Posted on 01/31/2007 8:46:24 AM PST by Antoninus
Political analyst and former Democrat insider Keith Thompson says even though Duncan Hunter is considered a long-shot for the White House, the California congressman could move into the top tier of GOP hopefuls as the 2008 presidential campaign progresses.
Hunter officially entered the 2008 presidential "sweepstakes" last week, Thompson notes. He says the candidate, as the former chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, has a strong conservative voting record working in his favor; and he is particularly known for his support of the military and his opposition to illegal immigration.
For these reasons, Thompson feels the California representative is at the top of the second tier of Republican hopefuls right now and is capable of moving up. Hunter has "a fairly decent financial base right now [and] some key supporters who are helping him get his campaign to the next level," the political analyst points out; "so I think he could come right into that first tier very quickly and be a significant candidate for the nomination."
Hunter's biggest problem is name recognition, Thompson acknowledges. He says that is one advantage early GOP favorites John McCain and Rudy Giuliani have over the California lawmaker.
But even though Hunter does not come in with the years of exposure that those virtually "mythological figures" have, Thompson observes, he says "the name recognition factor could change," and Hunter could become a force to be reckoned with in the coming 2008 presidential campaign.
We can get behind Hunter and shove him down their throats, God knows, the lsm does it to us with rudy and mcpain.
Absolutly not the case! That's why i asked for a clarification, but I see that tidbit slipped right through the gray matter. Like I said, i was just asking for a clarification, and at NO point did I make any assumption.
Good comment and analysis, thank you.
I am personally voting for: '-'!!!!!
You've completely mischaracterized the use of that phrase; most people here are "religious folks" -- just most of them aren't so far to the right as a few people here are.
You're offended almost as easily as liberals.
Is that a macro? It sure looks like one.
Since you have no meat in your sandwich, please point out what is grammatically incorrect in the statement you italicized, or be considered a liar forever.
So that is what a great conservative is these days. Have the right view on immigration and you can meddle in everyone else's affairs and business and spend their money like crazy and Hunterites will love you as a great conservative.
If the election were today, I'd cut you guys some slack. But you act as if the coming months count for nothing in terms of fundraising, increased exposure; and let's not forget the chance that the Democrats will become so competitive that they'll shred each other into unelectability.
It's one thing to say that if it comes down to Rudy or Hillary, we have to rally behind Rudy. It's another thing to make active attempts to discredit the early candidacy of someone you admit to "liking." There's just no justification for that. Leave the psychic hotline predictions to the Democrats. "Cold political analysis" should recognize that there are too many factors in play for several months for such predictions to have any more reliability than next week's weather report. And when you as an individual have the ability to influence others, as presumably you are seeking to do on this forum, why would you not use such influence to better the odds of the candidate instead of denigrating him? To do so is to wave the white flag before the enemy is even in sight. That's what I mean by cowardly.
And for the record, "cold political analysis" by definition excludes active participation. So if you want to stand on the sidelines, that's your call. But the minute you stump for one of the "electable" candidates, you disqualify yourself as an objective observer, which renders your predictions suspect. Call it the Heisenberg Principle of politics.
I am sure Howlin would give you a defifnitive list if you wanted one.
I wrote a letter to the editor in our local paper several years ago about the gay agenda and gay marriage and published it here on FR. After the letter was published, I received death threats on the phone and hate mail.
It sure sounds like it.
And you think Hillary is going to bring up these issues and be to the right of Rudy? ROTFL
Oh no, not the defifnitive list :)
Ah, so Stormfront is a site for Boy Scouts? You don't even know your own terms.
I'm sorry to hear that. That is just plain wrong.
Is it still available here on FR?
What's even funnier is complaining about someone making a Nazi reference when you did the same thing the night before.
Posted by Howlin to Spiff
On Smoky Backroom 01/30/2007 11:11:23 PM EST · 589 of 914
I think that a great many FReepers, like you, have lost your course because you've jettisoned your allegedly conservative ideals
That one post shows what a pompous sanctimonious A$$ you are.
Like I thought, you all are realizing how irrelevant you are so you have to come on all these threads and trash anybody and everybody who doesn't have the same tunnel vision brown shirted views you do.
And I bet you have no clue how many people are GLAD you don't speak for them.
Sounds like you are going to support it. Thanks for letting us know in advance if we dont take your candidate you are going to take your marbles and play with yourself.
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.