Political analyst says [Duncan] Hunter can move into GOP top tier

Hunter for President website ^ | 1/31/07 | OneNewsNow.com

[TommyDale]

You are 100% correct. However, lately when you state such truth you will be attacked.

[brothers4thID]

Name recognition this early in the game can be a negative- as McCain and others are finding out. The more that you are "known" the stronger your negative polling numbers will be. Those strong negatives can be used against you in fund-raising circles. Hunter's lack of nationwide noteriety might very well be a plus in the next few months. Potential voters will be "seeing" him for the first time.

[longtermmemmory]

So he is below Barack (husein) Obama but above Denis (did the federal matching funds arrive) Kucinich.

[Plutarch]

Is Hunter the most conservative running, based his published record?

NO. If you like Big Government, Duncan Hunter is your man. He is one of those big spending Republicans that have been spending like crazy while losing their majority. The Club for Growth notes the following about Hunter:

YES on No Child Left Behind

YES on Sarbanes-Oxley

YES on the 2003 Medicare Drug Benefit

YES on 2005 Highway Bill

YES on the 527 bill (like most Republicans, he flip-flopped, having first voted NO on McCain-Feingold)

Hunter also went 0 for 19 on the Flake anti-pork amendments.

Despite being a member of the Republican Study Committee, Hunter frequently votes NO on their fiscally conservative annual budgets (2006, 2005, 2003...)

We gave him a 49% on the 2005 Club for Growth scorecard. That places him 187th within the House GOP conference, out of roughly 230 members.

National Taxpayers Union shows a more telling trend. He was strong in the early 1990s, getting "B's" and one "A", but as time went by, like most politicians, his score dropped. For the past few years, he's been getting "C's".

[Fierce Allegiance]

My three: McCain, Giuliani, and Romney, all have a strong chance of winning the general election.

So do Hillary and Obama, ESPECIALLY if we roll out a conservative-lite candidate. Heck, Richardson could swamp the middle ground voters, and fairly easily be made to look more conservative-freindly than Rudy - without much effort.

[Post-Neolithic]

"Newt has great ideas but he would be massacred by the MSM. Never have a chance to get his message out. He would constantly be on defense. He is probably only person with as many negatives as Hillary, except perhaps Cheney."

And you think Rudy doesn't have as many, if not more negatives? Where would you like me to start? Pro-Abortion/Anti-Second-Amendment/Cheated on his wives multiple times/Pro-Gay/Pro-Illegal immigration and that's only what is on the surface.

His anti-second amendment stance alone will lose him most, if not all, of the southern vote.

[processing please hold]

However, lately when you state such truth you will be attacked.

Screw em', let 'em attack me, I can handle myself.

[Dave S]

Do you want to learn about him?

Not until he's got 15-20% of a national poll, not a Free Republic or other activist poll. Heck Hillary would have trouble getting nominated by DU...too conservative for them.

[Antoninus]

Thats anecdotal. Almost every poll taken shows Rudy beating Hillary by a mile.. He would prolly take PA..NJ and maybe CA.

And the early polls aren't? There's a logic behind why people say that and the logic is as follows: If Rudy gets the nomination (God forbid!) it will split the GOP. A strong 3rd Party candidate will emerge to Rudy's right, and will be made viable by incessant MSM attention. Between the MSM puffing up this 3rd party contender, and relentlessly bashing on Rudy, by election day, Rudy will be lucky to poll 35% of the vote.

That's the nightmare scenario for the GOP. Those boosting liberals like Rudy are playing right into the Democrats' hands.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Since when is cold political analysis "cowardly"? Most of those not on the Hunter bandwagon still like the guy but simply see no chance for him to win either the nomination or the presidency. If we don't agree with you why does that make us cowardly?

Almost EVERY pro-Rudy poster has stated that should, by some miracle, Hunter get the nomination he would get their vote. In fact, I have seen NO such poster say he would not vote for Hunter. Unfortunately I have seen only a few Hunter fans who say they would vote for whomever wins the nomination.

[ElPatriota]

(this pic put out a while ago)

This was a list someone listed as to indicate who was running for the GOP. I added MY input to it, no need to get upset :)

But when you look at the list, who are the three candidates supposedly in front?... That's right, two lefties and one questionable... Naturally they will cause disagreement and division among Republicans. If I were a "conspiracy" nut, I could even consider the possibility that the MSM or the left are pushing these three, (or at lease McCacain and Gulliani) just to divide us Republicans.

Could that be possible?... Anyone doing this on purpose to screws us up? Are we really that dumb and we can't see that values voters can NOT compromise on "values?" just as fiscal conservatives or gun owners can not compromise on their main issues/principles either... Well, then the logical answer is, let's hold our horses a bit, and let's see all the candidates we have, consider them carefully and pick the one that will satisfy most of us Republicans.

But I do believe that IF we are smart, we should find a candidate we can all support. When you look at the list... I wonder who in heck is trying to divide us... Is it possible we are that "dumb?" :)

Some people are accusing us of hating Guiliani... Nothing of the kind (as this pic we put out a while ago shows), but when we see the Lefties pushing him as MR. CONSERVATIVE, When there is enough pictures and evidence to fill up two 18 wheelers with his baggage, "insinuating" otherwise, THEN that is SOMETHING ELSE, that is LIE, and we must act. This is a crucial time we all know it.

[william clark]

Okay, let's put talk of "delusional" to the side for the moment. I'll ask this in all seriousness.

Never mind whether Republican-base conservatives would vote for them. The winning candidate will need to be able to appeal to voters from both sides of the middle. Why would any left-of-center voters, especially women, vote for any of those three, given that Hillary paints herself as moderate, but the leftists know better and will turn out for her in spite of that?

DH4WH

[Afronaut]

"What would successfully get Hunter into the top tier?"

Your support would make a difference.

Help Duncan Hunter!

[processing please hold]

That's the nightmare scenario for the GOP. Those boosting liberals like Rudy are playing right into the Democrats' hands.

Bingo!

[newguy357]

Your logic is backwards. The fact is, McCain and Giuliani have alienated the conservative base. People can argue all day whether or not true conservatives should vote for Rudy McRomney, but that is irrelevant. The important question is will they. Many will--but many will not. They do not excite the base--and for good reason: they're liberals. McCain for one will not get my vote. It's that simple. Don't launch into "you should vote for him anyway to avoid Shrillary"...that's great, but again, irrelevant.

[Dave S]

Neither of those guys had ever been elected to any office before. Neither of them was a decorated Vietnam Vet. Neither of them had a son who served in Iraq.

Did you know that John Kerry was a decorated Vietnam Vet?

[Antoninus]

I think some regular appearances on second tier conservative radio (Bennett, Ingram, as well as local people (Howie Carr) etc.) may help. Unlike Rudy/Mitt/John, he doesn't have a lot of personal embarrassments and/or left wing positions to explain away.

Exactly. More reasons for the Left to be afraid of him. They already know that Rudy McRomney is damaged goods and have stockpiles of ammo to use against them.

Duncan Hunter, by contrast, is the real deal...

[justshutupandtakeit]

unless Hillary gets caught having sex with a horse the day before the election [Insiders tell me that she is planning this in order to assure the Jockey vote.]

[onyx]

It's a word not permitted here when used like the poster used it. DUH on you.

[Fierce Allegiance]

It's certainly not a stupid comment in context. There are folks on both sides going over the top. Claiming it's just one side is incorrect. I just asked yuor opinion on that one comment.

I know (strongly believe, anyway) that you don't feel the people who publish facts about Rudy are KKK'ers.

I may be mistaken about electability, but I feel electing Rudy will only get us the lesser of two liberals. There is enough time to get a decent candidate like Hunter to the fore.