Duncan Hunter was first elected to Congress, defeating an 18-year Democrat incumbent in what was then a safe district for Democrats. History has shown Duncan Hunter to have electability.
Today the scoreboard shows every candidate running for President tied with zero votes received. The score will remain that until the first vote is cast, which isn't for a few months.
What you need to do is scare people away from voting for Duncan Hunter is create a perception that Hunter is (quote) "unelectable" (unquote). You need to scare people with what you hope is a self-fulfilling prophecy. And it's not just you. All the candidate teams have to put out that their candidate is the "only one" capable of defeating Hillary. All this gamesmanship pits people voting against their conscience with the most convincing scare tactics.
Hillary Clinton has such high negatives and will polarize people towards the Republican candidate whomever it is, much like what happened in 2000 with Gore and 2004 with Kerry. We could have done far better than Bush in 2000, but scare tactics and misperceptions will virtually guarantee mediocrity. Mediocrity is unacceptable with our Constitutional rights and civil liberties on the line.
>>> I’ve seen a similar failure to admit flaws from Hunter supporters (for instance, lack of electability) - but that doesn’t seem to offend you.
>> What you have is a “flaw” based on perception. The perception is what is flawed.
With regard to public opinion, perception is reality. The perception that Duncan Hunter is floundering around 1-2% support is not flawed ... it is reality based on scientific polling data. There is simply no indication of a groundswell of support for Hunter.
>> Duncan Hunter was first elected to Congress, defeating an 18-year Democrat incumbent in what was then a safe district for Democrats. History has shown Duncan Hunter to have electability.
And Dennis Kucinich and Ted Kennedy have been repeatedly elected locally ... that certainly doesn’t mean they’re electable on a national scale.
>> Today the scoreboard shows every candidate running for President tied with zero votes received. The score will remain that until the first vote is cast, which isn’t for a few months.
Polling data, fundraising, etc. are means of predicting that outcome. Duncan Hunter is not doing well thus far. You are certainly free to ignore or deny reality for as long as you wish ... but the reality is what it is. Don’t expect fellow conservatives like me to stick our heads in the sand along with you.
>> What you need to do is scare people away from voting for Duncan Hunter is create a perception that Hunter is (quote) “unelectable” (unquote).
First - I don’t create reality ... I just observe it. Second, people aren’t being “scared away” from voting for Hunter ... the vast majority of conservatives weren’t Hunter-voters to begin with. Among the Republican field ... Hunter’s getting 1%. The Republican Party is comprised of FAR more than 1% conservatives. Those conservatives’ consciences are leading them elsewhere - mostly to Thompson ... some to Romney, Huckabee, McCain, and even a few to Giuliani (as I would figure far more than 1% of his 25% support is from genuine conservatives).
>> You need to scare people with what you hope is a self-fulfilling prophecy. And it’s not just you. All the candidate teams have to put out that their candidate is the “only one” capable of defeating Hillary.
“My candidate” is NOT the “only one capable of defeating Hillary” ... but I believe he is the most conservative candidate capable of doing so. I believe Giuliani, Romney, Thompson and possibly McCain or Huckabee have a reasonable shot at beating Hillary. I believe Brownback, Hunter, Tancredo, Paul, Cox and Keyes are wasting their time - and ours.
>> All this gamesmanship pits people voting against their conscience with the most convincing scare tactics.
Who said I was voting against my conscience? It seems supremely arrogant for Duncan Hunter supporters to assume that a conservative’s conscience would necessarily lead him to vote for Duncan Hunter.
>> Mediocrity is unacceptable with our Constitutional rights and civil liberties on the line.
And perfection is unattainable. All candidates are impefect ... some more than others. I’ve yet to see any Hunter supporter give a convincing argument why to pick Hunter over Thompson ... outside of “vote your conscience”. Duncan Hunter didn’t register on my conscience.
H