Mmm...............................no.
Posted on 08/14/2007 9:39:58 AM PDT by George W. Bush
Long before Romney put his hat in the presidential race, I saw him speak on C-Span a few times. He made a lot of sense, even my Naval son liked what the man had to say.
My favorite GOP is Duncan Hunter (Romney is my 2nd choice)
But, I just don’t see Hunter getting the momentum.
Your whole post was complete bunk. You pulled most of that drivel out of your backside.
Hillary vs Mitt = Landslide victory for Mitt. Period. No Republican is going to vote for Hillary no matter who the Republican candidate is.
Your assertion that Religious conservatives would pull a voting lever in support of Hillary is ludicrous -at best. Borderline insane.
Hillary will get the standard %26 of the vote. That seems to be the current level kook-dom in the US these days.
Hillary couldn't win against a dead cat. Actually I'd feel safer with the dead cat in office than with her.
I want a President that does what's right for the country. Not what appeases the ideologues or worries about polls. The majority of the time that will be conservative, -but sometimes not. That it's the right thing to do is what matters.
I learned that from a man named Jesus. -lived a long time ago.
Don't give into the media hype
want a President that does what’s right for the country. Not what appeases the ideologues or worries about polls. The majority of the time that will be conservative, -but sometimes not. That it’s the right thing to do is what matters.
DITTO & well said
His analysis is about as impartial and objective as a 9/11 Truther's.
You ought to try reading what I actually posted before attacking me. You response makes you look stupid and childish.
I made no assertions whatsoever about Republicans of any flavor voting for Hillary, although it would be juvenile to assert that it will not happen at all. Oh wait, that’s what you said.
I have recorded your prediction on Hillary. I hope you like the taste of crow.
Now that we have the pleasantries aside, I will elucidate on what I actually posted.
The reason Romney cannot beat Hillary is exactly the same reason George Bush couldn’t beat Bill Clinton. The base will stay home. As I said, Romney has alienated large portions of the very fragile coalition that a Republican needs to win the White House. Most of the base doesn’t trust him. It doesn’t take Republicans voting for Hillary for her to win, it only takes Republicans not voting for Romney.
Dude,you got shrimp
Thanks.
The only option I see is Duncan Hunter and maybe Rick Santorum. However, it's highly unlikely Romney will choose someone from another Northeast state, so the smart money is on Hunter. If Romney's nominated he would have to choose Hunter. Anyone else and the base is staying home.
Mmm...............................no.
It’s difficult to say who FReepers support. I’d say the top candidates here are Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson. I’ve come to dislike Fred Thompson quite a bit (about as much as McCain) because I don’t get the impression he stands for anything. In rhetoric, he’s a pro-trade-with-communist-China version of Duncan Hunter; but in the Senate, he was closely tied to the McCain wing of the party.
I like Romney a lot. He’s my favorite aside from Huckabee. After Romney, I like Hunter; but I’ve become far too disappointed with his results.
If neither Romney, nor Huckabee, nor Hunter is viable by the time of the Florida primary, I would consider Giuliani; but Giuliani is hated around here.
It’s basically:
1. Huckabee - Unassailable social conservative credentials, supports FairTax vocally, and is completely committed against jihadism.
2. Romney - He’s the most decent seeming of the frontrunners, understands business and economics, talks about economics more than the other frontrunners.
3. Hunter - Perfect platform but a very poor speaker.
“...And I hope I get a chance to debate Hillary Clinton on this very topic, because when I’m asked what the biggest difference is between my plan and her plan, I’ll say that mine got passed.”
Mitt Romney on Hannity & Colmes, 8/14/2007
Any conservative who is at all familiar with Romney's history opposing the Bush taxcuts, supporting the assault weapons ban, and recent flip on abortion will not be motivated to vote for a RINO.
What would be the point of voting for Romney? He is not much different than a Democrat.
Precisely.
Interesting enough but it is easy for anyone to read a bit more into these straw polls than they merit.12 08 07 Straw Poll: Winners and Losers
The Iowa Republicans held their presidentialvote buyingstraw poll in Ames, Iowa. Below we note the winners and losers, in order as we see them:LosersSo lets look at the losers first. This was an unmitigated failure for the Republican party. In 1999, George W. Bush won the poll with 7,418 out of 23,685 votes cast (31%) over a free spending Steve Forbes ("Mr. Balloon ride", 21%) and Elizabeth Dole (14%). This year Iowa GOP leaders expected 40,000 to turn out for the most expensive straw poll ever and yet only about 30,000 to 33,000 showed up - many of those out of state volunteers - a decline in attendance of about 21% and 40% in participation.If the GOP thought the mid-term election disaster was a fluke, this should be another wake up call that the Republican party is dwindling away at an alarming rate.
- The Republican Party
- Mitt Romney
- Fred Thompson
- Rudy Giuliani
- John McCain
- Tommy Thompson
- Duncan Hunter
- John Cox
Winners
- Mike Huckabee
- Tom Tancredo
- Ron Paul
No Decision
- Sam Brownback
Romney, even though he carried the vote by the same margin as Bush, is also a loser in our eyes. Romney spent lavishly in Iowa all year and has spent a great deal of time in the state, more than any other candidate except Brownback and perhaps some combined. While actual figures are difficult to come by, the talk on the ground was his campaign had prepurchased 10,000 tickets - similar to the 11,000 Bush bought in 1999 - but only saw 45% cast to Bush's 67%. Simply put, Romney underwhelmed.
As to the other losers, the media darlings are certainly not looking good today. The turnout for Fred, Rudy and John was horrible. If Fred Thompson really, truly had a ground swell of support urging him to enter this race, it was not apparent in Ames where he carried 1.4%. If Rudy is really the candidate of the GOP, why was he only able to gather 1.3% of the vote? Though his organization on the ground did not place emphasis on the straw poll, Rudy has spent a lot of time the past year in Iowa and to show that poorly should be a concern for his campaign. The best McCain can say is he got 18 more votes than in 1999. John Cox, while a nice man with some good ideas, is not able to generate any grass roots support. As to Tommy Thompson, like Brownback and Huckabee, he placed all his effort on this one vote. Considering that he is from a neighboring state, unable to raise funds and generally seen as performing poorly in the debates should lead to his exit from the race and like Duncan Hunter, wait for his matching funds to pay off any campaign debts. Cleary Mr. Hunter's achievements with the border fence in San Diego did not translate to middle America.
Lets take a look at the winners now. Mike Huckabee must be very pleased with his finish. While not always as quick or sharp as some of the other debaters, almost all will say he comes across as a 'nice guy'. That and his strong pro-life position allowed him to pick up some momentum the past two weeks and snag the second place finish. Tom Tancredo finishing a strong fourth was certainly a surprise which clearly signals voter displeasure with the state of immigration as much as their desire for a paid trip to Washington, DC if they brought 25 others to vote for him. There is some talk he may be forced to drop out because of Colorado rules about running for two offices at once; we suspect he will now delay withdrawal as long as possible to continue his national conversation on border control and the appropriate use of thermonuclear weapons in the Middle East. Lastly, Ron Paul, though fifth, showed that he was able to translate his internet support into votes on the ground in a difficult environment with little name recognition. That he received approximately 500 more votes than his campaign gave away tickets while only spending a week or two in the state indicates he may be the only Republican candidate that can truthfully claim grassroots support (the Paul campaign only opened their official Iowa headquarters this past Friday).
Lastly, Sam Brownback. There will probably be much soul searching this week in a campaign which had pushed extremely hard to get second place in Iowa to jump start fund raising and gain some national momentum. While third place may not be a complete disaster, against this is the fact his name was very well known, his social conservative values were best suited for Iowa and the two front runners (Giuliani and F. Thompson) did not mount an organized campaign. We think he will defer a final decision until after September 30 to see if his fund raising efforts can gain any traction. If he is unable to come out of Q3 with more than $1 million in the bank, he will drop out of the race.
In conclusion, the straw poll really only helped two candidates (Huckabee and Paul) while buying Romney some very expensive but somewhat hollow headlines. Our personal feeling is the event should be eliminated or at least redesigned. The ability to buy votes is not indicative of true support or even organizational skills (look how much Romney spent per vote). Admission should be nominal - if at all. Far better for the state GOP to raise money by other means and stop the impression that Iowa is just a place for candidates to pander by mouth and wallet.
Rant Street! » Straw Poll: Winners and Losers
THE IOWA STRAW POLL WAS VERY SUSPECT WITH 26,000 TICKETS SOLD. ONLY 14,302 VOTES COUNTED. IOWA REPUBLICAN PARTY IS HIDING SOMETHING.
Were they all cast for Ron Paul, making him the runaway winner?
WIDEAWAKE - THE CONSTITUTION SAYS NOTHING ABOUT EDUCATION, ENERGY REGULATION, FEDERAL RESERVE AND ORIGINALLY REQUIRED EQUAL DISTRIBUTION OF TAXES FROM EACH STATE. THIS REQUIRED THE 16 TH AMENDMENT TO IMPLEMENT THE INCOME TAX IN 1913.
WHERE DID YOU RECEIVE THE AUTHORITY TO CRITICIZE THE CONSTITUTIONALISTS??? WHAT ARE YOUR CREDENTIALS. SIR
THE UNUSED BALLOTS IN THE STRAW POLL HAVE NOT BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR. THE CORRUPT IOWA STRAW POLL WILL STAIN IOWA UNTIL FULLY EXPLAINED. THE PAUL 2008 EFFORT IS UNDERWAY AND IT HAS NOT BEEN DEMONSTRATED TO THE SOUTH. SEPTEMBER 01, 2007 WILL BE A REVELATION TO YOUR SIDE
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.