Posted on 03/03/2007 2:38:10 PM PST by Pyro7480
No, it's not "fair," but it does tell us something about the candidates who have actually PLANNED a national campaign, and part of that is winning these meaningless straw polls and generating "buzz."
I think it is especially necessary for non-front-runners to have these organizations set up and building buzz at such events as C-PAC.
Let me put it like this: when you go in to interview for a job, it might not be necessary to have a coat and tie---they might look past that and look at the "real you." But it says something about the seriousness with which you undertake the interview to "come prepared."
I didn't get to hear Hunter's talk. But I don't think that's the case. I went to DC with 50 UDayton college kids, and they were pretty open. Certainly they are conservative enough. However, they DO want to be taken seriously, and I didn't get the impression that Hunter took this event, or the kids, seriously at all.
I am unsure. I read about him somewhere! :-)
That is what I think have thought from the get go!
Very good post. I agree with virtually everything that you said. I just don't understand the fascination that some conservatives here have with a liberal New York lawyer like Rudy.
Rudy tried to DISTANCE HIMSELF from Ronald Reagan--when he refused to call himself a Reagan Republican. He once ran for mayor in the 'Liberal Party'. He worked for Bobby Kennedy's campaign. He voted for George McGovern. He not only voted but publicaly endorsed Mario Cuomo (you can't get any more liberal than that) over the Republican candidate (Pataki). Really party loyalty there. As a vocal Clinton-apologist, he has defended Bill Clinton on more than one occasion. He was so liberal, in fact, that he was not even INVITED to the 1996 Republican Convention. And then he topped it off by expressing pride that he was not invited.
It makes no sense. He will never get the vote of my family or myself.
As I state on here (ad nauseum), liberal Republicans like Rudy are more dangerous than liberal democrats, because liberal Republicans BLUR THE DISTINCTION between liberalism and conservatism--making LIBERALISM MUCH MORE ACCEPTABLE.
I find it harder to trust people who go from a moral postion to an immoral position. In that and many other respects Guiliani is like Clinton and Gore.
For the documentation google: Guiliani 1980.
"If I thought that he was the ONLY candidate that could take a strong defense stand (terrorism, etc.), then I could vote for him. But you would first have to convince me that Romney and Hunter would be weak on defense"
He paid for their transportion and not all of them were Romney supporters BTW because I know several that took advantage that only did it for a free trip. He also paid entry fees.
None of the other candidates did that but my questions is why are you all so defensive? Is it because it shows you have to pay supporters way to get there? Rudy had no ground game but he almost beat Romney -- I would say that for the money spent and all the kids that were handing out his literature, you all didn't do very good.
Just think that the truth should be out there but obviously you all don't from your reactions. Romney already lied about Rudy and where he stands and if I check it out probably about McCain. Not looking too good and BTW, a straw poll isn't worth a whole lot because there is no scientific methodology. I know because I have run them before.
Very interesting. Thanks deport.
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.