Huck is clearly socially conservative. but as far as fiscally sure he talks a good talk but he raised taxes in Arkansas by over 600 million (over half a billion dollars). The endorsement of Time is not one I would want. It's not too much different that the NYTimes endorsement of McCain.
After Hunter and Thompson dropped out 75% of Freepers wanted Romney to win Super Tuesday. Now that Romney is out only 27% say they will support Huck. IOW, Romney was able to squeak past the ultimate conservative litmus test, Free Republic,(albiet as a begrudging third choice) while Huck does not.
I plan on writing Romney in in November. Sure my vote doesn't count in the grand scheme of things. Conservatives lost the vote against the moderates in every state except the West. My vote isn't going to change those facts on the ground.
In effect Republicans bought into a self fulfilling prophecy. By beating the war drums for years that they'd vote for anyone but Hilary they have gotten the opportunity to do just that. If they had spent the last four years advancing conservatism we'd be having a different discussion now. But it's all water under the bridge now. You are wasting your time trying to convince me that huck is better than McCain. Sure he may be? So what. It's kind of like being asked which of your kids ought to get run over by a car. I'm not going to make that choice.
I find it ironic that 2 weeks later Huck still hasn't caught up to Romney's delegate count (226 to 274). Everyone but Huck seems to know it's over for him. He can't catch McCain's 859.
I asked you at least twice - what did Huck lie about regarding Mitt Romney? (Keep in mind that a lie is not speaking an embarrassing truth).