Posted on 12/30/2007 5:50:44 PM PST by County Agent Hank Kimball
I have a very simple question, and I'd really like your take on it. I don't mean this as antagonistic, but I'd really like to hear your answer.
Somewhere between 70 and 80 percent of the people here on Free Republic consistently express their clear preference in poll after poll for Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter over Huckabee or Romney.
My question is: Why?
Why do you think, despite Romneys many millions spent and the claims of both Romney and Huckabee to be genuine conservatives, that Freepers haven't bought it? It is quite clear that most here are firm in their belief that neither Romney or Huckabee is an acceptable conservative. At least at this point of the game.
Why do we think this - in your opinion?
And then, why are we wrong?
Hank
“The less you know about Huckabee, the more you like him.”
http://www.realmikehuckabee.blogspot.com/
Go to the above link if you’re seriously wanting to know why Huckabee’s not the man for the job.
Uhhh...not only that, uhhh..he collaborated with that liberal duo McCain & Feingold, uhhh.. and then voted against, uhhh... impeaching Clinton.... What the huh???
Are you in IOWA?
I get an uneasy feeling every time I see a picture of Huckabee. And I’m a Christian. So, I haven’t fallen for the sentimental support of Huck because he’s of like faith.
The above link has extensive info on Huck’s problems, if you are serious about wanting to know more.
I am a conservative activist, but not far (lack of a better word) right as some people here are, where every other word is RINO. I feel somewhat obligated to get involved. I am a Catholic who collected signatures on petitions to place Mr. Romney on our congressional ballot here in Ohio (I did the same for Steve Forbes as well) — I know, I have to “get over it”. My husband supports Mr. Romney as well.
I believe, 70-80% of people on FR are constitutionalist at heart... we support true conservatism, and smaller government.. and, we are STRONGLY against illegal immigration. Hunter and Thompson are the guys who best fit our ideals.
However... I don’t believe we are representative of the ‘average’ voter. Not even, the ‘average Republican’. Far from it.
I think Hunter’s strong, vocal support for protectionist measures hurt him with the general public. Fred has been hurt by his ultra-laid back style... and poor press coverage.
Guliani was popular for the obvious reasons.. and, I think would be the clear winner if this were a National primary... but, it’s not.
Huckaby has experienced a boomlet because.. 1) He was great in the debates, and 2) His Likability factor is off the charts... He mostly answers questions directly, and has done a good job of staying positive and on offense.. thus far. Huckaby’s problem is... His record. It’s NOT conservative. And, the worst part is.. immigration and taxes... two big issues for us. I won’t write him off just yet... just because, he IS so darn likable, and that means A LOT!
Romney has run the smartest campaign thus far. He wins top marks from me on moral & family values.. He also wins my award for the smartest, most accomplished candidate. Add to that, his stunningly “Presidential looks and speaking style”... and, you have a strong opponent for anyone the Dems put up. His biggest knock seems to be his changing positions on abortion. But, that doesn’t worry me at all. I believe people CAN change their opinion on abortion... I know, I did. I believe his explanations... in part, because his current position is consistent with the morals with which his lived his life, with the position of his church, and with most of his actions as Govenor.
Oh.. almost forgot McCain.. I respect the guy.. but, I would NEVER vote for him in a primary... My worst nightmare is having to choose between Hillary and McCain... oh my...
So.. basically, the short answer is... FR people (myself included) are ‘special’... :-)
PS> We’ll start knowing soon... but, I would not bet a nickel at any odds against Romney.
“If you want someone who can win, then why aren’t you behind McCain instead?”
Perhaps the multiple-dozens of stabs in the back?
Just a thought...
Pro-choice, sanctuary city, socialised medicine.
Why is Thompson your pick for ideology? Hunter is more conservative for a longer period of time (No road-to-Des-Moines conversions) than Thompson.
.
.
.
.
According to Intrade, the winner of the December 12th GOP debate was... Duncan Hunter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938773/posts
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
In this poll Hunter is up 3% and even with Paul and Thompson.
http://www.wxyz.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=3481ef60-8195-46a9-af04-b87b907bcfdd
Well said....
Cheers
“Somewhere between 70 and 80 percent of the people here on Free Republic consistently express their clear preference in poll after poll for Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter over Huckabee or Romney.”
Because the vast majority of Freepers are first and foremost conventional conservatives; Goldwater Republicans as redefined by Ronald Reagan. They are concerned about:
Not necessarily in order
(1) Keeping the federal government small
(2) Keeping taxes low
(3) States rights (Federalism)
(4) National defense (which would include tight borders)
(5) Proper interpretation of Constitution by Judiciary
They also care about (but to a lesser and degree and not universally):
(1) Abortion
(2) Homosexual agenda
(3) Liberal agendas in general
These are my observations, that could be wrong.
No, not one of the so called top candidates have gotten 30 % support, so the balance of the voters are for someone else are no one.
It is like what the polls say about the hildabeast, no matter what 46% of the voters oppose her and say they would never vote for her.
Except that he’s a provable liar.
Uhhhh... make that 49% as of last week...
“The antiMitt group seems particularly visceral and just plain ugly. I have had nasty stuff said to me including that I should go back to porn sites by your buddies. If Mitt irritates the heck out of such rude,nasty people it is okay with me. There is no real dirt on Mitt. He is a politician. I’ve never seen that he has been arrested, or broke a law, or misused a cigar. He seems to be working really hard to win and I hope that he does.”
The anti-Mitt nuts have psychological issues.
WorldNet Daily:
Huckabee’s theology degree? Now says ain’t necessarily so
Campaign admits candidate doesn’t have claimed religious credential
Posted: December 14, 2007
7:20 p.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Former Gov. Mike Huckabee
Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee told the Christian Broadcasting Network he had a theology degree, he told voters in Iowa he had a theology degree, he repeated the claim in last month’s CNN YouTube debate ... but, his campaign now says, it was not true.
Huckabee’s claim began unraveling following his offhanded comment about Mormonism in a New York Times interview last weekend.
Reporter Zev Chafets wrote: “I asked Huckabee, who describes himself as the only Republican candidate with a degree in theology, if he considered Mormonism a cult or a religion. ‘I think it’s a religion,’ he said. ‘I really don’t know much about it.’
...
In the interview, Huckabee’s account of his education made no mention of his having earned a theology degree.
(Story continues ...)
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59222
Unfortunately for me and you that day is approaching rapidly.The only hope I see for Duncan is to move to another state. He needs to be elected governor or senator , preferably governor. He’s much to smart to gain any of these in Kalifornia.
Double Cheers!!
“I understand why you’re asking. But, to me, the more pressing question why aren’t Thompson or Hunter gaining traction with Republican party voters? That’s what really matters.”
Ding ding ding: you asked the real question.
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.