Posted on 01/19/2008 8:02:20 PM PST by counterpunch
Republican presidential candidate Duncan Hunter will drop out of the race for the White House Saturday, FOX News confirms.
Hunter, a California congressman, Vietnam veteran and evangelical Christian, tried to appeal largely on his anti illegal immigration platform but never gained traction in the primary race.
(Excerpt) Read more at youdecide08.foxnews.com ...
Leadership void indeed, and the Dc Republican Party has no interest in filling it for us, “WE” have to rally around a candiate/persona to bypass the Beltway.
“If” Duncan Hunter were 15 yrs younger, and willing to put in the work, in 2012, he would make a great candidate for Conservatives.
From Reagen’s “A time for Choosing Speech” until the 1980 inaugurial address was 16 yrs, all that time he was on the move losing 2 campaigns but building Organization and Strength.
Today’s politics precludes losing two nomination processes, but with the Internet, it will be much easier to build Organization and Strength of Opinion Leadership.
We just need a guy to fill that roll, when I look at the election returns, and Ron Paul dusts Duncan Hunter, and Fred is considered less of a Conservative then Huck or McCain, we have problems with educating and message.
Huck basically called anyone who opposed McCain’s Amnesty a racist, and they finished #1 and #2 in SC, the same state that kick the crap out Lindsey “Amnesty” Graham this past yr and shut down the Capital Hill switchboard.
And these two characters finished #1 and #2 in SC?
What is wrong with that picture?
Hunter quit, so why don’t you stop making an ass of yourself with your moronic theories?
Very good comments and well taken.
We need more of this type of thoughtful posting
rather than threads started for the sake of bashing
They're playing against, arguably, the best team ever to set foot on a football field. And I want them to come out of this game with their head held high. They proved me wrong. Norv Turner proved me wrong.
And I'm proud of them. They're gutsy and tenacious.
Go Bolts.
Considering our QB has both knees wrecked and will probably need surgery. Gates wrecked, LIght Out - Flu,
etc, etc. this will be interesting.
and yes, Go Chargers
-----
Since I'm assuming you're serious, I have to say this is about the dumbest thing I've ever read on this forum.
If only the fifteen percent of the party that has supported Fred would have thrown its support behind the <1 percent of the party that has supported Hunter, Hunter would be doing better? Is THAT what you're saying?
That's some revolutionary.....ummm....."thinking" there.
Hank
I agree, very good analysis. It wasn’t hard to see that he started the Huckster ball rolling and made his own bed early on.
Match Hunter’s record to Huckabee’s record.
LOL!
Combine Hunter with Fred and we still would fal short, subtract Mitt from the business wing of the Republican Party, and we still would have fallen short of either one winning the SC primary.
INOW, we “need” a Candidate who has Conservatives both Religious and War Fighting who has both views in their pocket, then we need someone who is well known and listened to due to their Conservatism.
Not one more “It Came From DC” Candidate.
How many of these candidates for us can we say “Oh I know where he stands” this cycle?
The Evangelicals chose Huckabee as their champion and now he polls higher than Thompson. To blame Thompson’s situation on Hunter means either you have a very poor memory or you just have some personal problem with him. I don’t know which it is, but Hunter is the last person you can blame for Thompson’s current poor showing.
This is exactly the case.
Thompson will never get the Christians.
Huckabee will never get the fiscal/libertarians.
Giuliani and Romney will never get any Conservatives.
and McCain is a traitorous bastard who will get nothing.
No matter who wins the nomination, they will get pounded by any democrat with a pulse, simply because everyone is supporting candidates no one else can stand. It doesn't matter who wins anymore.
BULLCRAP!!!!!
YUP ,My write in pencil is sharpened and at the ready!!!!
luvadavi is right.
What you need to do is add Fred and Huck together to start to see the Conservative potential. Had Fred captured the Christian vote, this would be no contest. Replace Fred with Hunter and it would have been even better in SC, as Hunter had the military credentials that would have opposed McCain.
That is why I have been preaching the Reagan Coalition for so long: "Strong Military", "Fiscal Conservatism/libertarianism", and "Social Conservatism".
Fred owns only one of those pillars.
????? Fred is the ONLY candidate that has had all three.
NRTL endorsement and strong on 2nd Amendment. Also shepherded Bush judicial nominations through the Senate.
Supported Bush tax cuts and FURTHER tax cuts.
Strong on defense spending, supports our Iraq efforts, doesn’t want to close Guantanamo, doesn’t whine about waterboarding.
What am I missing here?
Hank
Had it not been for Hunter’s band of haters — this election’s version of Keye’s 2000 supporters — then there would have never been any contention over FRed as the conservative choice here, and thus anywhere else.
ROTFLMAO
What's really funny is that I think you actually believe the crap you write.
DING! DING! DING! We have a winner here.
I*m a relative newbie so Im going by what ive picked up here on FR—that there was much interest in Hunter earlly on before they took much notice of Fred; then they decided to swarm all over Fred, the actor, the senator, so forth, built up an ideal he did not match up to. And Hunter*s growing support dwindled. Hunter supporters from then on heard, he*s stuck at l%,nobody knows him, hes dead in the water, so forth. When I made the scene here, I marvelled at how they could ignore a man with Hunter*s potential and record of willingness to do battle in Congress with the very rats that oppose American virtues and safety. But Freds fans were in denial. He has brought himself down, and in a short time we will know if it has all been a con game to support his old friend McSick.
Youre right. And this would have worked, well.
No, That would have been Hunter.
NRTL endorsement
NRTL has been known to back people their base abhors for the purposes of political expediency. Go wander around some of the Life blog sites and see what they have to say about those endorsements.
Fred dissed Dobson and the Value Voters debate because "he's his own man". Fred came out against the RTL Amendment and the Marriage Amendment. Fred authored and defended McCain-Feingold which severely limited the participation of Christian organizations in the political process. Fred was divorced, and proclaimed himself non-church-going.
As much as y'all like to waive these things off, they matter big time to the Christians. Big_time.
Also shepherded Bush judicial nominations through the Senate.
A sure sign of a moderate, and a tie to the Bush administration.
Supported Bush tax cuts and FURTHER tax cuts.
Yep, Fred's got those fiscal creds.. though somewhat offset by his "constitutional earmarks" for the TVA...
[...]and strong on 2nd Amendment. Strong on defense spending, supports our Iraq efforts, doesn’t want to close Guantanamo, doesn’t whine about waterboarding.
McCain kicked his butt with the vets in southern SC because McCain is a vet. Thompson, for all his good works in this area doesn't know what war is, anymore than I do. McCain just played better with them.
SUMMARY:
Reagan Coalition:
Strong Defense
Fiscal Conservatism/libertarianism
Social Conservatism
Thompson wins on "Fiscal Conservatism/libertarianism", Though weak on libertarianism because of McCain-Feingold.
Thompson is weak on "Strong Defense" because he has no military service.
Thompson flat lost the Social Conservatives as Hunter's core here, and Huckabee's rise attests.
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.