The GOP has successfully splintered the Reagan Coalition by embracing candidates who in no way represent Reagan conservatism. Make no mistake, the Coalition is still there; it's just that there is no candidate who embraces ALL of its precepts.
To a great degree the blame for this deplorable turn of events can be laid directly at the feet of George W. Bush, who claimed the principles of Reagan conservatism but who governed as a neo-con who made some terribly awful decisions.
Thus, we blundered through the first few years in Iraq until General Petraeus took the helm. The BAFTE has continued its assault on gun owners and gun retailers unabated. Judges have been appointed to the bench who have run slipshod over the rights of property owners in favor of a highly skewed and lopsided view of 'eminent domain.'
And then, let's not forget Bush's most despicable transgression of all--his absolute, stubborn refusal to do anything at all about illegal aliens, protecting the border, and removing incentives for illegals to come here in the first place.
In many ways he has been worse than Bill Clinton on this issue, and that is saying a mouthful.
The ONLY two vestiges from the Reagan era that Bush has kept intact are the support for the pro-life position and the view that tax cuts are good for the American people and the economy.
This has opened the door for those candidates who are even further to the Left than Bush, such as Guiliani, McCain, Romney, Huckabee.
Even Ron Paul fails the Reagan Coalition test due to his dangerous, and frankly, frightening views on U.S. foreign policy, terrorism, and the War in Iraq.
Thus, here we are stuck with a bunch of charlatans who only give lip service to the Reagan legacy. Only Fred Thompson could truthfully lay claim to the Reagan mantle.
But the GOP and their major contributors apparently have decided they had rather have 'moderate' Republicans who all now claim to be conservative, rather than a true, conservative heavy-weight who had delineated in great detail his views on the issues, including those the others will not dare touch.
The fact that the GOP is now poised to give its approval to a big-government neo-con (this is all that's left of the viable candidates), while rejecting Fred Thompson, is almost unforgivable.
And for this we can point to the failure of President George W. Bush to keep the Reagan Coalition together, moving in the same direction.
Showing posts with label GOP candidates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GOP candidates. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Second Amendment News Roundup for 1/22/08
Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:
(Hat tip to Traction Control). The Associated Press has the sickening and disappointing news that Fred Thompson has withdrawn from the 2008 Presidential race:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/THOMPSON_2008?SITE=CAOAK&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Sebastian comments on this news here:
http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=2485
If there were ever any doubt that the Libertarian Party is now in the hands of complete wackos, The Liberty Zone quickly dispels that doubt here:
http://libertyzone.blogspot.com/2008/01/what-kind-of-libertarian.html
The Bitch Girls provide appropriate commentary on the potential Presidential matchups this year:
http://www.thebitchgirls.us/?p=7767
Alphecca comments on the new CCW bills in Florida:
http://www.alphecca.com/?p=614
Armed and Safe says that the battle for gun show freedom in Virginia is not yet over:
http://armedandsafe.blogspot.com/2008/01/battle-for-virginia-gun-show-freedom-is.html
The most beautiful blond on earth, Blonde Sagacity, has perhaps the most direct and accurate assessment of the reasons why Fred Thompson withdrew from the race and why this bodes ill for the GOP in November:
http://mobyrebuttal.blogspot.com/2008/01/thompsons-campaign-struggling.html
Of Arms and the Law reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has set the date for the argument for D.C. vs. Heller on the gun ban in the nation's capital:
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2008/01/parkerheller_se.php
Say Uncle says that the Anti-Defamation League equates gun owners with violent bigots:
http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2008/01/22/anti-defamation_league_equates_gun_owners_with_violent_bigots/
Robb Allen says that now that Fred is out, he is supporting Ron Paul:
http://blog.robballen.com/archive/2008/01/22/Word-on-the-street--Fred-throws-in-the-towel.aspx
The War on Guns comments on last night's slugfest between Hussein Obama and Rodham Clinton:
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2008/01/about-last-night.html
John Lott reports on the attempt to pass even more gun control laws in Virginia as a result of the Virginia Tech incident:
http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2008/01/even-more-gun-control-laws-being-pushed.html
The MUST-read of the day is by our favorite intellectual, Dr. Walter Williams, who gives us a shocking 'tyranny update':
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/08/Tyranny%20Update.htm
Cap'n Bob and the Damsel comment on the panic that seems to be driving the stock market today:
http://capnbob.us/blog/2008/01/22/let-the-panic-begin/
Mike McCarville has the results of a poll on Senator Tom Coburn's shocking endorsement of John McCain:
http://wwwtmrcom.blogspot.com/2008/01/59-say-coburns-mccain-endorsement-shock.html
(Hat tip to Traction Control). The Associated Press has the sickening and disappointing news that Fred Thompson has withdrawn from the 2008 Presidential race:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/THOMPSON_2008?SITE=CAOAK&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Sebastian comments on this news here:
http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=2485
If there were ever any doubt that the Libertarian Party is now in the hands of complete wackos, The Liberty Zone quickly dispels that doubt here:
http://libertyzone.blogspot.com/2008/01/what-kind-of-libertarian.html
The Bitch Girls provide appropriate commentary on the potential Presidential matchups this year:
http://www.thebitchgirls.us/?p=7767
Alphecca comments on the new CCW bills in Florida:
http://www.alphecca.com/?p=614
Armed and Safe says that the battle for gun show freedom in Virginia is not yet over:
http://armedandsafe.blogspot.com/2008/01/battle-for-virginia-gun-show-freedom-is.html
The most beautiful blond on earth, Blonde Sagacity, has perhaps the most direct and accurate assessment of the reasons why Fred Thompson withdrew from the race and why this bodes ill for the GOP in November:
http://mobyrebuttal.blogspot.com/2008/01/thompsons-campaign-struggling.html
Of Arms and the Law reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has set the date for the argument for D.C. vs. Heller on the gun ban in the nation's capital:
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2008/01/parkerheller_se.php
Say Uncle says that the Anti-Defamation League equates gun owners with violent bigots:
http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2008/01/22/anti-defamation_league_equates_gun_owners_with_violent_bigots/
Robb Allen says that now that Fred is out, he is supporting Ron Paul:
http://blog.robballen.com/archive/2008/01/22/Word-on-the-street--Fred-throws-in-the-towel.aspx
The War on Guns comments on last night's slugfest between Hussein Obama and Rodham Clinton:
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2008/01/about-last-night.html
John Lott reports on the attempt to pass even more gun control laws in Virginia as a result of the Virginia Tech incident:
http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2008/01/even-more-gun-control-laws-being-pushed.html
The MUST-read of the day is by our favorite intellectual, Dr. Walter Williams, who gives us a shocking 'tyranny update':
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/08/Tyranny%20Update.htm
Cap'n Bob and the Damsel comment on the panic that seems to be driving the stock market today:
http://capnbob.us/blog/2008/01/22/let-the-panic-begin/
Mike McCarville has the results of a poll on Senator Tom Coburn's shocking endorsement of John McCain:
http://wwwtmrcom.blogspot.com/2008/01/59-say-coburns-mccain-endorsement-shock.html
Friday, December 14, 2007
South Carolina Suddenly Up for Grabs?
A brand new poll indicates that the race for the GOP nomination in South Carolina--a key early pivotal state--is up for grabs.
Bear in mind, however, that the poll was conducted by the Clinton News Network (CNN) which has a vested interest in playing up Huckabee due to the fact that he is the ONLY GOP contender that Hillary can beat.
The CNN poll shows that Huckabee has suddenly skyrocketed into first place by 7 points over second-place contender Fred Thompson
Here are the results of the poll:
Huckabee 24%
Thompson 17%
Giuliani 16%
Romney 16%
McCain 13%
Paul 11%
This polling data, however, is very different from an in-state poll that shows Thompson up by 2 percentage points, but with Huckabee moving up fast.
Our most trusted and experienced poll watchers inform us that these particular poll numbers can be safely disregarded at this point in the campaign, especially the nationwide polls.
In addition, the state-by-state poll numbers are highly misleading and volatile, pointing to the vast uncertainty that still exists among a large portion of the electorate.
Suppose, for example, that we take at face value that the CNN poll listed above is accurate. Our sources tell us that with 5 candidates polling between 10 and 20 percentage points, any of them could win. In addition, the fact that Huckabee is showing a 7 point lead when just a few days ago he polled sixth in the field of candidates is highly suspect.
With three weeks to go until the Iowa caucuses and four weeks to go until the South Carolina primary, widely variant and volatile polls such as these can change in a hurry.
The bottom line is that Thompson is still very much in this ball game and Huckabee is not necessarily the front runner.
Bear in mind, however, that the poll was conducted by the Clinton News Network (CNN) which has a vested interest in playing up Huckabee due to the fact that he is the ONLY GOP contender that Hillary can beat.
The CNN poll shows that Huckabee has suddenly skyrocketed into first place by 7 points over second-place contender Fred Thompson
Here are the results of the poll:
Huckabee 24%
Thompson 17%
Giuliani 16%
Romney 16%
McCain 13%
Paul 11%
This polling data, however, is very different from an in-state poll that shows Thompson up by 2 percentage points, but with Huckabee moving up fast.
Our most trusted and experienced poll watchers inform us that these particular poll numbers can be safely disregarded at this point in the campaign, especially the nationwide polls.
In addition, the state-by-state poll numbers are highly misleading and volatile, pointing to the vast uncertainty that still exists among a large portion of the electorate.
Suppose, for example, that we take at face value that the CNN poll listed above is accurate. Our sources tell us that with 5 candidates polling between 10 and 20 percentage points, any of them could win. In addition, the fact that Huckabee is showing a 7 point lead when just a few days ago he polled sixth in the field of candidates is highly suspect.
With three weeks to go until the Iowa caucuses and four weeks to go until the South Carolina primary, widely variant and volatile polls such as these can change in a hurry.
The bottom line is that Thompson is still very much in this ball game and Huckabee is not necessarily the front runner.
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Rev. Huckabee and His Congregation
Much has been made over the past few days about the 'Mike Huckabee surge' in the polls both locally and nationally. Huckabee has surged to the top of the field in Iowa, and a recent national poll shows that he has moved into second place behind Giuliani and ahead of Thompson and McCain, who are tied for third.
Huckabee is going to have a tough time getting the GOP nomination despite his recent and soon to be shortlived surge.
As an ordained Baptist minister and former Governor of Arkansas, Huckabee has run into skepticism among the GOP base. At the top of the list of concerns is the Governor's record in Arkansas, which can hardly be portrayed as a shining example of conservative Republican policy.
The Party faithful are skittish on Huckabee's record on taxes and immigration, with immigration being the looming issue that is sure to eventually doom his surge.
As we have seen repeatedly in the past year, politicians in both Parties who show signs of supporting amnesty of any kind, or who support giving tuition credits to illegal aliens or their families, receive a swift and sharp kick to the behind from the voters.
Hillary Clinton is the most recent recipient of the backlash in Iowa over immigration policy.
Others who have suffered due to their stance on the issue are John McCain, Mitt Romney, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and others.
Huckabee is, without doubt, highly vulnerable on the immigration issue simply because the Republican base won't stand for a candidate whose views are so geared toward granting special privileges and exceptions to people who break our nation's laws by coming here illegally.
This is not to mention the fact that it is extremely unfair to immigrants who come here legally and become citizens through the provisions of the law.
But the factor that is perhaps the most damaging of all is that Huckabee tends to appeal only to a certain type of person within the Republican base--the religious conservative. In a sense he has built his own congregation of sorts across the country made up of people who believe that the nation's President must be closely akin to a church Pastor.
To be sure, voters are looking for men and women of character, honesty, and integrity. They want plain-talking straight-shooters. However, I highly doubt that they are ready for a Baptist preacher as President, particularly one who has advocated for the belief that the Earth and Universe are only a few thousand years old.
Huckabee's congregation tends to be homogeneous. There is not enough diversity within the ranks to satisfy Jews, Catholics, spiritual agnostics, and the like. Racially and socioeconomically the congregation is almost exclusively white middle class married couples with children. Single parents and singles without children are likely to feel left out.
The final deal-breaker, however, is the fact that polls show that among the potential GOP nominees, Huckabee is the one that Mrs. Clinton would likely beat. In fact, she would trounce him in the general election.
My hunch is that the latest national polls cannot be counted upon to present a reliable picture of Huckabee's true level of support. In spite of the fact that he now polls second, it is still only Thompson, Giuliani, and Romney that would beat Mrs. Clinton if the election were held today.
Huckabee is going to have a tough time getting the GOP nomination despite his recent and soon to be shortlived surge.
As an ordained Baptist minister and former Governor of Arkansas, Huckabee has run into skepticism among the GOP base. At the top of the list of concerns is the Governor's record in Arkansas, which can hardly be portrayed as a shining example of conservative Republican policy.
The Party faithful are skittish on Huckabee's record on taxes and immigration, with immigration being the looming issue that is sure to eventually doom his surge.
As we have seen repeatedly in the past year, politicians in both Parties who show signs of supporting amnesty of any kind, or who support giving tuition credits to illegal aliens or their families, receive a swift and sharp kick to the behind from the voters.
Hillary Clinton is the most recent recipient of the backlash in Iowa over immigration policy.
Others who have suffered due to their stance on the issue are John McCain, Mitt Romney, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and others.
Huckabee is, without doubt, highly vulnerable on the immigration issue simply because the Republican base won't stand for a candidate whose views are so geared toward granting special privileges and exceptions to people who break our nation's laws by coming here illegally.
This is not to mention the fact that it is extremely unfair to immigrants who come here legally and become citizens through the provisions of the law.
But the factor that is perhaps the most damaging of all is that Huckabee tends to appeal only to a certain type of person within the Republican base--the religious conservative. In a sense he has built his own congregation of sorts across the country made up of people who believe that the nation's President must be closely akin to a church Pastor.
To be sure, voters are looking for men and women of character, honesty, and integrity. They want plain-talking straight-shooters. However, I highly doubt that they are ready for a Baptist preacher as President, particularly one who has advocated for the belief that the Earth and Universe are only a few thousand years old.
Huckabee's congregation tends to be homogeneous. There is not enough diversity within the ranks to satisfy Jews, Catholics, spiritual agnostics, and the like. Racially and socioeconomically the congregation is almost exclusively white middle class married couples with children. Single parents and singles without children are likely to feel left out.
The final deal-breaker, however, is the fact that polls show that among the potential GOP nominees, Huckabee is the one that Mrs. Clinton would likely beat. In fact, she would trounce him in the general election.
My hunch is that the latest national polls cannot be counted upon to present a reliable picture of Huckabee's true level of support. In spite of the fact that he now polls second, it is still only Thompson, Giuliani, and Romney that would beat Mrs. Clinton if the election were held today.
Monday, December 03, 2007
GOP Primaries--States Where Fred Will Win
Many who are avid followers of political news may at this point have the impression that whoever wins Iowa and New Hampshire in the GOP primaries is destined to win the nomination. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Ronald Reagan is the prime example.
With regard to Fred Thompson, the fact that the candidate is behind in both states seems to be an ill omen to many who observe the shifting sands of politics.
At this point I simply do not buy it.
The reason is fairly simple. Once we get passed the first cluster of early primary states and head southward to the next cluster of early primary states and beyond, Thompson is in very good shape.
He is way ahead in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi. He is ahead in North Carolina. He is in a statistical dead-heat tie in South Carolina, but I am told by one of the most reliable political prognosticators in the area that he fully expects Thompson to be the winner in the state.
Fred is also ahead in Texas and Oklahoma, and in Maine of all places the candidate has been a surprising hit for the very reason he has lagged behind in other parts of New England--his down-to-earth, folksy manner.
It is for this very reason that we expect him to do very well in West Virginia, Kentucky, and Indiana as well.
Louisiana is another state we expect to be added to the Thompson column when it is all said and done.
In short, NONE of the current proclaimed 'front-runners' will win in the South, with the exception of Mike Huckabee, who will win Arkansas in all likelihood.
And this means that Giuliani, McCain, and Romney will have a most difficult time winning the nomination. Florida may well go to one of these RINOS, although Thompson is also showing signs of strength there. But even with Florida, a GOP candidate is going to be hard pressed to win the nomination with only one southern state attached to his belt.
This is not to say that things could not change. In politics anything is possible. But at this point Thompson is slated to win more states in the key demographical areas than any other GOP candidate.
Ronald Reagan is the prime example.
With regard to Fred Thompson, the fact that the candidate is behind in both states seems to be an ill omen to many who observe the shifting sands of politics.
At this point I simply do not buy it.
The reason is fairly simple. Once we get passed the first cluster of early primary states and head southward to the next cluster of early primary states and beyond, Thompson is in very good shape.
He is way ahead in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi. He is ahead in North Carolina. He is in a statistical dead-heat tie in South Carolina, but I am told by one of the most reliable political prognosticators in the area that he fully expects Thompson to be the winner in the state.
Fred is also ahead in Texas and Oklahoma, and in Maine of all places the candidate has been a surprising hit for the very reason he has lagged behind in other parts of New England--his down-to-earth, folksy manner.
It is for this very reason that we expect him to do very well in West Virginia, Kentucky, and Indiana as well.
Louisiana is another state we expect to be added to the Thompson column when it is all said and done.
In short, NONE of the current proclaimed 'front-runners' will win in the South, with the exception of Mike Huckabee, who will win Arkansas in all likelihood.
And this means that Giuliani, McCain, and Romney will have a most difficult time winning the nomination. Florida may well go to one of these RINOS, although Thompson is also showing signs of strength there. But even with Florida, a GOP candidate is going to be hard pressed to win the nomination with only one southern state attached to his belt.
This is not to say that things could not change. In politics anything is possible. But at this point Thompson is slated to win more states in the key demographical areas than any other GOP candidate.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Maybe Ron Paul Needs a Second Look
A faithful reader of The Liberty Sphere, whose opinion I have come to value, has made up his mind to support Ron Paul for President. Normally I would simply chalk up such a thing to differences of opinion and move on.
But perhaps Ron Paul deserves a second look.
This is not to say I am on the brink of endorsing Mr. Paul, though I would not hesitate to vote for him if he is the GOP nominee. I simply believe that such a prospect is a long shot at best.
Mr. Paul, no doubt, has some credible ideas that have their basis in Jeffersonian thought. And there is no doubt that he is perhaps the lone voice of Constitutional reverence and adherence in American politics today.
No doubt Mr. Paul appeals to a broad cross-section of American voters in both Parties who want us out of Iraq. But most of those respondents state that they want our withdrawal contingent upon a plan to make the region stable and America the clear winner.
Mr. Paul does not hint that he is willing to give us such a plan. The only thing he has said, essentially, is that just as we entered Iraq we can simply leave Iraq.
It is much more complicated than that, however.
Further, Mr. Paul receives high marks for his contention that the Constitution mandates a declaration of war by Congress before U.S. troops can be sent into battle. Generally this is true, but the War Powers Act gives Presidents more leeway than that in a world in which split-second decisions can make the difference between life and death for millions of Americans.
Fred Thompson has also stated he would go to Congress before committing the U.S. military to war, but Thompson recognizes the prudence of the provisions of the War Powers Act in the modern era.
It is unclear if Mr. Paul grasps the extreme importance of a U.S. President being willing to act quickly under the provisions of the War Powers Act without being given the go-ahead from Congress first. In a world filled with terrorism it is unrealistic to expect the President as Commander in Chief to wait until Congress deliberates and gives its approval in the event of a major terrorist attack against Americans.
Those wasted hours could mean the horrifying loss of thousands, if not millions, of lives.
In addition, Mr. Paul gains much support due to his support of the Second Amendment. But he is not the only GOP candidate who has the credentials to speak with credibility on the subject of gun rights. Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, and Fred Thompson in particular are staunch supporters of the citizens' right to keep and bear firearms.
As I have often stated, I am by no means anti-Ron Paul. There is much about the candidate that can be praised and admired. Yet there are numerous pitfalls as well. Until I get answers to my questions about the issues raised here, I am still unconvinced that he is the best candidate to go head-to-head against Hillary Clinton.
But perhaps Ron Paul deserves a second look.
This is not to say I am on the brink of endorsing Mr. Paul, though I would not hesitate to vote for him if he is the GOP nominee. I simply believe that such a prospect is a long shot at best.
Mr. Paul, no doubt, has some credible ideas that have their basis in Jeffersonian thought. And there is no doubt that he is perhaps the lone voice of Constitutional reverence and adherence in American politics today.
No doubt Mr. Paul appeals to a broad cross-section of American voters in both Parties who want us out of Iraq. But most of those respondents state that they want our withdrawal contingent upon a plan to make the region stable and America the clear winner.
Mr. Paul does not hint that he is willing to give us such a plan. The only thing he has said, essentially, is that just as we entered Iraq we can simply leave Iraq.
It is much more complicated than that, however.
Further, Mr. Paul receives high marks for his contention that the Constitution mandates a declaration of war by Congress before U.S. troops can be sent into battle. Generally this is true, but the War Powers Act gives Presidents more leeway than that in a world in which split-second decisions can make the difference between life and death for millions of Americans.
Fred Thompson has also stated he would go to Congress before committing the U.S. military to war, but Thompson recognizes the prudence of the provisions of the War Powers Act in the modern era.
It is unclear if Mr. Paul grasps the extreme importance of a U.S. President being willing to act quickly under the provisions of the War Powers Act without being given the go-ahead from Congress first. In a world filled with terrorism it is unrealistic to expect the President as Commander in Chief to wait until Congress deliberates and gives its approval in the event of a major terrorist attack against Americans.
Those wasted hours could mean the horrifying loss of thousands, if not millions, of lives.
In addition, Mr. Paul gains much support due to his support of the Second Amendment. But he is not the only GOP candidate who has the credentials to speak with credibility on the subject of gun rights. Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, and Fred Thompson in particular are staunch supporters of the citizens' right to keep and bear firearms.
As I have often stated, I am by no means anti-Ron Paul. There is much about the candidate that can be praised and admired. Yet there are numerous pitfalls as well. Until I get answers to my questions about the issues raised here, I am still unconvinced that he is the best candidate to go head-to-head against Hillary Clinton.
Monday, October 22, 2007
The Fred Watch: The Oct. 21 GOP Debate
The Liberty Sphere has been keeping its ever-keen eye on Fred Thompson of late, checking to see if there is anything to the rumors that his campaign is faltering.
Based upon the Oct. 21 Fox News-GOP Presidential debate, we would assess that Thompson exhibited great strength and resolve, often going on the attack against the two who have made the most noise, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney.
The only thing we have to say about Thompson's offensive is that it's about time. Both Rudy and Mitt are long overdue an accounting for their positions on various issues through the years.
And no amount of verbal calisthenics can change or hide their record.
Thompson even suggested that Romney's positions have sometimes been to the left of Ted Kennedy, of all people. And regarding Giuliani, Thompson castigated the former Mayor for his support for federal funding of abortion, his support for ultra-liberal Democrat Mario Cuomo for Governor of New York, and his support for gun control.
These are all issues with which GOP voters need to begin to hold Giuliani accountable. The same can be said for Romney.
The bottom line? The Thompson campaign is nowhere near faltering. The Senator has his own unique style that may at times be fodder for critics with a vested interest in seeing him falter--such as Ron Paul supporters and even the Giuliani and Romney campaigns.
If anything, Thompson demonstrated that he is Presidential material, a serious contender for the White House, and quite possibly the most electable candidate among the GOP contenders.
Based upon the Oct. 21 Fox News-GOP Presidential debate, we would assess that Thompson exhibited great strength and resolve, often going on the attack against the two who have made the most noise, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney.
The only thing we have to say about Thompson's offensive is that it's about time. Both Rudy and Mitt are long overdue an accounting for their positions on various issues through the years.
And no amount of verbal calisthenics can change or hide their record.
Thompson even suggested that Romney's positions have sometimes been to the left of Ted Kennedy, of all people. And regarding Giuliani, Thompson castigated the former Mayor for his support for federal funding of abortion, his support for ultra-liberal Democrat Mario Cuomo for Governor of New York, and his support for gun control.
These are all issues with which GOP voters need to begin to hold Giuliani accountable. The same can be said for Romney.
The bottom line? The Thompson campaign is nowhere near faltering. The Senator has his own unique style that may at times be fodder for critics with a vested interest in seeing him falter--such as Ron Paul supporters and even the Giuliani and Romney campaigns.
If anything, Thompson demonstrated that he is Presidential material, a serious contender for the White House, and quite possibly the most electable candidate among the GOP contenders.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
GOP Picture Grows Murky
With U.S. Senator Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, out of the race for the White House, the question becomes where will social conservatives go.
It is not as if they had no other options than Brownback. But the social conservatives have been split between several candidates, and with one of them gone the others stand to gain.
Several of the current GOP Presidential hopefuls could potentially benefit from Brownback's departure, given their pro-life stance. These include Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, and Mitt Romney.
Even John McCain could benefit, given his lifelong support of right-to-life.
Giuliani's front-runner status in national polls cannot be trusted at this point, given that the numbers have tended to swing wildly.
Currently some polls show Giuliani with a 10-point lead over 2nd place contender Fred Thompson. Yet Giuliani's problems are mounting with some of his views on social issues.
Further, some GOP activists are beginning to openly question the Fred Thompson candidacy. It seems that more than a few of the GOP faithful were miffed that Thompson gave a very short speech to a forum in Florida on Saturday, in contrast to the other candidates.
Thompson spoke for only a few minutes and then abruptly left the stage, leaving many scratching their heads.
In one of the early primary states, South Carolina, the field of front-runners is getting crowded. Thompson, Huckabee, and Romney are within the margin of error to be considered a statistical tie.
Both Romney and Giuliani are counting on the early primaries to gain traction, such as Iowa and Florida. Romney leads in Iowa while Giuliani leads in Florida. Yet Giuliani polled a dismal eighth at a GOP forum in D.C. early in the day on Saturday.
Does this mean that a truly dark horse could come galloping to the front to save the day? Ron Paul waits in the wings despite the nervousness many GOP operatives feel about his candidacy.
The mere fact that the GOP field is this murkey with a little over 2 months to go to the primary season is reason to believe that the field is wide-open.
It is not as if they had no other options than Brownback. But the social conservatives have been split between several candidates, and with one of them gone the others stand to gain.
Several of the current GOP Presidential hopefuls could potentially benefit from Brownback's departure, given their pro-life stance. These include Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, and Mitt Romney.
Even John McCain could benefit, given his lifelong support of right-to-life.
Giuliani's front-runner status in national polls cannot be trusted at this point, given that the numbers have tended to swing wildly.
Currently some polls show Giuliani with a 10-point lead over 2nd place contender Fred Thompson. Yet Giuliani's problems are mounting with some of his views on social issues.
Further, some GOP activists are beginning to openly question the Fred Thompson candidacy. It seems that more than a few of the GOP faithful were miffed that Thompson gave a very short speech to a forum in Florida on Saturday, in contrast to the other candidates.
Thompson spoke for only a few minutes and then abruptly left the stage, leaving many scratching their heads.
In one of the early primary states, South Carolina, the field of front-runners is getting crowded. Thompson, Huckabee, and Romney are within the margin of error to be considered a statistical tie.
Both Romney and Giuliani are counting on the early primaries to gain traction, such as Iowa and Florida. Romney leads in Iowa while Giuliani leads in Florida. Yet Giuliani polled a dismal eighth at a GOP forum in D.C. early in the day on Saturday.
Does this mean that a truly dark horse could come galloping to the front to save the day? Ron Paul waits in the wings despite the nervousness many GOP operatives feel about his candidacy.
The mere fact that the GOP field is this murkey with a little over 2 months to go to the primary season is reason to believe that the field is wide-open.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Now It's Sean Hannity's Turn to Blunder
Yesterday we reported that Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly made a major blunder by suggesting that not only has Giuliani practically sewn up the GOP nomination but that he should tap Mitt Romney as his running mate.
Now it's Fox News commentator Sean Hannity's turn to blunder.
We have commented recently that Fox apparently wishes for the GOP to be dominated by northeastern liberals, such as Giuliani and Romney. Hannity seems to be no exception.
On his daily radio broadcast, Hannity took a call from a woman who stated that she was very concerned that some of the GOP front-runners cannot gain the support of evangelical Christian conservatives. The caller stated that the GOP nominee will need this block of voters to win.
We agree. We have commented at length many times on how desperately the GOP needs evangelical conservatives to beat Hillary Clinton.
Yet Hannity hedged a bit, stating that 'this is what the primary process is all about.'
Granted, that's true, but the primary process is certainly not being influenced by certain conservative commentators who have all but conceded the GOP nomination to Rudy.
As we have stated before, repeatedly, if Giuliani is the nominee the religious right will stay home on election day, throwing the election to Hillary. They have already told us that this is what they plan to do.
Why should we not believe them? Giuliani's record on a range of issues from gun control to abortion has alienated the vast majority of evangelical voters. Their view is, if there is essentially no difference between Hillary and Rudy on gun control and abortion, for example, then why vote at all?
Personally, I have some very good, sound reasons as to why they should vote for Giuliani if he is the nominee, not the least of which he is not a Socialist like Hillary, and he would appoint to the Supreme Court and the federal bench only strict constructionists, unlike Hillary.
Nonetheless, my position is a hard sell when it comes to persons who so value human life that they would rather die themselves than vote for someone who supports abortion rights. And just enough of these persons will, indeed, stay home on election day to throw the election to Hillary.
I honestly do not think that commentators like O'Reilly and Hannity truly understand the mindset of the evangelical voter. These pundits are far too prone to underestimate the commitment of evangelicals to principle over Party, to issues over ideology, to honor and faith over politics.
Issues oriented voters couldn't care less about what happens to the Supreme Court if the supposed alternative to Hillary is himself a supporter of abortion rights.
In a close election, or even a not so close election, the loss of a mere 5 million evangelical voters could tip the election to Hillary.
And this is precisely why choosing Rudy as the GOP nominee is highly risky and therefore terribly ill-advised, unless the candidate experiences a major surge in popularity over Hillary. Thus, Hannity has it wrong...at least for now.
Now it's Fox News commentator Sean Hannity's turn to blunder.
We have commented recently that Fox apparently wishes for the GOP to be dominated by northeastern liberals, such as Giuliani and Romney. Hannity seems to be no exception.
On his daily radio broadcast, Hannity took a call from a woman who stated that she was very concerned that some of the GOP front-runners cannot gain the support of evangelical Christian conservatives. The caller stated that the GOP nominee will need this block of voters to win.
We agree. We have commented at length many times on how desperately the GOP needs evangelical conservatives to beat Hillary Clinton.
Yet Hannity hedged a bit, stating that 'this is what the primary process is all about.'
Granted, that's true, but the primary process is certainly not being influenced by certain conservative commentators who have all but conceded the GOP nomination to Rudy.
As we have stated before, repeatedly, if Giuliani is the nominee the religious right will stay home on election day, throwing the election to Hillary. They have already told us that this is what they plan to do.
Why should we not believe them? Giuliani's record on a range of issues from gun control to abortion has alienated the vast majority of evangelical voters. Their view is, if there is essentially no difference between Hillary and Rudy on gun control and abortion, for example, then why vote at all?
Personally, I have some very good, sound reasons as to why they should vote for Giuliani if he is the nominee, not the least of which he is not a Socialist like Hillary, and he would appoint to the Supreme Court and the federal bench only strict constructionists, unlike Hillary.
Nonetheless, my position is a hard sell when it comes to persons who so value human life that they would rather die themselves than vote for someone who supports abortion rights. And just enough of these persons will, indeed, stay home on election day to throw the election to Hillary.
I honestly do not think that commentators like O'Reilly and Hannity truly understand the mindset of the evangelical voter. These pundits are far too prone to underestimate the commitment of evangelicals to principle over Party, to issues over ideology, to honor and faith over politics.
Issues oriented voters couldn't care less about what happens to the Supreme Court if the supposed alternative to Hillary is himself a supporter of abortion rights.
In a close election, or even a not so close election, the loss of a mere 5 million evangelical voters could tip the election to Hillary.
And this is precisely why choosing Rudy as the GOP nominee is highly risky and therefore terribly ill-advised, unless the candidate experiences a major surge in popularity over Hillary. Thus, Hannity has it wrong...at least for now.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Bill O'Reilly Blunders
Whether you like the guy or not, you have to admit that he is quite a force with which to be reckoned when it comes to political and social commentary. Sometimes I find myself agreeing 100% with him, and sometimes I cringe at his comments. Yet I keep watching and listening because he matters.
But Bill O'Reilly is certainly far from perfect, and sometimes when he misses it, he misses by a mile.
O'Reilly's blunder came on the radio this evening. In commenting on the various political campaigns, he stated that Mitt Romney would be a good running mate for Rudy Giuliani should Giuliani get the GOP nomination, of which O'Reilly is certain.
The reason cited by O'Reilly? Because 'Romney is a true conservative, and Giuliani will need a bona fide conservative on the ticket.'
Now let me get this straight. O'Reilly would place on the GOP ticket two northeastern liberals, Republicans in Name Only. My question is, does he wish to hand the election to Hillary?
It will be bad enough for many parts of the country for Giuliani to be the nominee. Many have already vowed to stay home on election day if he is. But some of these could be persuaded if there is a solid REAL conservative on the ticket.
Put Romney with Giuliani and you have immediately lost the entire South and Southwest, along with the Rockey Mountain States.
No Republican will ever win the White House without the South. Period, end.
O'Reilly's contention that Romney is a conservative is based upon his indefensible philosophy in taking a candidate at his/her word and totally ignoring that person's record. The record shows that Romney is no conservative.
It should be noted that ever since the campaigns began in earnest Fox News and their conservative pundits have all been in Giuliani's hip pocket just as CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN have been in the hip pocket of Hillary Clinton.
This fact shows just how thoroughly Fox wishes for the GOP to be dominated by politicians in the northeast corridor.
The people out in the heartland want none of it.
Should Giuliani get the nomination, he will need Fred Thompson or Mike Huckabee. But let's hope such a scenario will never become a reality. Giuliani is simply not a viable alternative to Hillary Clinton.
But Bill O'Reilly is certainly far from perfect, and sometimes when he misses it, he misses by a mile.
O'Reilly's blunder came on the radio this evening. In commenting on the various political campaigns, he stated that Mitt Romney would be a good running mate for Rudy Giuliani should Giuliani get the GOP nomination, of which O'Reilly is certain.
The reason cited by O'Reilly? Because 'Romney is a true conservative, and Giuliani will need a bona fide conservative on the ticket.'
Now let me get this straight. O'Reilly would place on the GOP ticket two northeastern liberals, Republicans in Name Only. My question is, does he wish to hand the election to Hillary?
It will be bad enough for many parts of the country for Giuliani to be the nominee. Many have already vowed to stay home on election day if he is. But some of these could be persuaded if there is a solid REAL conservative on the ticket.
Put Romney with Giuliani and you have immediately lost the entire South and Southwest, along with the Rockey Mountain States.
No Republican will ever win the White House without the South. Period, end.
O'Reilly's contention that Romney is a conservative is based upon his indefensible philosophy in taking a candidate at his/her word and totally ignoring that person's record. The record shows that Romney is no conservative.
It should be noted that ever since the campaigns began in earnest Fox News and their conservative pundits have all been in Giuliani's hip pocket just as CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN have been in the hip pocket of Hillary Clinton.
This fact shows just how thoroughly Fox wishes for the GOP to be dominated by politicians in the northeast corridor.
The people out in the heartland want none of it.
Should Giuliani get the nomination, he will need Fred Thompson or Mike Huckabee. But let's hope such a scenario will never become a reality. Giuliani is simply not a viable alternative to Hillary Clinton.
Friday, October 05, 2007
GOP 3rd Quarter Fundraising Totals
Republican Presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani continued to lead the pack in fundraising, bringing in $11 million during the 3rd quarter.
Mitt Romney comes in at a close 2nd with $10 million dollars raised. But campaign sources disclosed that Romney put over $8 million of his own money into his campaign, meaning that he actually raised less than $2 million during the third quarter.
This is precisely why The Liberty Sphere has maintained that Romney's campaign is largely fluff and that his money carefully conceals the lack of support the candidate has been able to garner throughout the country.
Fred Thompson's 3rd quarter campaign earnings were much better than expected and topped earlier reports. The Thompson campaign reports that the candidate raised over 9 million during the 3rd quarter, the vast majority of that coming in during the month of September.
John McCain's totals for the 3rd quarter stand at $5 million--a vast improvement over projections. This would tend to support the candidate's contention that his campaign is experiencing a turn-around.
Ron Paul also raised $5 million during the 3rd quarter--his best showing to date. Yet Mr. Paul comes out ahead of McCain due to the fact that McCain was $2 million in the red, meaning that he has only $3 million to spend. Mr. Paul has most if not all of his $5 million to spend.
The rest of the Republican field of candidates raised much less than the top 5.
Thus, the Liberty Sphere offers an assessment of the success of the top 5 candidates based upon 2 factors--the total funds raised from the citizens and the amount of available cash on hand to spend.
Given these 2 important factors there are only 2 GOP candidates who approach the 4th quarter from a position of strength as compared to the rest of the field. Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson are in the best financial shape of all. Giuliani is way out in front in terms of available cash to spend, and Thompson comes in 2nd with roughly 8 million in available cash.
Mitt Romney's position in the field of candidates is a bit difficult to assess. From month to month it has been hard to track exactly how much of his campaign cash came from donors and how much he spent of his own money. The candidate has deep pockets, no doubt, and he is thus a major force with which to be reckoned. But it would be a mistake to place too much credence in Romney's ability to spend.
Thus, Ron Paul in our view comes in third with a solid showing of 5 million. His ability to run a frugal campaign relying on an army of Internet supporters has enabled the candidate to keep most of the money he has raised. He is in fairly good shape, and it would be a mistake to count him out.
John McCain is still a viable candidate. The Liberty Sphere had all but given up on his campaign for dead a couple of months ago. But the candidate has shown resilience and determination, even in the face of overwhelming odds.
McCain has also said he has heard the outcry of the citizens against his amnesty immigration reform bill, and he has thus changed his views to match those of the citizens who want our borders secure and illegal immigration stopped. We would still like to hear him say more about the glaring mistake of the McCain-Feingold act against free speech. If he comes clean about that, he could well be a come-from-behind candidate.
It certainly helped McCain to appear at the NRA and remind the nation that he has been a longtime supporter of 2nd Amendment rights. The NRA has given him fairly good marks through the years, despite the GOA's rating of 'F.' It is to be remembered, however, that the GOA's criteria for rating politicians is very strict, much more so than the NRA's.
While McCain is certainly not our 1st choice, not even our 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice, he is someone we could see ourselves supporting against Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, or for that matter ANY of the Democratic candidates.
But for now, we are pleased to see that Thompson is coming on strong, and we fully expect his fundraising to show even more success during the 4th quarter.
Mitt Romney comes in at a close 2nd with $10 million dollars raised. But campaign sources disclosed that Romney put over $8 million of his own money into his campaign, meaning that he actually raised less than $2 million during the third quarter.
This is precisely why The Liberty Sphere has maintained that Romney's campaign is largely fluff and that his money carefully conceals the lack of support the candidate has been able to garner throughout the country.
Fred Thompson's 3rd quarter campaign earnings were much better than expected and topped earlier reports. The Thompson campaign reports that the candidate raised over 9 million during the 3rd quarter, the vast majority of that coming in during the month of September.
John McCain's totals for the 3rd quarter stand at $5 million--a vast improvement over projections. This would tend to support the candidate's contention that his campaign is experiencing a turn-around.
Ron Paul also raised $5 million during the 3rd quarter--his best showing to date. Yet Mr. Paul comes out ahead of McCain due to the fact that McCain was $2 million in the red, meaning that he has only $3 million to spend. Mr. Paul has most if not all of his $5 million to spend.
The rest of the Republican field of candidates raised much less than the top 5.
Thus, the Liberty Sphere offers an assessment of the success of the top 5 candidates based upon 2 factors--the total funds raised from the citizens and the amount of available cash on hand to spend.
Given these 2 important factors there are only 2 GOP candidates who approach the 4th quarter from a position of strength as compared to the rest of the field. Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson are in the best financial shape of all. Giuliani is way out in front in terms of available cash to spend, and Thompson comes in 2nd with roughly 8 million in available cash.
Mitt Romney's position in the field of candidates is a bit difficult to assess. From month to month it has been hard to track exactly how much of his campaign cash came from donors and how much he spent of his own money. The candidate has deep pockets, no doubt, and he is thus a major force with which to be reckoned. But it would be a mistake to place too much credence in Romney's ability to spend.
Thus, Ron Paul in our view comes in third with a solid showing of 5 million. His ability to run a frugal campaign relying on an army of Internet supporters has enabled the candidate to keep most of the money he has raised. He is in fairly good shape, and it would be a mistake to count him out.
John McCain is still a viable candidate. The Liberty Sphere had all but given up on his campaign for dead a couple of months ago. But the candidate has shown resilience and determination, even in the face of overwhelming odds.
McCain has also said he has heard the outcry of the citizens against his amnesty immigration reform bill, and he has thus changed his views to match those of the citizens who want our borders secure and illegal immigration stopped. We would still like to hear him say more about the glaring mistake of the McCain-Feingold act against free speech. If he comes clean about that, he could well be a come-from-behind candidate.
It certainly helped McCain to appear at the NRA and remind the nation that he has been a longtime supporter of 2nd Amendment rights. The NRA has given him fairly good marks through the years, despite the GOA's rating of 'F.' It is to be remembered, however, that the GOA's criteria for rating politicians is very strict, much more so than the NRA's.
While McCain is certainly not our 1st choice, not even our 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice, he is someone we could see ourselves supporting against Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, or for that matter ANY of the Democratic candidates.
But for now, we are pleased to see that Thompson is coming on strong, and we fully expect his fundraising to show even more success during the 4th quarter.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
BREAKING NEWS: NEWT WON'T RUN IN '08
Fox News has confirmed that former U.S. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich will not seek the Republican nomination for a bid for the White House in '08.
According to Fox News' Senior correspondents Chris Wallace and Carl Cameron, Mr. Gingrich decided that it was unrealistic to expect to raise 30 million dollars in the final quarter of 2007, a feat that has never been accomplished in a three-month period.
Gingrich had flirted with the idea of throwing his hat into the ring this year and stated that he would run if he could raise 30 million dollars. The former Speaker was set to announce tomorrow the formation of an exploratory committee that would have set in motion the fundraising process.
However, Mr. Gingrich concluded after carefully assessing the lay of the political landscape that such a goal was much too lofty. In addition, his candidacy would have further split the conservative vote among Republicans, most of whom at this point indicate that they prefer Fred Thompson.
With Gingrich in the race, Rudy Giuliani stood to gain the most. A Gingrich candidacy would have meant fragmentation for GOP conservatives, with Giuliani clearly reaping the benefits.
A few national polls show Giuliani ahead of Fred Thompson by anywhere from 3 to 6 percentage points. Other polls show Thompson ahead of Giuliani by 3 to 5 percentage points.
However, when one considers state-by-state straw polls and early data indicating the voting preferences of those most likely to vote in the various Republican primaries, Fred Thompson is clearly ahead of the game. Ohio is the latest state to join the Thompson bandwagon.
Information we have been able to gather around the country shows that Thompson is ahead in Ohio, Indiana, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, and Missouri.
Had Gingrich entered the race, at least half of these states would be a toss-up between Thompson and Gingrich.
Giuliani is ahead in states that in recent years have tended to support Democrats, such as New York, New Jersey, California, and Pennsylvania. However, Pennsylvania is ripe for the picking for a strong conservative candidate such as Thompson, with the state's rather large GOP issues-oriented groups such as gun owners and social conservatives.
This means that Giuliani will need to begin showing strength in areas that are perfect for a candidate such as Thompson. So far, we do not see Giuliani winning a single primary in the South and Southwest, two areas he desperately needs in order to win the GOP nomination.
With Gingrich out of the picture, don't be surprised by a Thompson sweep of everything south of the Mason-Dixon and west of the Mississippi, with the exception of California.
According to Fox News' Senior correspondents Chris Wallace and Carl Cameron, Mr. Gingrich decided that it was unrealistic to expect to raise 30 million dollars in the final quarter of 2007, a feat that has never been accomplished in a three-month period.
Gingrich had flirted with the idea of throwing his hat into the ring this year and stated that he would run if he could raise 30 million dollars. The former Speaker was set to announce tomorrow the formation of an exploratory committee that would have set in motion the fundraising process.
However, Mr. Gingrich concluded after carefully assessing the lay of the political landscape that such a goal was much too lofty. In addition, his candidacy would have further split the conservative vote among Republicans, most of whom at this point indicate that they prefer Fred Thompson.
With Gingrich in the race, Rudy Giuliani stood to gain the most. A Gingrich candidacy would have meant fragmentation for GOP conservatives, with Giuliani clearly reaping the benefits.
A few national polls show Giuliani ahead of Fred Thompson by anywhere from 3 to 6 percentage points. Other polls show Thompson ahead of Giuliani by 3 to 5 percentage points.
However, when one considers state-by-state straw polls and early data indicating the voting preferences of those most likely to vote in the various Republican primaries, Fred Thompson is clearly ahead of the game. Ohio is the latest state to join the Thompson bandwagon.
Information we have been able to gather around the country shows that Thompson is ahead in Ohio, Indiana, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, and Missouri.
Had Gingrich entered the race, at least half of these states would be a toss-up between Thompson and Gingrich.
Giuliani is ahead in states that in recent years have tended to support Democrats, such as New York, New Jersey, California, and Pennsylvania. However, Pennsylvania is ripe for the picking for a strong conservative candidate such as Thompson, with the state's rather large GOP issues-oriented groups such as gun owners and social conservatives.
This means that Giuliani will need to begin showing strength in areas that are perfect for a candidate such as Thompson. So far, we do not see Giuliani winning a single primary in the South and Southwest, two areas he desperately needs in order to win the GOP nomination.
With Gingrich out of the picture, don't be surprised by a Thompson sweep of everything south of the Mason-Dixon and west of the Mississippi, with the exception of California.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)