Conservatives seem to take thier candidates out of the running by declaring them “not viable” early in each primary contest. Conservatives definitely give most of their money to the most conservative candidate supported by the media and the corporate interests money (Nixon, Ford, George Bush I, Dole, George Bush II) instead of making it a contest by giving money and voting for their candidate, a real conservative. Psych! You lose even if your candidate wins! Only Reagan had the power to break through the “Rockefeller” or “RINO” or “Moderate” Republican machine that has been dominant . . .
No one is taking Hunter out of the running but Hunter. Say you convince everyone who has voted on a poll on Free Republic to back him, what is that, 5000 votes. And that’s among people predisposed to his stances and positions. Then what. What is the solution to a 25+ year congressman who is right on almost all the issues but can’t poll past 2% on average. I don’t know the answer but somebody needs to figure it out in the next 2 months.
That also assumes there is not a viable alternative also. Again Free republic is a conservative forum. When asked who they could support if winning wasn’t an issue, more than a few said Hunter. But in politics winning is the issue, hell it’s the whole issue. Now look at the previous poll and you get Thompson. That means there are more than few around here that think he can take the mantle and win. He may not be pure as Hunter in some eyes but a damn site closer than the R and R boys.