Posted on 09/26/2007 5:48:27 PM PDT by pissant
Well, for whatever reason, Hunter’s campaign has not surged, either in fundraising or poll results. You need both to be a serious contender.
I’m not passing any judgment on Hunter’s positions on the issues on this thread, but simply asserting that his campaign is probably futile at this point.
It doesn’t matter how right he may be on the issues without money or support.
Yes, being right or wrong doesn't seem to be the criteria anymore for being elected to office. 100 million and being a D.C. insider seems to be the magic ticket.
The name recognition he is gaining might help him out in the future. I don't think anybody would disagree that Hunter would make an outstanding Secretary of Defense.
That’s a possibility. There’s no doubt he’s a smart guy with a good background.
But I’d guess any candidate will need to have amassed $50 million to compete in the early primaries.
I think the next reporting date is in early October, and I suspect he will have raised about 10% of that amount.
I don’t believe he is close to 10%, but I’ve sent him another $200. In his book, Ed Rollins talks about the Reagan Administrations mistake of appointing so many people into high positions who had never supported Reagan and often opposed him. Sounds like Mitt, Rudy and Fred to me (among others). I like my candidates free of draft dodging and adultery. I want somebody who supported Reagan in 1976 and 1980.
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.