Hmmmm. From what I’ve seen, every Fred Thompson thread is immediately invaded by Duncan Hunter supporters who then make personal attacks on him and his supporters. And lets not even start on what they say about Rudy Giuliani. And Duncan Hunter supporters are also the only people who disparage all the viable candidates at once with their quaint “Rudy McRomneyson” label. You see, the difference here is those guys all have a chance of winning. Hunterites are doing nothing put hurting the party and the eventual nominee. From what I’ve seen, their behavior has been even worse than the Ron Paul supporters.
Anyways, I’m not gloating — I don’t have a personal investment in either Romney or Huckabee. I’m just saying I think this straw poll signals that it’s time for the Hunter supporters to start being team players a bit more.
I’ve read everything on FR about Duncan Hunter since Jan. I haven’t seen anything like what you have described. What you call “trashing” is merely pointing out their shortcomings, and emphasizing the REASONS we should support Duncan Hunter. If Mitt Romney didn’t want anyone discussing his flip flops, (on abortion, for example) then he shouldn’t have flip flopped!! Pointing out the truth is not trashing. If the truth hurts, so be it. We can be supremely confident that Duncan Hunter will not change his core beliefs just because it might get some more votes. I also read the Fred threads, and I say again, if the truth hurts, put some ice on it.
From what I've seen, Fredheads are the ones who are masters at personal attacks here, calling Sam Brownback "Senator Brokeback", and so on. The bizarre thing with the Fredheads is they seem to have no problem trashing someone for doing something their own candidate does. For example, they rant and rave all day that Lindsey Graham is McCain's homosexual lover and a traitor to this nation by supporting McCain on amnesty and the torture bill. But when it's pointed out that Fred was McCain's best buddy in the Senate and worked arm-in-arm with McCain to pass McCain-Feingold, they shrug their shoulders and say "nobody's perfect".
I haven't seen this kind of behavior from any other candidate's camp. You don't see the Rudybots blast other Republicans for being pro-abortion or the Romney people attack Harry Reid for being a Mormon, etc. The Fredheads seem to be "Do as we say, not as Fred does" mentality, and that's why the more we hear from them on FR, the bigger backlash there is that they put Fred on a pendastal and make him exempt from the purist standards they demand of all othe Republicans.
>> And lets not even start on what they say about Rudy Giuliani. <<
Since when has ANYONE on FR had anything positive to say about Giuliani? Not since the Rudybots were banished en masse on this forum a few monthes ago. Rudy had his chance -- TWICE -- to "beat Hillary" in New York, and he blew it, and now he wants a promotion to a nationwide office instead.
>> And Duncan Hunter supporters are also the only people who disparage all the viable candidates at once with their quaint “Rudy McRomneyson” label.
The "Rudy McRomney" label was invented by Fredheads who insisted we had to "draft" Fred into the race because NONE of the existing candidates, especially the three front-runners, was "acceptable" in their minds, and they they would fold their arms and refuse to vote in November if "Rudy McRomney" was the nominee. Then once they got their hero Fred, people noticed that Fred wasn't much of an improvement over the eeeeeeeeeeeeeevil McCain & Romney in terms of his "record" in office, so he's just more of the status quo. Thus the terms like "Rudy McRomneyson" (at the first GOP debate), "Rudy T. McRomney" and "Frudy McRomney" were coined. Really seems to tick off the Fredheads. They can dish it out but they sure can't take it.
>> You see, the difference here is those guys all have a chance of winning. Hunterites are doing nothing put hurting the party and the eventual nominee. <<
Of course, if you had been around in 1939, you would have assuered us that Wendell Wilikie, who was polling a dismal 3% compared to the "big 3" front runners (Taft, Dewey, and Vanderbult), had "no chance" of winning the nomination, and that in 1975, Jimmy Carter, who polled about 2% nationally, had "no chance" of winning the Dem nomination.
What's interesting here though, is Hunterites are probably the second largest group on FR after Fredheads, and we're supposed to believe Hunter is THE conservative consensus choice. Tommy Thompson has been ridiculed on FR as having absolutely no support anywhere. But when Tommy and Duncan went head to head in Iowa and tried to GOTV from their supporters all around the state, here's what happened:
Tommy Thompson 1,039
Duncan Hunter 174
Tommy Thompson, who is invisible on FR, got 5 times the support of Hunter among Iowa Republicans. And even though Fred was NOT at Ames, his supporters set up a booth for "FredHeads" and certainly made their presence known, with people working the crowds to pass out "I'm with Fred" stuff, and Tommy still beat Fred "I don't NEED to announce or campaign to win" Thompson 5 to 1.
So even with a poor 6th place position that might toss him from the race, Tommy still got FIVE TIMES as many people to the polls in Ames that the Iowa Fredheads or Hunterites (who DOMINATE FR and take up about 70% of the discussions here) managed to pull off.
>> From what I’ve seen, their behavior has been even worse than the Ron Paul supporters. <<
Nah, the Ron Paul crowd gets tiresome with their "ONLY Ron Paul understand the consitution" gimmack, but at least their equal oppotunity offenders.
>> I don’t have a personal investment in either Romney or Huckabee. I’m just saying I think this straw poll signals that it’s time for the Hunter supporters to start being team players a bit more. <<
Here's what the straw poll results told me:
1) Looks like Huckabee may be the 2nd tier candidate who can break out of the field and mount a credible challenger to the GOP status quo. And while Huckabee's record isn't as good as Tommy's, he's a great campaigner and has the charisma and brains to do it, and I will take a 2nd look at him.
2) The Fredheads may delude themselves by continuing to think Fred "wins" these things by not showing up, but since Fred got only 1/5th of the votes of the participating candidates despite being the only "non-participating" candidate who's supporters worked the crowd, it shows he can't have the GOP nomination handed him to him on a silver platter by sitting home all day and expecting desperate Republicans to come to him and annoint him by acclaimation. But Fredheads think it's a "brillant" stradegy for Fred to put off annoncing as long as possible, more the power to them. Don't say you weren't warned.
3) The voting base Hunter is aiming for went to Tancredo. Hunter is a better candidate on paper but Tancredo has built up support long before the 2008 race and he has the kind of fiery passion to whip up crowds that Hunter lacks. Shame, I met up Hunter and the Iowa straw poll and he is a great conservative patriot. But it's just not happening.
4) Who the hell is voting for Brownback? He came in third, which shocked me. I'm still trying to figure out this guy's appeal (okay, he's a midwesterner campaigning in nearby Iowa, but so is Tommy Thompson). I expected Brownback to finsh 7th or 8th out of 11. Indeed, I was THERE on the day of the Ames Straw Poll, and I only saw a handful of Brownback supporters. It's really frustrating to see Brownback beat guys like Hunter, Tancredo, and Tommy Thompson.