John Adams. Hancock was quite chagrined when Adams nominated Washington.
My modern rule-of-them about electoral viability being validated by ‘Can the candidate win a state wide election?’ has held up up in my lifetime. (It's like all rules-of-thumb its not exact and in some sense based on empirical observation.) In fact off the top of my head it certainly works all the way back to Coolidge, the exception being Kennedy.

I actually looked as far back as TR and one could make a case that it still hold back that far!

[Yankee]

Who didn’t see this coming?

McStain has not been winning GOP voters. All his victories have been the result of mischief by “demo-pendents” in open primaries.

Florida will be the death of the McStain candidacy.

Elmer Gantrabee is toast too.

[JohnnyZ]

I’ve got so much more respect for Huck, or Rudy, or Paul, or McCain supporters...

Ironic, as I share your attitude toward Mitt-worshipping sell-outs.