Posted on 02/17/2007 4:38:47 PM PST by Dog Gone
As an observer and frequent participant at Free Republic, it's not hard to notice that a great deal of the threads about the 2008 Presidential election center around two people, Rudy Giuliani, and Duncan Hunter.
That seems odd, because there are other major contenders, notably John McCain, Mitt Romney, and to a lesser extent, Ron Paul, Sam Brownback, and Tom Tancredo. I might have even omitted one or two "lesser extent" candidates.
The Rudy threads are fairly ugly, with a lot of good people throwing mud at each other. The cans of spam lying in the dust could feed an army.
All that is a prelude to my real question.
Is Duncan Hunter a serious contender?
History suggests that he isn't. While numerous sitting US Congressmen have run for President, Dennis Kucinich, Dick Gephardt, Patsy Schroeder, etc., none have really been a factor at all in modern times.
You have to go clear back to 1880 to find the one and only sitting Congressman who became President. That was James Garfield, who was a distinguished Civil War general, House Majority Leader, and who had already been appointed as US Senator by the legislature prior to the GOP nominating convention. Even then, he didn't become the nominee until the 36th ballot at the convention when nobody else could get a majority.
So, history is not on Hunter's side. Now, before you say, "Yes, but has the US ever elected a woman as President or someone who was only a mayor?", I'm suggesting there's a difference.
Outside of this forum, and in his district in Southern California, and to some extent within the Beltway of DC, Hunter is an unknown.
Ask some non-Freeper friends what they think about Duncan Hunter. They'll look at you strangely.
My question isn't whether Hunter is right on the issues, although if he became a first-tier contender, that will certainly be discussed.
My question is whether there is even a plausible scenario where someone with 1%-2% (margin of error 3%) possibly compete in a modern election where he'll have to raise $100 million by next January.
What is the gameplan for a Duncan Hunter victory?
McCain and Rudy can easily hold a million dollar fundraiser each week. Can Hunter do that, and if he can't, can he compete?
If not, are the Hunter supporters chasing windmills?
Dog, Duncan Hunter's main and only purpose is to tout conservative ideas in the debates. He's got the proverbial snowball in hell's chance of getting elected POTUS.
Personally I think Hunter can recapture some of the old Reagan democrats. On the other hand Rudy can probably capture some Clinton democrats but I think he'll lose far more conservatives and the race in general. I like Rudy as a man but don't think he would be good for America as a president.
I'm also bothered by the fact that the democrats aren't being forced to run against the right. It's driving them further and further to the left without opposition.
The only reason there is so much Hunter enthusiasm on FR is because the other choices are so poor. Unfortunately, you are right. Hunter has a near zero chance of either getting the nomination or getting elected.
Us conservatives have been left out in the cold with regard to the current top tier contenders.
Hunter will be inthe top tier within 4 to 6 months. Count on it. Then $$ will flow. Grassroots first.
I advise them all to switch to Gingrich. Rasmussen is polling a Hillary/Gingrich race now, its Hillary 50-43 right now. at least that's within reach.
I like Hunter but don't think he will be nominated.
It's early days but I like Giuliani's chances best.
....exactly....I've written on both Rudy and Hunter threads....and I'd like to see more critical analysis on Hunter....most people not in So Cal don't even know him so it would be refreshing if some supporters would give more intelligent and informative info.....we all know pretty much now where Rudy stands on things
I hope to heck you are right.
Good grief, people have posted his speeches , voting record, audio clips, biography, etc etc etc for the last month.
After Ron Paul's vote in the House yesterday on the non-binding resolution I would not give him a snowball's chance in you know where.
Duncan who?
Apparently, you would not support Duncan Hunter in the first place, which is OK. Just because he's such a dark horse? Why should I not vote my conscience? If Rudy is the nominee, then there will be a third party pro-life candidate. That's who I will support.
Don't use the "war on terror" issue to put people like Rudy into power. If Rudy is the nominee, the pro-life movement is dead in the Republican party. You can then look forward to a Republican party in a permanent minority status. Kiss your tax cuts and corporate welfare goodbye.
We got left out in the cold years ago. There are still people hopeful of a Rice run, or even a Cheney run. The biggest problem is that our leadership didn't want competition. They wanted to keep their current old boys club, even if that meant trashing state committees around the nation.
So, we're grasping at straws because the loft is empty, to prevent challenge to those who want to protect their position. It bites. Big time. I had hoped after last November's elections, we would have actually gotten the club destroyed and started rebuilding the party. Instead, we're dancing around.
So, yes, Duncan Hunter has virtually no chance, hasn't been promoted on a statewide basis, and outside this forum, I can ask a dozen conservatives, and not one will recall his name. Can we finally beat down the people who left us in this lurch? Or do we let them run yet another noneffective national campaign that's mostly notable for having nothing.
Hunter is a good man, a great patriot and I lived in his district some twenty years ago. I'm also a native of San Diego, so I've always considered him as one of our congressmen even when I didn't reside in his district.
That said, I seriously doubt that he can raise the necessary money, but I'd love to be proven wrong.
I know there are hints about Hunter having baggage, and I will only state that I know that his middle name is not Samsonite.
Major contender for what, traitor of the year? He voted for the resolution against the troops.
When Hunter announced, I'd never heard of him. Since I follow politics pretty closely, that isn't a good sign.
When you mention to someone that you're supporting a particular candidate, and the most common response you get is, "Who?", that's an even worse sign.
: ^ )
well I haven't see a ton of it in the last week then.. I dont' post as much as you do pissant...nor am able to be on here all the time like you....if that is so, I apologize, just have seen alot of Rudy records and not alot of the other.....sorry if my ignorance offended you
Gingrich is corrupt and depraved. He's the antithesis of the decent man.
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.