Columbia, SC (TLS). With two televised debates now under their belts, the Republican Presidential candidates have begun to carve out for themselves a certain niche in the minds of the voters. With some of these candidates, initial impressions have been made, for good or ill. Others have had opportunity to re-introduce themselves after years in the public spotlight.
The Liberty Sphere has been rating candidates, both Democrat and Republican, based upon our exclusive 'Liberty Scale.' This scale is based upon eight key issues that we view as being central to the preservation of liberty in our lifetime and beyond--taxes, gun rights, abortion, national defense, border security, immigration control, the War in Iraq, and the broader War on Terror.
Based upon the ratings of the Republican candidates on these issues during the two debates, we can now get a clearer picture as to who is ahead so far, and who is lagging behind.
We have added together each candidates' two scores from their two debates, and divided them by two, in order to get an average score. The following is the average score of each of the 10 Republican candidates, on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest score:
Duncan Hunter--10
Mike Huckabee--10
Jim Gilmore--8
Tom Tancredo--7.5
Sam Brownback--7
Rudy Giuliani--6.5
Mitt Romney--6.5
Tommy Thompson--6.5
Ron Paul--6.5
John McCain--5
You will note that only two candidates have a perfect score on the issues that are key to The Liberty Sphere--Duncan Hunter and Mike Huckabee. However, our concern at this point is money. Neither Hunter nor Huckabee have shown the ability, at least thus far, to raise the mega-bucks needed to mount a competitive campaign. It will be interesting to see if this changes after last night's debate.
If anyone stands to gain the most in terms of fundraising, it is definitely Rudy Giuliani with his powerful showing in the debate. We look for the candidate to overtake Romney as the Republican who raises the most funds, at least with the present field of candidates.
That looming unknown factor is still very much present, however--how soon will Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich announce, and to what degree with this effect the Giuliani bandwagon.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree with you that Ron Paul's statement regarding the 9/ll terrorist attack was a setback for his candidacy.
In regards to the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq I have been very hawkish in general. If some socialist liberal would have said what Ron Paul said I have to admit I probably would have been very upset about it. In fact, it is what many liberals have been saying for quite some time.
It is quite interesting, however, that Fox News in its text message voting had Ron Paul winning the debate for quite a while, and right now why I am watching he is only 1% out of first.
Let me try to defend Ron Paul, but first let me say that I do not believe that the U.S. is at fault for the attack on 9/11, nor do I believe that Ron Paul actually stated that the U.S. is at fault.
Lets say I am on the playground and I am teasing you and calling you very insulting names. You are very offended by this so you decide to push me and punch me in the nose. I respond by defending myself and punching you back.
Now, I do not believe I would be at fault for the fight that ensued. Kids on the playground inevitably will call each other names. That does not give a child the right to punch another. Once punched however, a person has the right to self defense. This seems to be what Ron Paul was saying. We did something to agitate the terrorists and they punched us in the nose. That however, doesn't make us at fault.
I am not saying that I agree with Ron Paul on this issue. All I am saying is for me personally I give Ron Paul alot more credibility on this issue than I do Cindy Sheehan and all the other wacko's on the left. I am willing to listen to criticism from someone I trust as opposed to people who I don't trust.
Ron Paul is the only candidate, Republican or Democrat, who consistently follows the U.S. Constitution. Perhaps this is why I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Perhaps it is time for the U.S. to abandon our Cold War mentality anyway (the mentality I believe Ron Paul was alluding too). The Europeans have as much at stake in world affairs as we do (such as Iran getting nuclear weapons) as well as many of our other allies. Maybe it is time for us to start bringing our troops home from Iraq (a war that we have won as far as I am concerned) and home from the Cold War. Frankly, I am tired of the United States subsidizing the cost of defense for planet Earth.
For one thing if other countries had a strong individual right to bear arms as the U.S. and Switzerland have then we wouldn't need to have our troops in their countries to defend themselves from their neighbors and from thier own governments.
I mean really, why is our military still in England and Germany and when are we planning on leaving?
Post a Comment