Posted on 08/11/2007 7:40:59 PM PDT by Turret Gunner A20
AMES, Iowa - Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney won an easy and expected victory in a high-profile Iowa Republican Party Straw Poll on Saturday, claiming nearly twice as many votes as his nearest rival.
(Excerpt) Read more at home.peoplepc.com ...
Put aside sour grapes and wonder. Why is it that some candidate like Duncan Hunter doesn't have smart money backing him. I don't know the answer to that. All I know is that his contacts in the defense industry in CA could fund one of these campaigns any day of the week that they chose to. So, I wonder. What do they know about him that I don't know?
Does that move Mike up to the first tier of candidates.
The must have counted the presstitutes in attendance,
Heh. That’s what I want to know. Why in the heck is this supposed to be SO important?
MSM going nuts about it. Blah blah and blah.
Most people I know (sadly) don’t follow politics, and aren’t even thinking about the election at this point.
This is all just MSM hype.
I’m sure the gays are happy, since he supports gay marriage. “It’s the American way.” < :P
” . . . a bunch of corn-shucking rubes too stupid to know any better.”
Be careful, Sir/Madame, that your eyes don’t permanently cross while looking down your nose at middle America. What’s next, coming up with some cute little barbs about southerners?
” . . . a bunch of corn-shucking rubes too stupid to know any better.”
Be careful, Sir/Madame, that your eyes don’t permanently cross while looking down your nose at middle America. What’s next, coming up with some cute little barbs about southerners?
I think you hit the nail on the head. This shows Romney can win even at the grassroots conservative level, in what is a change from his usual 'big city republican' appeal in Massachutes. I think big money backers will see him and his organization as tested now, and provide heavier funding.
I think the issue with Hunter amongst the big money backers like you said the defense industry. It might be fear of what would happen with his get tough trade policies. Or it might simply be Duncan while great ideologically isn't that great organizationally.
In an interview with Phil Klein of the American Spectator during CPAC 2007, the following exchange took place:
PK: On gun control, I know you signed an assault weapons ban in Massachusetts in 2004, now I know you joined the NRA within the last year. Can you tell me if an assault weapons ban came up at the federal level, would you sign or veto that?
ROMNEY: Well, it depends on what it looked like, but…
PK: If it was something like the ‘94 bill…
ROMNEY: I have indicated that my position is the same as it has been which is I support the Second Amendment, but I also support (an) assault weapon ban, that’s why I signed a bill of that nature. That’s what I said back in ‘94. I’m in the same position that President Bush is. President Bush also says he supports the Second Amendment, but he would support an assault weapon ban. But the specifics of the particular ban are something that I’d have to look at, and it’s been a long time since we’ve looked at the particular types of weapons that might be involved. So my position is the same there as it has been before —
PK: But if the ‘94 one came up for vote again…
ROMNEY: Well obviously, we’ve learned some things since then. I haven’t seen the specific proposal at this stage and so I couldn’t comment on it until we had. We had an effort in Massachusetts on the part of some to ban 50 caliber rifles. I opposed that, indicated I would oppose that ban. You know, I think we have to be very careful in any way restricting Second Amendment rights. I support the Second Amendment. We’ve got a gun at our house, it’s owned by my son. I’ve hunted since I was a young man. I believe that people have the right to bear arms. But I also recognize that there’s some types of weapons that don’t need to be in the public’s hands, machine guns certainly, and I’d be open to consider appropriate kind of measures, but I’m not looking for blanket kind of prohibitions on people being able to have arms for their defense.
In Romney’s reply he states “I support the Second Amendment, but I also support (an) assault weapon ban” and “You know, I think we have to be very careful in any way restricting Second Amendment rights.
The Second Amendment: A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Bottom-line he does not support the Second Amendment, he is willing to infringe on the rights of the people of Massachusetts. He is fractionalizing the Second Amendment, saying “you can keep and bear arms, it is your right, but only those arms government allows.
Do you trust Romney with the U.S Constitution? I don’t!
Ii thought he did a good job.
Similar spin is happening here at FR. Massachusetts-based Romney wins big in the Iowa heartland through a well-executed strategy (showing presidential qualities in abundance). He achieves this despite entrenched bigotry, so the "Jesus loves me and hates thee" FReepers dismiss his win as "meaningless." Or they say he just threw money at a bunch of rubes too stupid to know better, or that he bused in all the Mormons in the State of Iowa to pack the ballot boxes.
What does the same group crow about Baptist preacher Huckabee from nearby Arkansas who took second place with about half the support won by Romney? Why, his "win" in THE "big story!" He's got momentum NOW. Yeah, baby! He embarrassed the vile, evil cultist Romney and his diabolically perfect family. Did it without having to spread filthy mammon around like a social disease. Onward Christian soldiers . . . . smite the idolators! Punch 'em in the nose and gouge their eyes for Jesus!
So out of one side their mouths they dismiss the Ames straw poll as "meaningless" (Romney) while out of the other side of their mouths they vest it with overarching, cosmic significance (Huckabee).
I've read elsewhere suggestions of a Romney-Huckabee ticket. Romney would have no problem with it. But then, Romney isn't a bigot. It's "true Christian" Huckabee and his supporters who would find the pairing anathema.
And that tell you all you need to know about both men and their base of support.
Similar spin is happening here at FR. Massachusetts-based Romney wins big in the Iowa heartland through a well-executed strategy (showing presidential qualities in abundance). He achieves this despite entrenched bigotry, so the "Jesus loves me and hates thee" FReepers dismiss his win as "meaningless." Or they say he just threw money at a bunch of rubes too stupid to know better, or that he bused in all the Mormons in the State of Iowa to pack the ballot boxes.
What does the same group crow about Baptist preacher Huckabee from nearby Arkansas who took second place with about half the support won by Romney? Why, his "win" in THE "big story!" He's got momentum NOW. Yeah, baby! He embarrassed the vile, evil cultist Romney and his diabolically perfect family. Did it without having to spread filthy mammon around like a social disease. Onward Christian soldiers . . . . smite the idolators! Punch 'em in the nose and gouge their eyes for Jesus!
So out of one side their mouths they dismiss the Ames straw poll as "meaningless" (Romney) while out of the other side of their mouths they vest it with overarching, cosmic significance (Huckabee).
I've read elsewhere suggestions of a Romney-Huckabee ticket. Romney would have no problem with it. But then, Romney isn't a bigot. It's "true Christian" Huckabee and his supporters who would find the pairing anathema.
And that tells you all you need to know about both men and their base of support.
Congratulations to Mitt and those working on his campaign. They’ve worked really hard for this. I also was surprised with the good showing Huckabee, Brownback and Tancredo showed. I don’t think coming in 4th for Tancredo was a big loss. He gave a rousing speech in the town hall and certainly has passion. He’s a bit extreme on certain issues, but he is certainly drumming up support for the border fence, and that’s not a bad thing. Overall, it was a great day for conservatives.
Poor showing for Rudy.
“This “fundraiser” for the Iowa GOP netted them a cool $1 million. But, Romney, alone, spent $5 million so the State Party could make $1 million. What’s wrong with this picture?”
It’s nice that the party made $1 million, since people are still so fed up they aren’t donating, but that wasn’t -really- the point of this. The point is to get your name out there... Winning an early state typically causes a domino effect, which is why people campaign in Iowa and New Hampshire disproportionately to their electoral contribution. This straw poll is an early indicator to how the candidates will ultimately do in that state.
Look at what happened to Kerry - that uncharismatic nobody went on to win the nomination just because he suddenly had the big name recognition.
Obviously, I don’t either.
I agree with you.
You are certainly right about that. But these are not debates. I was a debater. These are just TV shows, and Steph kept his interesting.
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.