Posted on 12/01/2007 5:01:26 PM PST by Jay777
Rudy Panic set in for many Republicans this week, with conservative leaders both nationally and in Iowa concluding they need to settle on a single champion to prevent Rudolph W. Giuliani from winning the GOP presidential nomination.
They fear that victory by the socially liberal former New York mayor could permanently shatter the largely successful coalition of social, religious, economic and national defense conservatives that, more often than not, has worked electoral magic for Republican candidates at all levels.
"The main driving force behind all of that is a belief that Rudy Giuliani is positioned to win the nomination and a belief that, and I describe it this way, the four most central planks in our Republican platform would be sacrificed in the process: life, marriage, guns, border security," said Rep. Steve King, Iowa Republican. He said the calls and e-mails in Iowa grew "utterly intense in the last week" as Republicans urged one another to settle on an anti-Rudy candidate.
A new poll showing a statistical tie between Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee for the Jan. 3 Iowa first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses is fueling the frenzy.
"What conservatives have to realize is that Giuliani is now relying on Mike Huckabee to take his most viable opponent, Mitt Romney, down in Iowa, and that anyone voting for him there in the caucuses will be inadvertently, and ironically, helping the New Yorker," David A. Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, said earlier this week in a surprise endorsement of Mr. Romney.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
“There aren’t huge numbers of social conservatives. They’re maybe 15-20% of the electorate as a whole, and 1/2 of those vote dim.”
I would like to see those numbers, got a good source?
Nobody knew who Bill Clinton was. Nobody knew who Jimmy Carter was.
Getting known is the result of getting exposure. With the right organization anyone can become well known, especially now with the internet.
Hunter’s message is powerful and right on target. His failing was not getting out front of the MSM and party elite by going around them.
Now, that may be because he was never in it to win or because of some other reason. I don’t know.
I do know he did a pi$$ poor job of getting his name and message out.
Not a problem.
“Nobody knew who Bill Clinton was. Nobody knew who Jimmy Carter was.”
People did know who they were, both of those men were governors, and they lined up their ducks and donors before committing.
A governor is at the top of the heap in his state politically, always with varying degrees of recognition on a national scale, depending on the size and importance of the state, but it is always something.
The biggest difference is that it takes something to win the governors seat that it doesn’t always take to win in many congressional seats.
Even the smallest governor has some celebrity, not something that all of the hundreds of congressman can claim or attain.
Hunter is probably disappointed that he can’t break 1%, he is human after all, and after more than a quarter century as a politician it has to sting a little, it bothers me a little, but it is what it is, we have an election at risk and we have to move on.
I'd say there's a 50% chance he'll end up in the Executive Branch somewhere. I would say more like 5% if he was hanging on to his congressional seat.
“Romney can beat Hildy but she would crush Huckabee”
Exactly. That’s why a huckabee nomination would be a GOP disaster and it’s the reason the lib media is hyping him - for them, a Huckabee nomination is a DEM victory. Romney is the only good match for Hillary in a debate.
RealClear Politics has McCain and Hillary neck and neck in general election style polls.
Lastly, these polls are worthless. Want to see how worthless? RealClearPolitics has Clinton waxing Romney by 11 points. Now, do you really think there's any chance that Romney would lose by 11 points if he's the nominee? These polls are worthless.
“There aren’t huge numbers of social conservatives. They’re maybe 15-20% of the electorate as a whole, and 1/2 of those vote dim.”
I have seen the figure as about 41 or 45%, the PEW reasearch below seems to support that..
“According to the Pew Research Center, nearly four out of five white evangelical Christians supported President Bush in 2004, representing more than a third of all ballots cast for him. When traditionalist Catholics and members of other conservative religious communities are factored in, it becomes clear that the voters usually lumped together under the banner of the Religious Right form the largest single constituency of today’s Republican Party.
I reject any "principle" which requires one to help Hillary Clinton become President.
Excellent analysis.
That said, I think any of the top tier could beat Obama. He's the dumbest 46 year old man in the world, and the only thing that stopped the train wreck he was having recently was Hillary having the licenses for illegals train wreck.
“It IS an endorsement of Romney, practically. Hardly another candidate is focused upon.”
Not exactly an enthusiastic endorsement tho, was it? Unfortunately, we’re coming to the point where we have to start being pragmatic and stop being idealistic. Some of us may have to vote for a candidate we don’t prefer, just to stop a candidate we abhor from winning.
Double unfortunate, because Romney has really, really tumbled in my estimation recently and I had originally been very impressed by him. I’m not convinced he’s much better than Rudy, but at least he says the right things. The problem is what he says doesn’t match his past actions - perhaps even more dramatically than Rudy.
I won’t deny that I fear, no matter who the Republican nominee is, winning in November may be next to impossible simply because the candidates who should be in the lead are running last, and the weakest candidates are ahead.
Clinton was a little better known than Carter but in November of 1974 A Harris poll lists 35 potential presidential candidates. Jimmy Carter is not one of them. What he did have was the “Peanut Brigade” that went to Iowa and New Hampshire from Georgia and out worked the better known candidates.
As you say, he had a plan to overcome his lack of national standing. Even Patrick Caddell, Carter’s campaign pollster, told PBS: “If it weren’t for the country looking for something in ‘76, Carter could never have gotten elected. He was almost unknown outside of Georgia. We had to overcome that.”
He had a plan to become known. Hunter didn’t.
Look at Ron Paul. He was no better known than Hunter. He worked the internet, and lined up support from groups and factions that spread the word for him, and got his name out.
He’s in 4th or 5th place depending on the poll. Duncan Hunter could have done better. His message appeals to more of the base. Hunter should be up there fighting for the top right now had he just had a plan to become known.
Once anyone is nominated by either party, name recognition is no longer a problem. It boils down to message and who the voters trust.
You can’t really believe that were Hunter nominated, he wouldn’t knock the snot out of Hillary or Obama.
Of course, none of this matters because he didn’t have a plan to become recognized and will not get the nomination.
Thank you Sir.
“Look at Ron Paul. He was no better known than Hunter. He worked the internet, and lined up support from groups and factions that spread the word for him, and got his name out.”
Ron Paul will have his little thing like the Naders and such always do.
Hunter could not do a Ron Paul for two reasons, one it would lose the family seat, if Hunter goes too far to get noticed then we don’t vote for his son and we choose a popular conservative like Steve Baldwin instead.
The second reason is that Duncan doesn’t know how to do it.
Paul transcends his little district, he has a big (goofy) vision that attracts people on a large scale.
Duncan Hunter is so perfect as a conservative because he has never been challenged on it, if you put him in a different district where he had to fight every election and you would find a more mixed record.
Duncan has a simple basket of comfortable conservative positions that is all he has ever needed or wanted, it is good for me and my neighbors, but Duncan doesn’t have the “it” factor that transcends this little district.
There is a reason why he found an easy chair of a district 26 years ago and never left it, he just isn’t a good campaigner, that is why we never talked about him being senator or governor.
My daughter and her Republican friends (first-time voters) think that the “Dream Team” is Rudy and Huckabee as VP.
I love Rush and listen to him daily but he didn’t help much in shaping the 2006 mid-term outcome, in spite of his non-stop diatribes on what it would mean (which it has, as predicted). If he’s that big a supporter, he better make it known before January 3, or give Thompson lots of free airtime.
For a guy that claims not have a candidate you sure seem to know which one that you don’t like.
Our ex-senator (Burns) got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Nothing will turn off the Right quicker than that. That the Republicans didn't make him retire and raise up a new champion is precisely their own fault, and this issue should be seen in that light.
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.