Do Vanity Candidates Really Have a Chance? (Michael Medved)

Michael Medved's Townhall Blog ^ | February 8, 2007 | Michael Medved

[EveningStar]

Two days ago, in blogging about the abortion records of the serious GOP Presidential prospects (McCain, Giuliani, Romney), I provoked a great deal of anger by writing off the other current contenders (Huckabee, Brownback, Tancredo, Ron Paul, Gilmore, Thompson, Duncan Hunter) as "lesser" candidates who stand no realistic chance of winning primaries or grabbing the nomination. No matter how much you may admire these people, their candidacies are irrelevant – more a bid for attention, or a preparation for future races, than a realistic bid for power...

When, in the last 60 years of Presidential politics, did any obscure underdog manage to defy the odds and win the nomination of the Republican Party?...

[saganite]

I think Bill Clinton was described as an underdog when he won his parties nomination although he had far more name recognition at the time than Duncan Hunter does now.

[EveningStar]

I'm really curious. How does losing an election by running someone you would consider a "true conservative" advance the cause of freedom?

Are you saying that conservatives should make decisions based on reality rather than wishful thinking? Shame on you! :)

[upsdriver]

I'm curious, why do you think running a liberal republican can be equated with winning anything?

[Sherman Logan]

There was a time when the republican party was a 3rd party.

By stretching the point, this could apply to the 1856 election. However, it would be more accurate to say that there was one active party involved, the Democrats, and two half-parties, the Whigs in an advanced state of dissolution, and the Republicans just forming. There was never a time when the GOP filled the classic role of a 3rd-party against two established ones.

[Antoninus]

I'm really curious. How does losing an election by running someone you would consider a "true conservative" advance the cause of freedom?

You're talking to a guy from New Jersey. We took Medved's advice and elected a liberal Republican in the 1990s. Since then, the state GOP has imploded, the Democrats have taken over lock-stock-and-barrel, and when we do manage to put forward an excellent conservative candidate for statewide office, the liberal GOP leadership *publicly endorses the Democrat* (see Bret Schundler versus Jim "gay American" McGreevey in 2001).

Do you want that for the national GOP? How does having two liberal parties advance the cause of freedom?

[EveningStar]

Miscellaneous ping list + others

[PatrickF4]

Wendell Wilkie, 1940 And we all go, "Who's that?"

Medved is right that the MSM is gushing over Hillary and Obama, but he is ignoring the gush over Guiliani.

[onyx]

Bump

[SaxxonWoods]

"Need some more koolaide to wash that popcorn down with Mr follower?"

Follower?

Following who?

I guess we are up to 2 DH follwers so far. Not that there is anything wrong with that, you understand. I like Duncan's positions, they are in tune with mine for the most part. Hey, that gives me an idea...no, never mind.

[uptoolate]

The elections almost 2 years away and already we have people deciding who the viable and ridiculous candidates are.

No wonder politics has become nothing more than a popularity contest.

[cripplecreek]

Hey, that gives me an idea...no, never mind.

Aww come on. be a man and say it.

[JennysCool]

We ALL really need to calm down. The announced candidates have begun their campaigns (ie: fundraising drives) WAY too early. Some who may seem to have momentum at the moment will find America completely sick of them when it comes down to crunch time. Dark horses will surge only to fall back. Issues we haven't even thought of yet will be hotly debated. Gaffes will be made. Come November, 2007, or June, 2008 or, most certainly, November, 2008, things will be completely different than the way we view them now.

This preposterously early start for the campaign is, I think, an effort by the candidates to stretch out the fundraising "season" and the media to get more political bang for the buck, in both controversy for the news programs advertising for the bottom line, and advancement of their agenda.

In other words, the politicos and the drive-bys are manipulating us AGAIN. Just look -- conservatives are already at each others throats -- just the way the media and the libs like it. Just like 2006.

We sheeple never, ever learn.

[CyberAnt]

He doesn't need 100 million to win.

The reason is .. he doesn't have to hire consultants, speech writers and image makers to make him appear conservative .. HE'S ALREADY CONSERVATIVE .. and he has a proven voting record in the House to prove it.

And .. since he's already beat the straw poll in AZ against McCain .. I'd say he's a lot more visable than YOU think.

[upsdriver]

So if you agree with Hunter, why is it necessary to put him down?

[EveningStar]

forgot to ping you

[gitmogrunt]

The GOP has had such smashing success in the last election with their RINO candidates, they would be foolish to send out any lesser candidates, particularly if they were those lowly conservative types./sarcasm off

[Antoninus]

Are you saying that conservatives should make decisions based on reality rather than wishful thinking?

The reality is that North Eastern Yankee liberals are very likely to remind newly minted Southern Republicans why they changed parties in the first place--and send them running to a 3rd party. Do you honestly think a guy like Rudy has any shot of pulling in Bible Belt states? Of the 15 million Evangelicals that Karl Rove declared vital to Bush winning in 2000, how many will pull the lever for Rudy. 50%? If he's lucky.

Add to that the fact that the core Republican special interest groups like the NRA, GOA, CWA, NRTL, border control, and pro-family groups, will not endorse Rudy in the millions of voter guides they send out. When was the last time that happened to a Republican presidential nominee?

Rudy McRomney are party splitters and any of them will lose to Her Heinous. Rudy would be lucky to pull in 40% of the vote.

[SaxxonWoods]

OK, I'm in! I mean, why not? I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and by golly, people like me! Well, maybe not around here, but so what?

I got a slogan:

"I come from a place called dope!"

...or is that cope?...mope?

[uptoolate]

Did not the last election teach us that conservatives only want true conservatives?

The untrue conservatives screwed up.

[Sherman Logan]

How does having two liberal parties advance the cause of freedom?

It doesn't. It sounds like your problem is more with the local NJ GOP leaders. Why not clean out that particular stable? Of course a conservative candidate is not going to succeed while undercut by his "followers."