--------
He's a quality person. He's a quality Congressman. He's a quality conservative. Correct that, he's an OUTSTANDING conservative.
None of that makes him a quality candidate. Quality candidates win elections - in fact, that's the definition of a quality candidate. Candidates who DON'T win elections, whatever other virtues they may have, are known as "losing" candidates.
Hunter has given no indication - not one - that he's going to win anything other than a meaningless straw poll here and there. He's raised very little money. After running for a year, he has little name recognition. And as I've already pointed out, his poll numbers are in the tank.
I WISH ALL THIS WERE NOT TRUE. I myself started off as a Tancredo supporter, but months ago came to the realization that I was on a Quixotic quest. That doesn't mean I wouldn't love to see Tancredo elected. It just means I have the discernment to see that it ain't gonna happen.
So to your question: what are you supposed to do? Well, you asked, so I'll presume to answer. I'd review the five candidates who have a >0.0001% chance of winning the nomination, pick the one who I can best live with and support him. Then I'd agitate to make Hunter Secretary of Defense; a post for which he's exceptionally well qualified.
But that's just me, as Dennis Miller used to say. I could be wrong....
Hank
Did you know that "winning" is not always winning?... And that "losing" may actually lead to winning down the road?
I am social-conservative first, and Republican 3rd or 4th :)... I, and many others out there think it's time to demand more of our leaders, better quality leaders as far as our issues go. No, we are not asking for a 'saint,' but we want someone that if nothing else CAN BE BELIEVED IN WHAT HE SAYS! and Duncan is that man for us. I will stick with him until some BETTER comes along.
But I understand your point of view, I hope you understand mine - even if you don't like it - and others who feel the same as me.