Posted on 01/03/2007 10:20:08 AM PST by Antoninus
The Democrats nominate unkowns, the Republicans don't. The last Republican dark horse to be nominated was Wendell Willkie in 1940. The nomination will be wrapped up by South Carolina at the latest.
Hunter's support stands at 1% (see http://www.citizenlink.org/CLtopstories/A000003360.cfm)
To win the Presidency, a candidate is going to have to raise $500MM, including at least $50 by New Hampshire. The nomination will be locked up by South Carolina at the latest, and perhaps by New Haqmpshire. Who's going to give $50MM to a candidate voters have never heared of? I'm a political buff. The only reason I've heard of Hunter is that he's appeared on Fox.I caught myself typing "Duncan Hines" for his name before I realized what I was doing. Fox draws an audience of 2 million for O'Reilly and Hannity/Combs. There are 120 million likely voters. The last time a House member was elected President was James Garfield in 1880 -- the only time a House member has made it. It's a very minor office, especially in the minority. Hunter is going to have no opportunity to make policy. Effectively, he was placed on the shelf when the Democrats won the House.
I asked privately to be added to your Duncan Hunter ping list, but wanted it to be public to head off the RINO Brigade here @ FR. They tend to maintain lists of Conservatives that denounce their RINO politicians, DeWine springs to mind. I'm sure they'll read this and move me up a notch on the list. Thanks in advance for promoting Duncan Hunter! Blackbird.
I don't think that is true. As far as I recall, that's the first time I've ever mentioned it.
I have nothing against Duncan Hunter. I know little about him. Perhaps he has a chance, and perhaps he'd be the greatest President in our history.
If you'd like to link to a few threads where I've made the same observation, I'd be much obliged.
My feeling is let's see what happens with Hunter. He certainly seems to have a fan base here.
Whether that can be expanded into national recognition seems like a long shot to me. House Republicans are irrelevant at this point in time unless they can form some sort of coalition with the few conservative Democrats in the House.
Unless they can do that, it's going to be hard for Hunter to be influential and attract the attention of the media or anyone else. I'm not sure how he will become well-known.
Everyone has heard of Guiliani and McCain. Some have heard of Romney, but far less. Hunter isn't even on the radar screen, and that's a huge challenge.
I find it funny that the folks who have consistently preached "pragmatism" are the biggest Rudy supporters here on FR despite the fact that what you say is absolutely true.
Hunter is conservative. Romney and Guiliani are not. Would it not make logical sense that the latter two get attacked on a conservative forum?
Trashing people is a natural part of politics. President Bush would not have won had he simply campaigned on his own merits. It took a well-coordinated trashing of Kerry for it to happen. I really don't see what is so bad about badmouthing a candidate that is repulsive to me.
Count me in as a Hunter supporter who will take absolute pleasure in voting against someone like McCain or Guiliani. Nominating a liberal for the GOP ticket is simply not a pragmatic thing to do. I'm hoping that people take heed of this when the primaries roll around.
I give Whitman credit for moving most highway construction to the night time. Other than that, I can honestly say that I cannot think of one single good thing she did other than beating McGreevy once.
The subject was the historical perspective of a House member becoming President. The subject was not Dog Gone.
As I asked another poster earlier, what is so bad about people on a conservative message board trashing non-conservative candidates? If it wasn't for "trashing", John Kerry would be president now.
Because our state GOPs suck more than yours. It's really that simple.
Ah, thanks. I thought I was being accused of making posts I didn't remember as some part of an anti-Hunter agenda.
I appreciate the clarification.
Antoninus has been perfectly civil to you this entire thread. I think your personal attacks on him are uncalled for and do not turn anyone on to your side of the argument.
Well, you have been criticizing people for trashing Guiliani. Does that count?
You're absolutely wrong. Every gun owner I know opposes Rudy. In this political climate in which being anti-2nd Amendment is toxic, you are never going to see an out of the closet gun-grabber win the presidency.
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.