You're not saving me any grief. You're avoiding a substantive reply to my challenge. You're only saving yourself from - and I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here, because you seem sincere and thoughtful - having to re-assess your position when your arguments are dismantled. Rather than string them out over months, wouldn't it be more fruitful to present them so we can hash them out early and - in theory, at least - come to an agreement that will benefit party unity and increase the chances of victory? Otherwise, it seems as if you simply don't want Hunter to win, and your arguments about his viability are a smoke screen.
Hunter has no pedigree, no experience in doing anything but running for congress during the past decade.
Hunter has no political machine, no major backing, and nothing to hang on to for a political run.
He is not known for any issues, any policies, any particular opinions at all! Nothing!
He has a great conservative reputation in the Congress. That's it!
Conservatives like Hunter cannot win a national election because they do not have the broad spectrum appeal and cannot build it no matter how much money they spend. At best, if he got every conservative vote in the country, he would be beaten by 30 points minimum. (Assuming he could make it through the primary, which he can't)
The man we need, and I did say man, is a republican, and not a right wing conservative. He needs to be a former Governor and he needs to have decisive and successful managerial experiences on his resume.
He needs to be moderate or centrist on social issues, and not particularly controversial regarding his opinions. This means, he can not be seen as being pro-abortion, or rabidly against it.
Social issues are not a ticket to the White House, and never have been.
He needs to have a solid Friedman view of Economics and taxes, and he needs to be a dynamic public debater and speaker. He needs to be strong on geopolitics and national security. He needs to know how to kiss a baby..:-) (I'm serious actually)
He needs to be wealthy! He may be required to forgo the public election funds because this campaign will be lost by the people who are forced to take the money and then cannot compete against Hilary because of the rules.
We have to have a even playing field because they will have all the money they need. They will not be taking public funds. Duncan will never be able to match those funds.
There is only one candidate in the race at present who has national electability, money, prestige, is a moderate and has all the experience, knowledge and backing needed to beat the Democrat, which is not going to be at all easy and many already think impossible.
Just one..............