Posted on 01/24/2008 11:16:15 AM PST by WalterSkinner
Roger Hedgecock interview with Duncan Hunter on remaining GOP candidates and his endorsement of Huckabee...
Yes it appears he had a reason...not necessarily that he thought it through. I think it is sour grapes because Romney just ignored him. Hunter’s reasoning means nothing to me. If he felt so strongly about these things, he should have kept running. I think he is looking for a VP spot.
Hunter also thinks that Huckabee can be “trained out of some of his less conservative positions”.
Listening to the interview sure seems that Hunter will be there to do some the training : ).
ROCK AND ROLL!!!
HUCKABEE/HUNTER 08!!!!!
“I’m satisfied that he thought it through.”
He may have thought it through but he comes down hard on everyone but Huck? To Huck he gives a pass on his liberal positions and record, especially Hucks pro-illegal record.
That makes no sense to me.
I liked Duncan Hunter but supported Fred because DH never seemed to get the campaigning done....if Fred were to support Huck or McCain I would still be against both!
I'm having trouble with this rationale, but I guess Hunter thinks he knows Huckabee a lot better on a personal level than many of us suspected or believed.
Yes, except the rest of these candidates apparently had NO interested in discussing the afore mentioned subjects except Huckabee. Hey does not mean I will support Huckabee, what it tells me that Hunter sized up the candidates and found the one still in the race willing and interested in what he wanted to offer. He was a NOBODY to the rest of them and HE had NOTHING they wanted to hear or discuss.
Interesting, given what fine print that comes across his desk daily.
Same here. I never understood the invective directed toward most of the candidates to begin with (I disagree with all of the RINOs but I don't ooze hatred of them like some here seem to). Last week it was "Flip" Romney this and that but since Fred's out apparently we're supposed to flip to "Flip".
I'm no great fan of Huckabee but, except for now agreeing to enforce the border, he really has been the most consistent of the remaining bunch.
I think my new motto might be "I may end up voting for Huck- but only because the others suck even more than he does!" I was searching facebook yesterday for a group with similar sentiment but I couldn't find one.
marinamuffy
“. Mitt out of the company for 8 years and this guy is holding him accountable for what it does? “
And Bain is still paying the Romney family. So why can’t he disassociate himself? If he’s still making money from Bain and their Chinese deals, he has some say about this.
“Romney still retains an investment in the Cayman fund through a trust. Campaign disclosure forms show the investment paid him more than $1 million last year in dividends, interest, and capital gains.”
What kind of logic is that? How can someone "make" his "former" company do anything? My understanding is that Romney left Bane Capital 10 years ago. With this type of thinking I'm glad Hunter is out. Although I really don't believe this is the real reason he doesn't like Romney.
Roger’s response is what I think, too. Thank you.
Great motto, expresses my sentiments.
He is the lesser of the evils. Here is my take on the current crop:
McCain: Unapologetic amnesty lover. That alone disqualifies him. Plus he despises the conservative base unless he is groveling for votes.
Paul: Nuttier than a pile of squirrel droppings.
Guiliani: Little too liberal in everything but economy.
Huckabee: Amnesty lover - in-state tuition, LaRaza speeches,etc. Anti-smoking NAZI, Ignorant on foreign policy, "bunker" mentality statement, etc.
Romney: Was governor of liberal state. Was forced to pass gay marriage. Unsure, though about Mass health care - how privatized it really is ? Who is left to vote for ? I give you the lesser of the four evils.
Hunter would make an excellent replacement for Dick Cheney.
And much younger too!
While acknowledging that with the net the rules have changed, it would seem to me that the unofficial rules of endorsement by a candidate that drops out are still clear: You highlight why you are supporting a remaining candidate AND you avoid throwing barbs at those candidates that didn't get the endorsement.
Hunter has taken an endorsement with limited value (due to his limited following) and managed to disillusion many supporters that stuck it out with him by going with a candidate that seems to be at odds with his signature issue, illegal immigration, and makes a dishonest accusation about another candidate regarding business dealings made by a company said candidate left nine years ago and had absolutely no role regarding the disputed issue.
People have every right to see Hunter's endorsement as sour grapes with a complete side of compromise.
I believe the deal to work with the Chinese company first came up before Romney divested. The actions that they took later were just the reasons Hunter and others opposed the deal originally. I’ve not found the dates on this to prove it yet, but it makes more sense than Hunter blaming Romney for something he has no control over.
Ditto.
Given the 'fine' print that Hunter gets access to and he had a son in the military in Iraq and Saddam... who was purchasing armaments from this particular... Chinese company, (I am guessing here, against the supposed rules of the UN sanctions) does not exactly make Romney capitalistic desires above the appearance of ill gotten gains, given his own children are serving him on the campaign trial.....
What nobody seems to be talking about; does Mr. Hunter think Huckabee can actually win the national election against Obama or Hillary? Seems like that would be a pretty important consideration.
Thanks.
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.