Posted on 12/24/2007 8:48:50 PM PST by Fred
-—Because Huckabee is now expected to win Iowa, Romney may be in position to declare victory with a strong second place showing – and he might still win the state.-—
Exactly! I was worried about Huckabee until I got to see him in action the last 2 weeks. No way is he going to win this primary. Just no way.
...And not one word about the only viable Conservative and authentic Republican in the race.
Mr Slick, spends 30 millions gets his clock cleaned by a fellow liberal and he declares victory. LOL, that's rich. :^)
Yeah - the Paulbearers won’t be a bit pleased ;)
Once they get the bit in their teeth its hard for them to spit it out. All that fawning attention and those rubber chicken dinners are addictive to people with that sort of personality. As I’ve stated before...”Anyone who wants to be President automatically isn’t qualified”.
Makes me fear for this nation. McCain gets the nomination I'm done with the Republicans forever.
That’s about as likely as Dr. Demento getting it.
At this point in time, with huckster doing so well, I’ll take mccain. And gladly. Huck just really rubs me the wrong way.
Add Rudy, Romney, and Huckabee to that for many.
Two of the first five I mentioned would not get my vote in a general election under any circumstances, but I could see any of them with the necessities to handle the job of president. Huckabee might make a decent vice president if kept on a very short leash and given intensive on the job training. His ignorance of foreign affairs is almost as astounding as that of Osama Obama.
I can support your first two choices, with my preferences in reverse. As for the rest, I would put your third choice as dead last. I view him as outright dangerous and untrustworthy on par with the Clintons, while the one you described as an adolescent merely retained the services of their footsoldiers in Little Rock, also nearly equally as untrustworthy. I cannot in good conscience vote for any except the first two in the general, and under no circumstances for the other two I just cited.
In fact, I think a Thompson-Romney ticket might actually be our strongest offering given the geographical balance as well as idealogical balance.
Those turned off by Fred's age and gruff style might be attracted to Mitt's smooth style and great hair. Those turned off by Mitt's smoothness might actually like Fred's down-to-earthness.
Bush I definitely was ready for prime-time after being Reagan's VP and quite possibly would have gone on to being a great president had he not been snookered into raising taxes. I see Romney as a similar type. Too liberal-- definitely. Persuadabale-- probably. Smart leadership and management skill-- good to excellent.
I will never be sold on him, and he brings nothing to the ticket but gross dishonesty, zero principles and odious and rank ambition. He wouldn’t help to carry a single state in the northeast. Simply put, I wouldn’t trust him as dogcatcher and he is EXTREMELY disloyal. He is fully backed by his mentor, William Weld, and I consider Weld a covert Democrat operative and Clintonista. He carried out Weld’s mission to completely eradicate the MA Republican party, and was a rousing success.
That’s because his viability is all in your head. No data supports it.
I was just last night watching Bush 1 vs Clinton in the first debate, when Bush looked at his watch, then gave an amazingly horrible answer to a simple question by some idiot voter, who clearly wanted the candidates to show they had empathy with economically challenged voters. It was pathetic. Then Slickster comes in and nails it. GHWB was never ready for prime time.
We were very fortunate that the Democrats nominated the world's most successful gigolo in 2004. Had they nominated almost anyone else, with the possible exception of Howard Dean, they'd own the whitehouse now.
I pretty much agree with that. I think the loony left has put the dems in a pickle, also. They miscalculated Americans disapproval of the war to mean we prefer losing, when really we just had lost faith in the administration's willingness/ability to win it. We didn't want to gleefully choose defeat, we wanted a change in strategy that would bring victory. Seems like shitcanning Rummy was a good move. Speaking of Bush traits, I think the younger, like the elder, is loyal to a fault.
Keep dreaming.
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.