See my repeated links to Michelle Malkin’s post about their differences. Also HotAir.com. And innumerable other flabbergasted posters. Short version: shamnesty, taxation, Gitmo/WOT. There are others, but obviously I’m talking to someone who’s made up his mind.
At least one of your “affinities” are weasel-worded talking points. For example, to believe that Huck is good on illegal immigration — good, in the way that Hunter was demonstrably good for decades — because Huck recently took some pledge is simply silly. You’re the first person to say straight-facedly that Huck is good on this issue, and that is simply shocking. (I’ve had Huck folks say things like, Yeah, he’s weak on that issue, but I have more important ones.) Because this was probably Hunter’s strongest single issue, illegal immigration, I find the endorsement perplexing and, frankly, smelly.
Speaking of recent conversions: The point about guns and abortion and marriage is fair enough given Mitt Romney’s “recent conversion” on those issues, and Giuliani’s frank liberalism on them.
All of the major GOP candidates support a stronger military, so that is not particularly helpful in distinguishing amongst them.
Appreciate your post. I think just about everybody in the know wants to move the 100 or so remaining terrorists out of Gitmo, by now.
It’s just time to get them into the relative anonymity of a place like Leavenworth (isoated — there is enough Muslim recruitment in prisons). Ask the White House.
I don’t recall hearing the other candidates pulling for reinforcing our tactical defensive infrastructure like Huckabee has.
I also don’t see anyone else who wants America to achieve energy independence within ten years. I bet Hunter likes that. I do too.