Google Custom Search

Sunday, September 23, 2007

A Work in Progress: Updated GOP Assessment

With slightly over three months to go until the crucial GOP primary season begins, we have noted some changing trends that have led to an update in our assessment of the various candidates' chances at gaining the nomination for President.

First, it is important to consider the two wild-card variables that have changed the complexion of the race.

Fred Thompson seemed to come out of nowhere in the Spring to announce on Fox News that he was considering a run for the White House. Thompson finally entered the race in September with a big bounce in the national polls.

But as Mike McCarville points out at The McCarville Report, Thompson's bounce seems to be over. His poll numbers have settled to slightly above that of Rudy Giuliani; still on top but sliding a bit.

The question is, has Fred been able to live up to the hype? A shift downward in poll numbers is common when a candidate experiences a sudden, sharp hike. Thus, the slightly lower poll numbers for Thompson may indicate nothing.

Yet media reports from around the country have tended to give Thompson mixed reviews. Many of these were unwarranted and unnecessary, such as the reporter who painted a highly negative picture of the candidate because he perspired profusely and gave out of breath while campaigning outdoors in the searing heat of central Florida.

Such reports are simply not helpful and tend to tell us more about the bias of the reporter rather than the quality of the candidate.

Other reports have given Thompson rave reviews, such as when he exclaimed before a crowd last week, 'My wife will make a much better First Lady than Bill Clinton.' The crowd roared with laughter. And this is not to mention the fact that Thompson has been picking up the support of voters from Florida, to Iowa, to New Hampshire by visiting gun shops, county fairs, and community festivals, and engaging in simple, straight talk about the issues.

Second Amendment supporters have liked what they've heard, and Thompson has stayed on message even in the face of tough questions about gun rights.

We still believe that Thompson is the man to beat, IF conservative GOP voters can get over the fact that he is not Reagan. There will never be another Reagan, and it is unfair to expect Thompson to be anyone but Thompson.

The big question that looms over the Thompson campaign is, has his initial bounce lost so much of its luster that his campaign is beginning to run out of steam? I doubt it, but apparently Newt Gingrich seems to think so.

And this brings us to the second wild-card in this race, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. Gingrich had stated prior to Thompson's announcement that he would enter the race only if he detected a faltering Fred Thompson.

Gingrich told reporters last week that he would run if he had 30 million bucks.

Does this mean he sees Thompson running out of steam? Or was this his plan all along?

As we have stated many times before on The Liberty Sphere, while Gingrich has many attractive ideas as a candidate, we fear his negatives among the general populace. His negatives in the polls rival that of Hillary Clinton, and frankly, I have reason to doubt his ability to beat her in the general election.

In spite of the fact that Gingrich is known as a conservative on most issues, he nonetheless supported measures in the House that ran counter to the right to keep and bear arms. Gun Owners of America, for example, gave Gingrich a grade of 'D' on gun rights, while Thompson had a grade of 'B.'

If Gingrich enters the race I see a needless split of the conservative GOP vote between him and Thompson. He is better off staying put and forgetting about running.

Second, what about the rest of the field of candidates?

Mike Huckabee has made some inroads. He is humorous, articulate, likable, energetic. Yet at this point we feel he would make a better choice as a running mate than as the GOP standard-bearer.

Tom Tancredo is another good option for a running mate, but at this point we do not see a chance for his gaining the nomination.

Duncan Hunter was always our first choice as a candidate. He is consistent, solid, focused, articulate, and probably knows his way around Washington better than anyone. Yet his campaign never got off the ground, we are sad to say. This is truly America's loss.

Ron Paul is certainly always an option. While his poll numbers have remained fairly consistent, he could well emerge as a force with which to contend if the others fail to garner widespread support. He would certainly bring to the GOP table a large segment of the population that opposes the War but that also supports the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

Giuliani and McCain are problematic as always. If we had to choose between the two, it would be McCain, but only because he is a genuine American war hero. And, despite what some conservatives claim, either one would be MUCH better than Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.

That leaves Mitt Romney and Sam Brownback. Romney is unlikely to win no matter how much of his own money he spends on the campaign. He has simply waffled too much on too many issues. And as for Brownback, for all intents and purposes his campaign is over. 2008 is not his year.

Thus, the race for the GOP nomination is still wide-open for four announced candidates--Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Ron Paul. Newt Gingrich can be added to this list if he announces.

Mike Huckabee, Tom Tancredo, and even Duncan Hunter would be excellent choices for the GOP running mate, with the odds tipping toward Huckabee due to his 'rising star' status in the Party and his colorful stump speeches. Huckabee would help the GOP Presidential nominee more than any of the rest, in our opinion.

As we approach the primary season in just over three short months, it is important to bear in mind that in looking over this field of candidates, ANY of the ones named above would be preferable to Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. Both have stated positions against the Second Amendment, free speech, American free enterprise, and our Constitutional Republic.

2 comments:

Brent said...

Very good and helpful commentary. The Liberty Sphere has become a site that I visit almost daily. There isn't any mainstream outlet that I trust more than your site for honest and insightful commentary on the 2008 Presidential elections and on other political topics as well.

Personally, I am still leaning towards Ron Paul. Although I see Islamic extremism as a very important and dangerous issue and although I have been relatively supportive of the Bush administrations' decision to go to war against Iraq I cannot help but support Ron Paul.

He is right on just about every other issue- more so than any other Republican candidate running or potential candidate.

Newt Gingrich has said many times himself that the Republican candidate needs to bring fundemental change to the way things are run in Washington D.C. He also has said that our country is at crossroads. Gingrich is right; I just hope the Republican elites realize it in time. We must make a choice between socialism/communism and freedom and liberty.

Ron Paul is correct when he says that the U.S. Congress should have declared war against Iraq. If Congress is going to send our soldiers onto the battefield they should have the courage to declare war. We should not be fighting to enforce U.N. resolutions. Going to war for self defense is not the issue. We have every right to defend ourselves and I believe there is a good case that we were justified in going to war against Iraq in self defense. But, Congress should have declared war- the Constitution says so.

If Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination than I could settle for Thompson or Huckabee, but I really do not think I will be able to bring myself to vote for McCain, Guliani, or Romney and I believe there are alot of other folks who feel the same. That is the dilema that the Republican elites have. If McCain, Guliani, or Romney gets the nomination I will go to the polls but I will leave the Presidential ballot blank or write someone else in; even if it means electing Clinton or Obama who I personally see as the epitome of evil.

Welshman said...

Hiya, Brent! Thanks for stopping by. It's always good to have you here.

Your comments are always thoughtful and perceptive.

I deeply appreciate your kind words about The Liberty Sphere. It is good to know that somebody out there actually thinks my drivel is worth reading!

This is a labor of love. I love to write, and I love what I write about. Glad to know that means something to sombody.

And I agree with you 100% about change in Washington. The GOP MUST get back to its core values or it will lose every time to Democrats. Big government Republicans are just as bad as big government Democrats, with one exception. At least Rudy and McCain have enough of the American left in them to know that Hillary and Obama are socialists, pure and simple. At least Rudy and McCain stand for free enterprise and capitalism.

Do I support them? No. And I truly don't think either one will get the nomination. At this point--and this could change--I would tend to put my money on one of the following being 'the one': Thompson, Gingrich, Paul, or Huckabee.

But basically I want someone who can beat Hillary or Obama and who, at the same time, adheres to the values I hold dear.