Posted on 02/17/2007 4:38:47 PM PST by Dog Gone
Except for those people who listen to Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham; or who read George Will or assorted conservative blogs; or who watch ABC, CNN, MSNBC or Fox News.
The enthusiasm if because of his solid conservative credentials, military background, personal integrity, etc. The plan is to do what any candidate facing an uphill battle has to do. Spread the word, make personal and media appearances, solicit volunteers and funds, and debate effectively when the opportunity presents itself. The common denominator of all these "Hunter can't win" pronouncements is the attitude that the situation at the time of the general election, or even the first primary, will be a snapshot of things as they are now. That's ridiculous on so many levels, it's hardly even worth pointing out; except that there obviously are people to whom it doesn't occur.
There is plenty of time for any frontrunning candidate(s) in either party to self-destruct.
Plenty of time for the apparent initial success of the latest Baghdad operation to lead to other victories and have an impact on public perception of the war and the Republican prosecution of it.
Plenty of time for a moderate-to-severe terrorist attack on our own soil.
Plenty of time for increased media exposure and fundraising. It's about spending smart; not how much you throw around. That's a general principle the Dems have yet to figure out in campaigning or governance.
Plenty of time for supporters to spread the word to their friends, family members, co-workers, etc.
"It's amazing what you can accomplish when you don't know what you can't do."
Well, we didn't think Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter were either.
My memory may be faulty (correct me if I am wrong), but who really knew about Clinton during the early stages of the Democrat primaries in 1996? At that time, he had very little name recognition in a very crowded field of competitors. Yet he managed to come out of nowhere to capture the Democrat nomination.
Hiya sweet one! I'm glad you liked my attempt at humor. :0)
Giuliani's popularity on FR isn't hard to figure -- he's got serious name recognition and despite his many faults is clearly superior to the only other candidate in the field with similar name recognition (McCain).
Why Hunter? Simply because he's the most conservative candidate in this (extraordinarily weak) field. Yeah, he's a serious longshot, but considering the alternatives that's a roll of the dice many are willing to take.
No doubt things are getting quite heated around these parts, especially since we have almost a whole year before the first primary. Ripe for burnout. But imagine what it'll be like if some left-of-center Pubbie somehow wins the nomination and a conservative makes a challenge as an Ind. Total meltdown.
The amount of opposition research on Rudy, McCain and Romney is indicative of the percieved strength of their candidacies. There's no opposition research on Hunter because no one takes him seriously. He doesn't concern anyone in the upper tier enough for them to even bother with attacking him.
I think that says a lot right there...
Here is how the game is played.
Second and third tier candidates run, get their base enthused and eventually transfer those voters to the party nominee.
The nominee, of course, is forced to make some concessions towards the lesser candidates.
The second tier candidates may get a shot at VP or cabinet.
The third/fourth/fifth tier candidates get to sell more books, host their own radio show and can charge more money for speeches.
..we're all gonna need a lot of it before it's over, onyx ; - )
"My memory may be faulty (correct me if I am wrong), but who really knew about Clinton during the early stages of the Democrat primaries in 1996?"
It was 1992, and what little name recognition Bill Clinton had, came from a bizarrely longwinded speech at the 1988 convention. He prattled on and on.
..Everybody was SURE the nominee was going to be Cuomo--Clinton came out of nowhere...
And when do pigs fly? Hell freeze over?
snowball in hell's chance of getting elected POTUS.
Rudy and Mitt has even less chance
Ron Paul is my congressman. I sent him a scathing letter yesterday.
A lot of good it will do. The guy is nuts.
The interesting thing that I've seen on this thread so far is that almost everyone agrees that Hunter has no real shot. That's my assessment, too, but I expected more opposition given the support for him at this forum.
I appreciate the reality check.
I agree, Ron Paul is Nuts.
..Everybody was SURE the nominee was going to be Cuomo--Clinton came out of nowhere...
No one comes out of nowhere.
Who BANKED Clinton in 92?
I don't know if the field is all that weak. I like Giuliani (leadership). Hunter seems OK on conservative issues. Gingrich is a forward-thinking, very smart man. Brownback isn't too colorful, but he's a decent guy.
Who do the Democrats have? Hillary is a behemoth but her negatives are massive. Obama is hot right now, but does he have staying power? He's very green.
Should be a fun election.
I could have told you that he gave the longest (something like an hour) and most boring nominating speech in Democratic convention history in '88. He actually received hoots when he got to "in conclusion..."
You're right, Mario Cuomo was perceived as being the "annointed one." It would be an interesting exercise to post early polling results from prior presidential primary runs. Any idea where such a thing might be archived online, for both Republican and Democrat presidential primaries?
Clinton had a plan. It included a war room, lots of money and a real cozy relationship with the MSM.
Hunter has none of that.
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.