|
TIER 1 Candidates |
Posted on 05/06/2007 11:16:43 PM PDT by jedward
Edited on 05/22/2007 11:41:01 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Official Campaign Site |
Non-Declared |
Official Campaign Site |
Official Campaign Site |
| TIER 2 Candidates | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Official Campaign Site |
Official Campaign Site |
||
| TIER 3 Candidates | |||
 Senator John McCain |
 Fmr. Governor Jim Gilmore |
 Alan Keyes |
 Newt Gingrich |
|
|
**Note: If you have current and relevant links not shown above for a candidate, please freepmail them to me and I will update. Enjoy the thread and I hope you find the information useful! |
He’s up there.
Thanks for the help!
“Is this a viable unbiased measure of who actually “wins” a debate, at least with the folks who put their money where their mouth is?”
I’m not sure there is ever a viable unbiased measure of who wins a Political debate, and that even includes the voting booth.
‘Then do you think Intrade is a good indicator of who “won” the debate and who “lost”?’ - Kevmo
There is a subtle qualification to be made, which I tried to state in my answer above: “winning/losing” must be defined as performances “exceeding/failing” prior expectations relevant to nomination probabilities. If one defines “winning/losing” that way, yes, there’s no better indicator than Intrade contract prices.
Thanks for noting that. There are people lurking who will by trying to decide where to put weight and/or credence to a lot of the info that’s out in the media.
You’re welcome!
“A firestorm of protest erupted”
Always enjoy the author’s addition to articles (lol) Thanks and great to see ya!
Header udpated, and thanks again for noting that.
Header now updated!
Something else that I can find news for....LOL...
Or news “from” :)
Why is Alan Keyes listed? Is he running?
very nice!
Thank you!
He has not filed to run. I’m listing him as I suspect he’s considering running, has run in the past and I personally would like to see him get some positive exposure. It should also be noted that neither Newt Gingrich nor Fred Thompson has filed either, but both along with Keyes represent the conservative viewpoint quite well.
As time progresses, those listed will get smaller as potential candidates declare they will not file. I didn’t include his picture, as I’m waiting for any Keyes supporters to hunt one down and freepmail it to me. I haven’t received one yet.
My pleasure!
Jedward: I’m not sure there is ever a viable unbiased measure of who wins a Political debate, and that even includes the voting booth.
mdefranc: There is a subtle qualification to be made, which I tried to state in my answer above: “winning/losing” must be defined as performances “exceeding/failing” prior expectations relevant to nomination probabilities. If one defines “winning/losing” that way, yes, there’s no better indicator than Intrade contract prices.
***Ok, it does appear to me that this is the best indicator for now. I have to admit that I’m disappointed with Duncan Hunter’s post-debate Intrade numbers. I think the expectation was high that he would break out. There’s a possibility that Matthews simply downshifted into laziness and followed the path of human nature, engaging in softball chit-chat with the candidate closest to him, as seen in this article. The result was that the lucky dog closest to him got the best chance to pitch his message.
What debate? (analysis: Romney, McCain given preferential treatment)
RenewAmerica.us ^ | May 7, 2007 | RenewAmerica staff
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1829913/posts
The reason for such blatant favoritism and ineptitude? Moderator Chris Matthews. Matthews carried on a running dialogue with Romney throughout the evening—in part because Romney was positioned right next to Matthews, a bit of good fortune Romney took full advantage of.
Matthews was curt, abrupt, and oblivious to others down the line, while he repeatedly deferred to Romney. Since the debate was whatever Matthews defined it to be—with no apparent rules, format, or attempt at even-handedness—this meant his virtual sidekick, Romney, had an obvious advantage.
Good morning Kevmo. Yes, I think mdefranc did a good job in defending the credibility of the numbers giving the qualification.
In any case....
As many people know, as of right now I am supporting the only “Thompson” who’s actually IN the race, Governor TOMMY Thompson. He is just as conservative as Fred, if not more so, and probably much more electable in the general election. Tommy said it best himself in the debate:
“I’m the reliable conservative. I vetoed 1,900 things; I reduced taxes by 16-and-a-half billion dollars. I’m from Wisconsin, a blue state, and I won four consecutive times.I still have a very high popularity appeal, and I’m the one that started welfare reform, reduced welfare caseload in the United States, in the state of Wisconsin, by 93 percent. And I believe that kind of a record will attract Democrats and independents if you stand up and start talking on principles and ideas. Where I think the Republican party lost its way is, we went to Washington to change Washington. Washington changed us. We forgot to be coming up with new ideas, big ideas like Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan had an optimism and a belief that America could be stronger and better tomorrow than it is today, and he instilled that and inculcated that in every American. That’s what we have to do as a party again.”
And as FReeper Phil Collins noted:
“I agree that too many people, on FR, support Rudy and Fred and that not enough support Tommy Thompson, the candidate for whom I’ll volunteer. While he was gov., he proved that he’s pro-tax cuts, pro-welfare cuts, pro-life, pro-capital punishment, anti-gay marriage, and pro-gun rights. He says that he wants to deport as many illegal aliens as possible, as quickly as possible. Two of the last three republican presidents were governors, as well as four out of the five last U.S. presidents, and Thompson was a governor almost as long as Romney and Huckabee, combined. He’s also the only former cabinet member who’s running.”
And make no mistake about it being a blue state, here’s the kind of political environment conservatives face in Wisconsin:
GOVERNOR: Jim Doyle (D)
LT. GOVERNOR: Barbara Lawton (D)
SECRETARY OF STATE: Doug LaFollette (D)
STATE TREASURER: Dawn Marie Sass (D)
STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION: Elizabeth “Libby” Burmaster (D)
U.S. SENATORS: Herb Kohl (D), Russ Feingold (D)
U.S. CONGRESS: 5D, 3R
It must really tick off the Ahnuld/Rudy backers (I have yet to meet someone on FR who is pro-Rudy but not pro-Arnold) seeing good, PRINCIPLED unapologetic conservatives like Tommy Thompson, Mike Huckabee, and Duncan Hunter run and WIN in blue states. Having such people elected to office goes against their entire theory why we “need” to run RINOs, so they simply ignore them.
I urge all of you to learn more about Thompson’s background and positions and consider him for President. Find out more here:
TOMMY THOMPSON OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN SITE:
http://www.tommy2008.com/Home.aspx
TOMMY THOMPSON’S MYSPACE:
http://www.myspace.com/tommythompson08
WIKIPEDIA PROFILE OF TOMMY THOMPSON:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Thompson
WASHINGTON POST PROFILE OF TOMMY THOMPSON:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/tommy-thompson/
TOMMY THOMPSON ON THE ISSUES:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1821821/posts
I liked Thompson in the debate. He didn’t really do enough to stand out in that large crowd, and given the quick format, but I look forward to hearing more. Thanks for all the links.
God bless you!!!
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.
