Tuesday, December 11, 2007
|
|
Defusing the Huckabomb
|
|
Posted by:
Patrick Ruffini at
12:28 AM
|
|
A particularly shrewed corresponded emailed tonight with this observation:
Not to confuse the Romney camp with the Kremlin, but using Huckabee to take out Mitt in Iowa seems to resemble using the Muhadjadeen to remove the Soviets from Afghanistan…once they are done they will be as big a problem for us as the old enemy was.
Huckabee has moved from niche regional contender to (for now) bona-fide national frontrunner. He is now within 1 and 2 points of Rudy Giuliani nationally in two national polls released this evening (with a decent post-speech bump for Mitt). This is the first time anyone has gotten so close to Rudy in a non-Rasmussen poll (which uses a very tight likely voter screen — itself ominous for the Mayor). Huck is now overperforming Fred at his peak.
This is no longer just an Iowa deal. Huckabee leads in South Carolina. He can win Florida. He can play in Michigan with the help of the unions, and the Wolverine State has a habit of awarding unorthodox primary wins.
With Huckabee no longer content to play foil to Mitt Romney, he becomes a threat to Rudy. Rudy’s recent dip in the RCP average coincides precisely with Huck’s meteoric rise. Sooner or later, both Mitt and Rudy will have to deal with Huckabee.
Mitt’s attempt starts tomorrow, in the form of a negative TV ad aimed at Iowa households. It’s unlikely this alone will do it, but the idea here is to start a drumbeat of negative buzz and scrutiny of Huckabee that crests just in time to eeke out a narrow win or loss on the 3rd. Since Iowa is effectively a two-man race right now, Romney’s people are probably betting they can evade the murder/suicide scenario.
How does Romney put away Huckabee? I’ve written “the memo” before, but it bears repeating: Mitt Romney’s progress in the polls has been plodding at best because he appeals to people’s heads and not their hearts. My advice to Mitt simple: let people get to know you. Talk about the Olympics, talk about your business successes, talk about how you’ve turned around everything you’ve touched — and go light on the policy stuff. Do an ad straight to the camera and say, “I’m not the flavor of the month — but if you want someone who has the real world experience to turn things around, I’m your guy.” On conservatism, tell people you’ve got “the whole package” — and scratch the awful, elitist “three legged stool” metaphor. Rudy’s a social liberal. Huck’s an economic liberal. Mitt’s just right.
For Rudy to survive, his campaign mantra for the next 29 days must be: national security, national security, national security. Is the national security party really going to nominate a former governor with zero national security experience to face al-Qaeda? This is Rudy’s key differentiator against Huckabee — and Mitt too. It is also McCain’s narrative — I saw first hand at the Florida debate how McCain gained goodwill just by being the only one to talk about the war. But by owning McCain’s issue — and by remaining the stronger of the two — McCain’s voters may finally get the hint and go Rudy.
The rap on Rudy is that he talks about 9/11 incessantly. If only that were so, he’d be doing a lot better. The reason Rudy has remained so strong for so long is not that he cut the welfare rolls in New York City, it’s not because he kicked the squeegies out, and it’s not even the dramatic reduction in crime he’s best known for. He loves to talk about these things, but primary voters don’t care. The one and only reason Giuliani was ever a national frontrunner is because of his performance on 9/11 and what that said about his ability to lead in a crisis.
Why he hasn’t run a campaign that is singularly evocative of that theme — just as Mitt has glossed over his experience as a turnaround artist — is baffling. Rudy’s message seems to have devolved into a 1996 Bill Clinton school uniforms message, just as Mitt’s has become a conservative panderfest.
Rudy needs to seal the deal on national security. Unlike McCain, who is Mr. Iraq, he can broaden it to toughness on Iran and the broader terror war. The central theme of a Rudy-Huck fight will be “Who do you trust as Commander-in-Chief?”
GOP primary voters feel passionately about two things: values and the war. Huckabee has cornered the market on the first. His success is not about ideology, but identity. For his voters, he’s a Christian first, and a conservative second. Attacking him on conventional conservative issues won’t undermine his core support because it has nothing to do with being a conservative.
And McCain, poised ominously for a comeback in New Hampshire, is on track to win the second by default, despite his narrow focus on Iraq, the weakest link in our national security message.
Can Romney reassert himself as the best all-around conservative when people believe he’s a conservative of convenience? Can Rudy steal back the national security issue?
The survival of the GOP’s conventional frontrunners hinges on the answers to these questions.
|
|
|
If you want a president that will be pro-life and stand up for you against the oppression of the militant homosexual agenda to force their sexuality in your face then you have three choices for President. It is either Huckabee, Tancredo, or Hunter. Thats it folks. There may be others that are somewhat conservative, but none of them other than the three I listed see the militant homosexual agenda as an important issue, and none of them support a marriage amendment. Because of the alliance of liberal democrats and liberal or moderate republicans, California starting in January will now have gender based off of feelings, rather than biology. This means your children are going to live in a world where boys will be on the girls basket ball them, be a cheerleader(in the girls uniform) and be homecoming queen. And that is not all. Starting at that same time, children will not longer be able to refer to their parents as mother and father. That is simply too offensive. And don't think that this is the end of the line. It will go futher and futher. There has already been gay marriage legalized in America in the Northeast. Which has grown and expanded to New Jersey and is still spreading. So if you continue to speak against Huckabee, just remember that you must be a very pro-homosexual person, as well as someone who doesn't care some much about the abortion issue. I am telling you that if you do not acknowledge that these issues are the most important issues we face today, then just give it some time. More and more you will begin to see. |
|
It was bad enough when Michael Jackson said it.
I agree. That's sacreligious. |
|
There is a new article out on Huck that documents that he refused to sign a bill passed by both houses that would give disaster relief to disaster victims in AR.
Huck refused to sign it as it contain the words "Acts of God". Huck's religion did not allow God to do anything destructive so he refused to sign it which allowed insurance companies to cancel policies.
Later he sign a revised bill that substituted the words natural disaster for Acts of God.
I am not worried about having to bow down and worship Huck 3 times a day like I would with the Taliban.
I am worried that Huck will become the Republican McGovern and lose every state in the general election.
Yes Huck is not as bad as the Taliban but he still saddles everyone to their detriment with his personal religion.
This same Huck who refuse to sign a relief bill because it contained the words Acts of God, referred to his own faith as "a different kind of Jesus Juice". To me that is sacreligious. |
|
Truth about the god of Vince S
Vince S would have you believe that his god is the God of Abraham. As anyone who actually knows something about God will tell you, He is our Father in Heaven and He loves us. Contrary to what Vince S and folks like him think, God doesn't jump for joy every time some self important, misinformed, antagonistic bigot says something ugly about one of His children. Vince S is not scoring points for the after life by spewing bigotry, and proclaiming to the whole world how evil Mormons are on the exclusive basis that he doesn't understand their beliefs. I don't understand why opposite magnetic poles attract each other while like poles repel each other. Does that make magnets evil? By Vince S's logic, the answer is absolutely, yes, and therefore I must tell the world all about it in the most offensive and hateful way, and I certainly must not read any books or talk to any experts to educate myself on the matter, unless it’s a book or an expert who agrees to confirm my prejudice and not challenge my self righteous, myopic, pompous, and erroneous view. I must only tolerate those who agree with me, so I can continue spreading lies without having to question myself or have a conscience.
There is a being who once demanded that God give him God's power and glory, without proving himself worthy of being trusted with that power (this is, by the way, completely different from the LDS belief in exaltation). That being has since spent every moment of every day trying to tear others down, to destroy faith in everyone, and to create holy wars based on theological differences. He's had tremendous success with the islamofascists, as we all saw on 9/11. That being is the devil, and given that Vince S is behaving more like him that like the God of Abraham, I'm left wondering just who is the god of Vince S.
Who indeed. |
|
Probably the best approach to use against Huck is to use his strength, his smoothness, his slickness, his image as a Minister (truth teller) against him.
If you run a simple ad on the "So Called Fair Tax" you forced him to defend a complicated issue that is basically a boon doggle, an emotional issue that most voters have reservations and negative feelings about.
All of the glib answers put forth to promote the "Fair tax" are flawed. Everyone knows the IRS will not be abolished. Every one who can multiply knows if you buy $77 worth of goods and pay $23 in national sales tax you are paying 30%
Huck will lose believability if he has to defend the Fair Tax. It will raise doubts about his ability to tell the truth. His image is a Baptist Minister. It will raise doubts about his image. Is he really honest? Is he a corrupt Minister like so many that the public has encountered?
It also takes him off image (his strength) and puts him on a loser issue (one of his bigger weaknesss).
Better yet this is one of his signature issues but it is a fight about taxes (a weakness)that is a legitimate discussion of issue differences. It is not a personal attack.
It would be best if a 527 ran the ads. But if necessary Romney or Fred can run it directly.
A national campaign may be just as effective as running an IA campaign but IA is much cheaper.
This approach has to happen sooner or later. It may as well be now. |
|
I am sick and tired of half-informed bigots whining about how they didn't get to go inside an LDS Temple.
Apart from the fact that most people tend to avoid having as guests jerks who tirelessly and mindlessly spew hateful lies and hearsay about them, there is a very good reason why entrance to LDS Temples is limited.
Visitors are welcome to LDS meeting houses. Come right in. A Temple is different. We're talking apples and oranges here. LDS believe that a building has to be consecrated and kept sacred in order for it to be clean enough for God to physically be present in it. While meeting houses are open to the public, only someone who is judged worthy can qualify to enter a Temple. Entrance to Temples is controlled to avoid polluting them. Sacred ordinances are done in the Temples that require they be kept pure. Membership in the Church is not enough, by the way. Every two years a person must get their Temple recommend renewed, in order to maintain the purity that we believe is necessary if the building is to be holy enough for God to walk on its floors.
Of course, I'm not asking anyone to believe this. I am just trying to explain the difference between a Temple and a meeting house. Anyone willing to meet the qualifications can enter a Temple. The question is, are you willing to meet those qualifications? If not, you have no right to whine about not being allowed inside. If a loved one is getting married inside and you can't go, how about respecting their faith instead of spewing anti-Mormon rhetoric and complaining that the Church failed to revamp its policies (which are based on commandments from God), just to avoid bruising your ego? Instead of bashing the faith of a loved one, why not ask them to explain it to you instead? I’m sure they’d appreciate that more than you calling it a cult. Real nice, buddy. |
|
|
|
|
What does everybody think about the new endorsement that Huckabee got today: [url]http://hubpages.com/_21icqppflxlzb/hub/minutemenendorsehuckabee[/url] |
|
|
It *will* be a 2 man race? I think it already is a 2 man race. Huckabee and Romney will be the only real contenders to win Iowa and New Hampshire. Those wins will affect Michigan and South Carolina, and Nevada too. Huckabee and Romney will be the big names in each of the first 5 races, as they each place first or second to the other in each race, except for New Hampshire. By that time someone should have established momentum for Florida. |
|
Well, I'll be listening for that "join my Huckabee Church" speech... I'm sure soon......Baptists have specific tenets by the way and you have to adhere to the tenets to be in the SBC, it's not minister specific. I was raised in a SBC church and was an "Acteen" if you need credentials.
Please acknowledge that you don't think any main stream Christian group (outside cults that do exist)is really like the Taliban, so I can move on...... |
|
Hucks own statements indicate that he will implement the gospel according to Huck.
He may be SBC but they are basically Minister specific. Each minister has his own World View and Huck is liberal on most issues but a Crusader on certain causes.
Huck does not represent a denomination so much as he represents his own Church and interpretation of Scripture. Just ask the SBC Ministers who disagreed with him in AR. |
|
The best way to attack Huck is to find all of the things in his past that are incongruent with the stereotype of a Baptist Minister. If he has played fast and loose with the truth, ethics, has bashed Catholic, Jews or other large blocks of voters, that will hurt him. If you can break his authenticity you can brand him as a "bad" Minister. One who talks the talk but who really does not walk the walk (Haggart, Swaggert, Bakker etc.).
On my personal background, I have a marketing background and have done some consulting (political and regular). I am not connected with the Romney campaign, I also have not contributed any money to the Romney campaign.
I do not think that Romney walks on water. Of the candidates who have a realistic shot at the nomination, in my opinion Romney is the best overall choice. Rudy is a liberal, Huck is a liberal on most issues who is taking a radical and dangerous religious positioning in the primaries.
Romney can overcome his "Mormon" problems. Currently, his head to heads are slowly improving and they should continue to do so as he campaigns. His favorable/unfavorable ratio is also dramatically improved. Huck's has the classic "new kid on the block" boom right now. That will change as more information come out and voters pay attention.
This is going to be a real horse race. If Romney can beat Huck in IA it will be a two man race.
|
|
Again which church will Huck establish as the State church???Where and when did he say that?
You do acknowledge the difference in Islam and Christianity and radicals of both?
Bin Laden /Billy Graham
Do some really believe these comments they make? |
|
Huckabee is probably the best bet, to stop the ongoing illegal immigration occupation. Very few of the Presidential contenders have the backbone, to fight the (OBL) Open border lobby.
The estimated profit to U.S. corporations and businesses employing illegal aliens in 2005 which was more than $2.36 TRILLION dollars; The cost of immigration to the American taxpayer in 1997 was a NET (after subtracting taxes immigrants pay) $70 BILLION a year, [Professor Donald Huddle, Rice University]; the cost is MANY TIMES GREATER now in 2006! In 2006 the average cost of each Illegal Alien here is 11,000.00 per year for American Taxpayers!
American citizen population who are fed up with paying the tab for pariah employers.The annual cost to taxpayers is about $22 + billion a year according to Center for Immigration Studies and the tax burden will grow -- because 15 million more immigrants are set to arrive by year 2017 according to their latest research. More than 10 million immigrants have arrived since year 2000; it is estimated that nearly 6 million are illegal. All told, the group of immigrants now account for 38 million at the moment according to the White House's own census bureau.
The "SAVE ACT" that can alleviate much of the frustration and anger of the American citizen. Using of penalties from predator employers of heavy fines and confiscation of business profits, would pay exceedingly well for internal enforcement?
Emphasizing the principles of Attrition Through Enforcement. The SAVE Act (H.R. 4088) will broaden and enhance border security and interior enforcement. CONTACT YOUR (Public Servant) SENATOR OR CONGRESSMAN/WOMEN TO CO-SPONSOR THE "SAVE ACT."
ITS IMPERATIVE TO TELL ALL FAMILY, RELATIVES & FELLOW WORKERS TO SPREAD THIS URGENT MESSAGE! |
|
The key point is that Huck really does not believe in the separation of church and state. Romney and many Mormons are just at conservative as Huck and Evangelicals.
However, Romney understands and respects the concepts of agency or free will and does not infringe on it unless it is necessary to preserve individual right or protect the common good.
Romney does not define his campaign as a religious crusade. He bases his positions on appeals to values, tradition and logic. He builds on a coalition of religious and non religious voters.
If you win the nomination by becoming the radical Evangelical Candidate you become radio active in the general election. The Party and the Country then lose.
All of the things that are coming out now about Huck will come out big time in the general as the Dem candidate moves to the center and embraces religion.
My key point which may get lost in the all of the writing is that Huckabee has taken a positioning strategy in the primaries that is a death sentence in the general.
The press will label him a radical Crusader and it will be game over.
|
|
I've just got to know. What do you do for a living? You have a post on every topic, on every article everyday of the week. I'm not trying to bash you but I was just curious.
By the way, I would consider myself an evangelical and I support Huckabee but in the end it's ABAD for me...Anybody But A Democrat. I can get over the petty issues that we discuss here but just could not stand seeing America given over to the left-wing loons for them to destroy this country for my children. |
|
So which church did Huck say he wanted to establish?Where was he when he said it? Who does he meet with in the plot?What's the address of the organization?I'm an evangelical,shouldn't I be notified?
You don't seem to know the difference in Islamic teachings about man/God and Christian teachings about man/God. The former is a fatalistic destiny,"the will of allah" philosophy and Christianity believe the free will of man to live as he pleases. Rejecting or embracing his Creator.he freely chooses. One philosphy gave us the Western civilization and the USA and the other gives us Saudi,Pak,&Iranian closed societies.
Just because you hear the Left say something, don't accept their premise or their anaysis. |
|
what you are talking about as to the Fair Tax. Try reading the book, your idiotic statement is so far from the truth, Mitt can't use it, it is a lie! I won't go into all the misinformation you seem to think is true, suffice it to say that if you read the book, and understand it (usually easy to get), you will become a supporter and not an ignorant hater.
That being said, it is the only issue with which I can support Huckabee. He is a liberal taxer and pardoned way too many violent criminals to have the proper gravitas to be President. |
|
It is one thing to run on values that have common ground in religion, tradition and natural law. It is another thing entirely to run on the idea that your religion should become the defacto State Religion.
This country will not elect a Pastor in Chief.
If you read Huck's own words He believes that Church (his Church) should run and be the State. State is an extension of his Religion.
Huckabee has stated, "Politics are totally directed by worldview. That's why when people say, 'We ought to separate politics from religion,' I say to separate the two is absolutely impossible".[Huckabee] Huckabee believes in Biblical inerrancy.[Parks]
That makes Huckabee identical to the Taliban and Bin Laden in World View. Their narrow interpretation of Religion should become the Government and force everyone else to comply. That is what we are fighting against in Iraq and Afghanistan. How is Huck's position any different than the Leaders of Iran, the Taliban or Bin Laden?
Parks, Scott. "Huckabee's not preaching to choir;Arkansas governor leads largely Democratic state", Dallas Morning News, 1997-03-09.
Huckabee, Mike (1997). Character Is The Issue. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 98. |
|
thinking that when Huck speaks at a debate that they are watchng a sermon? If so, he might be making Evangelicals feel warm and fuzzy with one liners, but as far as running the country, as Jesus' only candidate, Huck doesnt know much about America and the issues it faces, no matter how sincere he is. The irony is that LDS are accused often by SBC literature and SBC adherants of basing their testimonies off of their own feelings while leaving out logic. I havent seen one ounce of logic in a vote for Huck, Huckamaniacs love Huck's sincere iself apointed title of Jesus' Candidate but ignore Huck's sincere ignorance of American policy and issues facing this nation.
Huck, how is the SBC going to influence your candidacy?
Huck, are those push pollers members of the SBC?
Huck, do you stand by all the SBC's literature against Catholics, LDS, and Jehova's Witnesses?
|
|
What kind of word is "shrewed"? Do you mean "shrewd"?
|
|
|
I'd agree that if Huck can win in Iowa he will have the credibility to keep going. |
|
"I'm no evangelical, but if people are going to say "vote for Romney or you're a bigot" -- I think I'd stay home, too."
I don't give a rats a$$ if you're a evangelical or not. Mark compared Romney to Warren Jeffs and then said evangelicals wouldn't vote for Mitt. THAT is bigotry.
For you to take the leap from the point that evangelicals wont vote over religious bigotry to the point that ANYONE who doesn't vote for Mitt is a bigot, is absolutely astounding! If you're going to reject Mitt for his political history, that's completely acceptable and NO ONE I have EVER read has suggested otherwise.
Wise up. |
|
cdeven, Well, I am all for the lesser of evils when it comes to politicians. No one predicted the rise of Huck, and no one can quite explain it, but is does speak volumes about unhappiness with the former front runners. Huck will come down, but can he hold out for three weeks? If he comes across as the underdog who beats Mitt in Iowa, he will have a strong narrative to continue.
Hey, all of a sudden it is a two man race, just like Hugh said! |
|
|
I think it's just a matter of time for Huck. He is the last of the alternate candidates for the undecideds to support. His rise is, IMO, part of the same feelings of discomfort with all the candidates. Once Huck has been vetted, I think Mitt will be the lesser of the evils in Iowa. Hucks rise happened wiothin a few weeks and I believe his fall will be as quick. If Mitt wins by a nose, he is still in good shape for NH and that may propel him in SC. Florida will be a big test, and he may be able to be competitive. |
|
" 'Romney could never win a national election against a Democrat, because the Christian base of the Republican party will stay home if Romney is the nominee.'
So....evangelicals are bigots. Nice. "
I'm no evangelical, but if people are going to say "vote for Romney or you're a bigot" -- I think I'd stay home, too. |
|
cds, you are correct Mitt and Rudy are much better on the budget, than, say, Bush.
The attacks on Huck so far are not having much effect, in fact they may helping him with the voters he is after. The question is will his negatives begin to pull him down in time for the Iowa caucus?
Time is about up, I must say I have problems with Huck on pardons and immigration, but what he has done is show the lack of appeal Mitt has in Iowa, after spending a fortune and camping out there for the last year, he is dropping like a stone in Iowa. If Mitt has not sealed the deal by now, when will he? |
|
Truth About the god of the Mormons
1. “In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 349).
2. “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man ”(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345).
3. “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s: the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit ” (Doctrine and Covenants, 130:22).
4. “Gods exist, and we had better strive to be prepared to be one with them” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 7:238).
5. “As man is, God once was: as God is, man may become” (Prophet Lorenzo Snow, quoted in Milton R. Hunter, The Gospel Through the Ages, 105–106).
8. “Remember that God, our heavenly Father, was perhaps once a child, and mortal like we ourselves, and rose step by step in the scale of progress, in the school of advancement; has moved forward and overcome, until He has arrived at the point where He now is” (Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, 1:123).
9. “Mormon prophets have continuously taught the sublime truth that God the Eternal Father was once a mortal man who passed through a school of earth life similar to that through which we are now passing. He became God—an exalted being—through obedience to the same eternal Gospel truths that we are given opportunity today to obey” (Hunter, op. cit., 104).
On the surface, they appear to be orthodox, but …, Mormons are clearly evading the issue. . . .. Mormons have gone on record and stated that they accept the doctrine of the Trinity, but, as we have seen, it is not the Christian Trinity. God the Father does not have a body of flesh and bones, a fact clearly taught by our Lord (John 4:24, cf. Luke 24:39)
http://www.waltermartin.com/mormon.html#godmorm
It no secret. Its out there. But most people want to hide in the sand.
|
|
The great failure of the Bush administration is a failure to communicate. We must have a great communicator to get the good news out over the distortions and lies of not yet dead main stream media. |
|
"Mitt and Rudy are establishment candidates, and conservatives are tired of the big spending Rockefeller type Republicans."
Mitt and Rudy BOTH balanced their budgets with a surplus. Neither are DC insiders.
"he comes across as actually believing what he says, and obviously what he is saying is resonating with many voters."
Huck is the Elmer Gantry of the candidates. He lies about EVERYTHING. His taxing and spending, he lies about his desire to release rapists, and he lies about being pro-illegal immigrant.
It's pretty clear that Huck is simply the new "Fred". As soon as his history is realized by the voters, he will be racing Fred to the bottom of the heap. Who knows who will be left standing, but it wont be Fred or Huck. |
|
"Romney could never win a national election against a Democrat, because the Christian base of the Republican party will stay home if Romney is the nominee."
So....evangelicals are bigots. Nice. |
|
If Mitt tries to humanize himself and get touchy feely, it will look like yet another calculated sales pitch.
So why is Huck rising, all those polls are telling us something, and the above posters are hitting on it. Mitt and Rudy are establishment candidates, and conservatives are tired of the big spending Rockefeller type Republicans. The worst thing Mitt did last week was being introduced by Bush 41, that sent out a bad message.
Agree or disagree with Huck, he comes across as actually believing what he says, and obviously what he is saying is resonating with many voters. Mitt won't squash this with a power point presentation, nor Rudy by dancing around the abortion issue. And its too late for Fred to wake up.
Meanwhile, the Hildebeast is slouching toward Bethlehem. |
|
In the Bible it exhorts believers to speak truth in love.
Super hotbutton subjects like abortion and immigration are perfect for showcasing Huckabee's unmatched ability to speak the truth (ie abortion is wrong; illegal aliens must leave the country *before* asking for permission to return to work) all the while exhibiting compassion (don't forget the baby after it's born and we must allow immigrants to hold their heads high).
Ignoring these third-rail topics when virtually EVERYONE IN THE USA has passionate opinions on them is now impossible.
I was libertarian in my youth. When I found the Lord, abortion brought me to the GOP. Huck is best on that issue.
By a country mile.
9.11.2001 changed my foreign policy view. Rudy is best on this.
Can Huck learn to deal with islamic extremism? I believe he can.
Can Rudy change the hearts of millions on abortion? No way. He thinks it's a woman's issue to deal with alone.
I respect the fact that Rudy hasn't waffled (much). If that's what he believes, I can respect his right to hold any opinion he chooses.
But since ABORTION is the slaughter of innocent millions (to me and people that think like me), I'm voting for Mike Huckabee. |
|
Five days after the speech, and now we have Patrick lowering Mitt's expectations in Iowa with a 'narrow win or 2nd or 3rd.'
Sorry, not buying it, the Mitt plan was a big win in Iowa to launch him to victory elsewhere. He is finished if he crashed in Iowa.
And too little too late for going negative. Mitt's ad will look like Bah, Humbug during the holiday season. And if Mitt mentions immigration, he will just remind voters of his own yard man problem.
And how can McCain be making a comeback? Didn't Hugh tell us all he was finished?
But, yes, Patrick, thanks for a reasoned and logical analysis. Who would have thought we would be here in mid December? |
|
"...once THEY are done THEY will be as big a problem for us as the old enemy was."
Patrick. My man. Read the email again. Who are "they"? Republicans? Some Trilateralists manipulating the Republicans?
I know it pains some here at this sight, but Romney never broke 20% in a national poll. I can't remember him breaking 15%. Even with the single most eloquent speech in the history of mankind, a speech worthy to added to the Constitution, Romney is still below 15%.
Prediction: Huck (not my first choice. or second, third, or..) takes Romney out in Iowa. At this current time, Huck is viewed as the new "Somebody Else." His star is in ascendency. Etc. Romney drops in NH, and then possibly become irrelevent. But what can you say about a man who has spent the GDP of several small countries and can't move to the head of the Republican line? I'm sure it's because the Kabala has deemed that Romney must go.
Huck will likely fall. He has one, maybe two, conservative points: abortion and marriage. That isn't going to fly with the Republicans. But his eventual fall does not mean that Romney rises again.
Republicans are still looking for a conservative on:
spending
moral issues (abortion, et al)
military and terrorism
immigration
and especially a candidate who has not converted to these issues two weeks before they announced for the Presidency.
And it ain't Huck, Mitt, Rudy or McCain. Will Fred's star rise again? Hard to say, but no other candidate is a solid, across-the-board, historical conservative. So says Rush.
|
|
People keep quoting InTrade like it is some sort of scientific measure of potential results.
I mean, geesh, the actual sums bet on InTrade are miniscule and meaningless. |
|
Unless you have grown up in the evangelical movement, it will be hard to comprehend how myopic these people can be.
They think of anything outside of the "born-again" Christian faith as being "in the world". They truly expect Christ to return any day now.
If evangelicals are provided with a choice for President who actually has a chance of winning, there is NO WAY they would vote for a Mormon instead. Evangelicals believe Mormonism is a cult. Period. No different that Moonies in their minds and actually even worse because it is "closer" to Christianity and therefore more likely to lead people astray.
In the evangelical mondset, there is no "close". There is no "gray". There is just right and wrong and you are one or the other.
Add to this that Huck is charming, well-spoken, funny, and hasn't run a "negative" campaign and you have a guy who is almost bullet-proof with evangelicals.
What caused the "huck-a-boom"? When evangelicals sensed that he really could win and Thompson couldn't, they were onboard 100%.
So far, the attacks I've seen against Huck (The Dumond thing, The AIDS thing and The Cuba thing) will do NOTHING to lower his support among evangelicals. The Dumond things shows mercy. The AIDS things says gays are sinning and the Cuba thing is just too complicated for the average guy to understand or care about.
The ONLY thing that will shake evangelicals off Huck is if they can shake people's trust in his character. Show that he is a liar.
But remember, when you attack Huck, to the evangelicals you are attacking their own and instead of ddrawing off votes, you may just cause them to circle the wagons.
Add to that that |
|
|
And if Huck wins IA and SC, then it's a two man race with Rudy in pretty bad shape, right? |
|
The question for the other Republicans is the same: Where do you win? And if you don't win early, do you have the resources to go on?
John McCain, the candidate of the Union Leader, either wins New Hampshire or goes home. For he is going to be humiliated in Iowa if he does not drop out. And if he cannot win the Granite State, his strongest in 2000, how does he raise the money to carry on, and where does he win?
Fred Thompson appears to have little chance to win any of the first three. He is banking on holding on until South Carolina, despite a probable three straight losses before then and no publicity to rival what Huckabee and Romney are getting right now. Fred may not make it to South Carolina.
Which brings us to Rudy, the front-runner. His hope: That Huckabee wins Iowa, McCain wins New Hampshire, Romney wins Michigan, and Thompson or McCain wins South Carolina. Then, after four defeats, he comes roaring back in Florida, grabs the headlines going into Feb. 5, when half the primaries are held, and marches forward to the nomination.
Whoever thought up this strategy is the kind of guy who plays Russian roulette with four bullets in the chamber. The peril of the Rudy strategy is if a Romney, a Huckabee or a McCain wins in New Hampshire and South Carolina and catches a fire no attack ad can put out. Already, Rudy's national lead is vanishing. How he maintains it through December and four straight January losses is, as they say, problematic.
you don't have to READ THE WHOLE THING (because this is the best part anyway), but here's the link anyway:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/12/the_mittm ike_religious_war.html
|
|
A little objectivity and balance can be refreshing!
While I almost always disagree with Pat Buchanan on FP (especially his near-looney isolationism), he is a very smart guy who has seen it all. I disagree with his premise on the "Religious War" between Huck and Romney, I think it's much more complicated than he describes, but check this part out:
The questions now are whether Huckabee has peaked, whether he can be stopped, and, if so, who stops him?
Today, the one man who can do that is Romney. If Romney wins Iowa, not only would that break Huckabee's momentum, but Romney would likely surge to victory in New Hampshire, five days later, where he leads, and in Michigan, a week after, where his father was governor and Romney is a famous name. Comes then South Carolina. If Mitt is 3-0 going into South Carolina and everyone else is 0 for 3, it is hard to see who beats him there.
If Romney loses Iowa, however, he has to win New Hampshire or he is done. But if Huckabee wins Iowa, he need not win New Hampshire for he has already moved into the lead in South Carolina.
|
|
|
Excellent point. . . a pro life Barak Obama, who isn't as smart. |
|
to say that I would vote for whoever the GOP put up regardless because the alternative would just be to horrible to contemplate.
After digging into Mike Huckabee's record I have come to the conclusion that that is no longer the case. At last the GOP has found a candiate I can't bring myself to support under any circumstances. Mike Huckabee is basically a pro-life Barak Obama. |
|
BG quoted:
Huckabee has stated, "Politics are totally directed by worldview. . . I say to separate the two is absolutely impossible".
What you don’t realize BG is that you have a worldview too. "Every person carries in his head a mental model of the world." (Alvin Toffler)
Therefore, Huckabee is right, you cannot separate your worldview from the way you live your life. We all have a set of assumptions and presuppositions that influence every decision we make, including you.
You cannot say that because these two operate from a worldview they are the same, because we all operate from a worldview. One of the basic laws of logic says that: Just because two things have one thing in common does not mean they have everything in common.
The worldview of Huckabee and the worldview of Bin Laden are polar opposites.
The Judeo/Christian worldview begins with the belief that human beings were created in the image of God; therefore, every human life is sacred. Our country was founded on the principle that all men were created equal.
This is the invitation Jesus offers everyone, and Christians have accepted the invitation.
"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.” Matthew 11:28
Conversely, Bin Laden, the Taliban’s invitation is this:
Convert, submit to Islamic Law, or die, you infidel dog.
|
|
"Mitt Romney’s progress in the polls has been plodding at best because he appeals to people’s heads and not their hearts."
That may be A reason, I don't think it's THE reason, but even the speech he gave, for all the positives, it certainly lacked the personal touch of a Reagan speech. Reagan could make it seem like he was in the room, talking with you.
It's nice to mention a "decent post-speech bump for Mitt" -- but you may as well be complimenting the Atlanta Falcons for adding three to their score when the other team just scored three touchdowns.
|
|
Should the government crack down on churches for political statements? Would Martin Luther King be able to do what he did under a church crack down?
POLITICO-Mike Huckabee’s bid to win the 2008 Republican nomination faces plenty of obstacles, Mitt Romney’s money and machine being chief among them.
But lurking in the background could be a new concern: the Internal Revenue Service.
In recent election cycles the IRS has upgraded its scrutiny of churches and other charities, which risk losing their tax-free status if they engage in partisan political activity or advocacy for a particular candidate.
Huckabee’s Iowa surge is driven largely by an eleventh-hour rally of Christian activists behind the Republican’s candidacy, and that’s certain to draw attention from tax sleuths and others.
READ MORE
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/huckabee-support-h inges-on-churches |
|
|
Apparently has paid off with a Fl. Cuban legislator who endorsed him yesterday. He was against the embargo before he was for it.He's also done an amazing flip flop by his newly found toughness on immigration,given how he fought against measures in Ark. He fought federal authorities on workplace raids.I guess he has found some consistency though,he's for isolating Cuba and AIDS patients. |
|
InTrade 5am Tuesday morning (post all the clamor about the "new polls").
To win the nomination:
RG 40.3
MH 20.8
MR 19.5
others in single digits.
For all those that see the polls jump around, go to InTrade or IEM or a more planet earth assessment.
In last three weeks, MH has gone up and MR has gone down in InTrade ... both moves have been dramatic but in opposite directions.
RG has come down slightly (but the spread between his #1 and any #2) has widened considerably.
What it means? RG is still the prohibitive favorite to win the nomination? From the "speech to Huckaboom to ?" NOTHING really has changed for RG. |
|
Huckabee has stated, "Politics are totally directed by worldview. That's why when people say, 'We ought to separate politics from religion,' I say to separate the two is absolutely impossible".
[Huckabee, Mike (1997). Character Is The Issue. Nashville: Broadman&Holman, 98.]
This is why Huck is no different than the Taliban or Bin Laden.
Huck is his own Pope. |
|
With the author of this peice more. Mitt needs to humanize himself as well as emphasizing his bio rather than the snipe attacks.The latest TV ad rehashes old news about the tuition breaks. He would have been better off citing the fact Huck opened a mexican's consulate's office in Ark. with taxpayer money. Get something new out there.I also agree that Mitt appeals to people's brains and not their heart.I have said many times that the reason the republican brand has fallen doesn't have to do the war per se,corruption or even spending. The reason we have fallen out of favor is because we abandoned logic. common sense and problem solving. We've tried to fight the dems on an emotional basis and that's thier turf and they know how to exploit feelings.
Republicans have to appeal to people's logical side of the brain. Look at how this race has been sidetracked over religion. This has hurt Mitt because it's drowned out his bio as a turn around artist and problem solver. Mitt's MTP appearance this week could turn the race one way or the other. I hope Mitt turns all the questions around on what he would do to address the problems of the country as opposed to comparing himself with Huckabee. |
|
cyndu writes: Tuesday, December, 11, 2007 1:52 AM
He hasn't flopped on his wife - perhaps the best test of character there is. What a person does in the privacy of their home and secret life is very near where they actuall live in their mind and heart.
---------------------------------------
Exactly Right!!! mitt the flipper wouldnt let his inlaws attend their own daughter's weddding because they didn't belong to his goofy cult-and hence can't darken the doors of that temple of Baal-how despicable.
BTW: Christians are happy to welcome mormons in all of their houses of worship-but then Christianity is not a cult that separates families.
What a spineless weasel: mitt the flip wouldnt even stand up for his wife.
and what kind of ugly cult divides families that way???
|
|
Huckabee is about to run away with this election because the average American likes his positive vision for America, and despite all the media pundits, would be history makers, wannabee movers and shakers, and so called "conservative" leaders not getting it - ordinary Americans can see that Huckabee has the qualities America needs right now, namely a rare combination of experience, character, and leadership that is inspiring. We want someone who'll lift America up and Huckabee has a record of leading by example and getting things done.
www . mikehuckabee . com |
|
|
You are not born again. you should go douse yourself in the fires of hell to know the damnation that awaits you if you are not partaking of the jesus fish |
|
We need to know if Huckabee has used or promoted any of Ankerberg's or other's anti Catholic material in his churches. Has he shown or promoted any of Ankerberg's cult materials?
These are comments from Ankerberg's Website.
"In a nutshell, it would seem that there are so many ways in which Catholicism is not biblical that it is logically impossible to classify it as a genuine Christian religion." (Ankerberg and Weldon).
"To demonstrate that Roman Catholicism bears the mark of a cult is quite easy indeed..... A closer look at the other signs of a cult further confirm the fact that Catholicism, while large in number, humanitarian in practice, is still unbiblical and perhaps the mother of all "Christian" cults."(Dural)
One whole article on Mary "Catholic and Occult View of Mary" (Ankerberg and Weldon). |
|
|
of the backlash on Romney's Speech. I had not made up my mind until that speech. Unfortunately, so many people were busy saying what a great speech it was but the polls tell a different story. When polls were indicating that Romney was ahead - these polls were considered accurate. Now that the polls indicate a shift to favor someone else, these polls are questionable and Romney just needs to change his communication style because people just aren't getting his message. How about we proceed with the notion that people are actually getting Romney's message (since the speech) and they are rejecting it. |
|
|
if Romney is nominated and I am not an evangelical! It is unacceptable to nominate a person whose record on fundamental issues like abortion, stem cell research etc changes that much in 5 years. Also,how can we trust such a person to lead this nation? These issues are important for all americans (right, left and center) and Romney's Record makes any objective voter conclude that he is unpredictable! |
|
|
and that is why he can not speak to people in a personal way because his shifting positions make it difficult for him to really connect with voters. Romney will not make it to the general election, and if republicans get smittened enough to nominate him, american voters will not get smittened enough to overlook his shifting positions because the issues he has shifted his position on are important to all americans. He will not be able to explain his way out of his flip flopping. He may have kept his wife but people are not judging him based on his business or personal choices, they are judging him based on his public record - and that is very inconsistent! |
|
Of all the hundreds of articles that have been written on the subject, not one has done much more than casually mention or discuss the "evangelical" distaste for Mormonism.
I'd love it if one of these reporters actually gets up from their computer and visits one of the thousands of baptist, pentacostal and other churches scattered across the country? I think it would be helpful to hear some reporting on the time and energy these preachers spend "innoculating" their flocks from the clean cut young men in white shirts and ties who will inevitably knock on their doors and offer them a free copy of the book of mormon?
It is sad that our national discourse in such a crucial election is being so heavily influenced by the after effects of a decades-long religious marketing competition between Mormons and those evangelicals who don't proselyte as aggressively.
Story after story points out the conflict between mormon theology and traditional evangelical interpretations of Christianity and then simply lists the same things that any simple google search will uncover.
While legitimate differences do exist between Mormonism and Evangelical Doctrines, those who really care can discuss them. In the meantime, there is too much misinformation and plain untruth about mormon doctrine spread by these churches anti-mormon marketing/protection efforts.
How about a story that looks at the source of why these differences are so important to so many otherwise good people who attend evangelical churches? How about a story that reports on how much time and money these churches and groups spend preaching against somebody else's religion? |
|
All of the polls indicate that the so called Christian Base will voter for Romney in the general, much more so than Rudy or McCain. Romney does not have a problem with white Evangelicals in the general election. He does have a problem with rural good ol boys (Thompson's core vote).
Only the most rabid anti Mormons will stay home and they are very few and can be replaced with moderate Independents. |
|
|
best bet for a democrat president-no matter who wins |
|
Many Evangelicals are experiencials. Their identity, their religion is based on feeling, emotion and doing physical things. The Pentacostals, the Assembly of Gods and the Charismatics are good examples.
Huck speaks that language. Mormonism is based on spiritual experience but it is different. It is not the open tent revival atmosphere. It is based on a quieter more peaceful spirit.
Romney has to find an intuitive way to reach the Evangelicals and communicate with them intuitively.
In many cases the decision making is not that logical. Logic helps but mostly it is a matter of finding a justification for doing what the decider already senses that they want to do. The decision is emotion based and the logic is a rationale for doing what will create or fulfill the emotion.
|
|
|
Romney could never win a national election against a Democrat, because the Christian base of the Republican party will stay home if Romney is the nominee. |
|
Huckabee got grilled on Hannity & Colmes about it. Why in the world would Huckabee "desire" that a rapist like Dumond be released? Here's what one victim wrote about Dumond:
Standing there yielding a butcher knife above his head, was the shadow of a man. I asked "Who is it?" and he immediately burst on to my side of the bed, put his hands over my mouth and stuck the knife in my throat, whispering, "Don't say a word or I'll cut your goddamned throat." I froze and adhered to his request
Huckabee didn't know this guy would be a danger if released? Of course he's acting like a pillar of virtue in jail if the Governor is writing you letters saying I wish you were released.
What Huckabee should have said is it's godd that your getting better in jail and I hope you continue to get better behind bars. Compassion is not desiring rapist to go free Huckabee!
|
|
The Kennedy, Bushes and Kerry were not one of them. However, they still go the nomination and won or almost won the Presidency.
You don't have to be one of them. You have to reach them and convince them that you really do feel and think like them.
Romney can't change his background but he can change his communication/teaching style. |
|
I would not vote for Huck over Barack, but I would definitely consider him vs. HRC. Huck is better on cultural ideas. They are about even fiscally. And on strategic policy, Hillary is better. In my mind, its a close call, and I've never voted for a Republican for President. Never even came close.
If Huck could draw in a left-center guy like me, he could win the thing. MR and FT would be lucky to hit 45% next year. They are just more of the same. Rudy and McCain constitute more of a threat than Huck, although I personally would never vote for Rudy, at least, in a million years.
If I could be convinced that Huck is not beholden to the current generation of Republican leadership, he would be just what I'm looking for. Kind of like a center-right alternative to Barack. Barack vs. Huck would be a great election--good for the country, good for our soul. |
|
There are 3 types of learners, visuals (30%), auditory(25%)and kinesthetics(45%).
Romney is not reaching the kinesthetics. Romney look up ways to effectively reach this group. You have got to touch them if you want to win.
Kinesthetics learn by doing. Talk about things that they already do and link that to your points (behavioralism). Kinesthetics learn by mimicing. They imprint. Demonstrate, get them involved, they learn by doing, moving or working with their hands. You need to get them to do something physically.
Maybe run a direct mail piece and ask for a minor easy specific action. Maybe like estimate how much you paid in sales tax this month and then multiply it by 4 or something along those lines.
Just some off of the wall ideas. |
|
This will be very sad for conservatives if we turn this election into who is the most faith based true christian leader. Huckabee`s pandering, has turned the primary into a very perilous point.
Huckabee cannot withstand the fusion of Mr. and Mrs. Clinton`s swift nuclei attack machine .
|
|
The problem is, Mitt is NOT one of them. He is the one of the two or three anointed by Republican muckity-mucks. The muckity-mucks can live with RG, MR, and FT. And Mitt--despite his good qualities, and I am coming to believe in his good qualities--is too much status quo for the non-Foxnews, non-radio talk show, component of the conservative base.
Republican governance over the past several years has raised some issues about the philosophy undergirding that governance. Huck is addressing those issues. So is Ron Paul, although authentic libertarianism, like the Eisenhower wing, is a vanishing element of the Republican party. Romney does not. Romney is the same blah blah blah. He's going to run government efficiently and make it smaller. He shares our values. He's gonna be tough on the bad guys. Are these ideas we haven't heard from, oh, maybe every Republican candidate for office since 1978?
The Foxnews conservatives may not mind being played, but there is another type of conservative out there. They vote Republican, but they have not forfeited their right to think for themselves. And they look at what Republican government has produced in the past quarter century, and they have to decide whether they're going to believe Foxnews or their lying eyes. That's why Huck has to cheer everytime another pundit or another operative or another inside-the-beltway type comes out and assaults his candidacy. It just shows the broader public that there is something right about him.
If Mitt valued his political career, he'd approach Mike about running as a ticket (with Mitt at the bottom) and putting the stopper on RG. |
|
The problem with flip flop tag that people try to put on Romney is that his life doesn't really say "do anything to get ahead."
He has a huge reputation for being a straight shooter in business. My brother was talking to a Bain guy (not a Mormon) and said, "So, you konw all the dirt on Romney?" The guy said, "well, that's the thing about Romney - there is not dirt."
I will grant that he certainly knows how to flip - flip companies for a tidy sum, that is.
He hasn't flopped on his wife - perhaps the best test of character there is. What a person does in the privacy of their home and secret life is very near where they actuall live in their mind and heart.
|
|
|
It is best to let CC attack the fair tax. Some one will at the last moment. |
|
Tell the truth about the "fair tax." That new family car will cost 30% more. Sorry 2-car families. That new combine? 30% more. Retired farmers' medical care? 30% more. 30%, 30%, 30%. The home-mortgage interest deduction? Down the crapper. Sure, goodbye to the IRS, but because of the new black market caused by confiscatory and regressive tax rates, hello retail tax gestapo.
Two-thirds of Romney's Iowa ad buys from here on out ought to pound, pound, pound on this theme. When Huckabee passes the collection plate, Iowans better hold on to their wallets. |
|
|
76 % of the Rep voters are still deciding. Late decider decide on emotion more than logic. Less than half of people decide on logic (see Myers and Briggs). Many are intuitive or they sense the right way to go. It is not logical. Decision making style also tends to be genetically predetermined. |
|
sorry, after seeing those polls for DEAN in the primary, i want to wait to see a vote.
so much hype, so little reality...
we shall see.
HUCKABEE's vacant conceptions in foreign policy, taxation, spending, etc., are deeply concerning.
He is not a Conservative.
IT is no wonder Mr. Rich of the NY TIMES wants HUCKABEE to win the GOP nod.
And frankly, it is understandable why Democrat Liberals want him to win. |
|
The way to break Huckenstein is very simple. You attack his identity. He has declared his religion as himself. If you can show he is fast and loose with the truth you can break him. If you can nail him with a scandal you can break him.
One other way to break him is to use his identity against him. If he has engaged in promoting Catholics (maybe Masons, Mormons, JWs etc.) as a Satanic Cult your can break him.
You have to take the stereotype of a Baptist Pastor and find inconsistencies in his past or current behavior and exploit those. If those inconsistencies are exposed, Huck will come across as a Ted Haggart, Jim Bakker or Jimmy Swaggart. A smooth talking hypocrite who's actions are not consistent with his claimed and projected image. Huck has set a very high standard for himself. He is vulnerable.
He is also very vulnerable with secular voters for blending his "identity" with the way he governs. He does not think in terms of separation of church and state. To him the state is and should be an extention of his "identity" (religion or church).
It never occurs to him that his religion should not be legislated since his religion is him and he feel very strongly about his identity. Every one should conform to the religion of Huck. He knows best. |
|
Tell the Iowans the truth about the "fair tax" : that new family car is going to cost 30% more. (Sorry, 2-car families.) That combine? 30% more. Retired farmers' medical care? 30% more. Home mortgage interest deduction? Down the toilet.
Huck owns this issue and can't run away from it. It's regressive as h___ and applies to all goods and services. It's rate is high enough to create a black market... goodbye IRS, hello retail tax gestapo.
75% of Romney's Iowa ad buys should pound on this theme until caucus day. |
|
You do not talk about keeping the economy strong you talk directly about keeping your job and paying the mortgage or paying tuition.
You talk about illegals beating out citizens for jobs. You talk about taxes going up by the cost of a set of tires or a month rent.
You talk about your neighbors getting mugged, it could happen to anyone.
You talk about your experiences running things, many change happen, turning around very difficult situations.
You talk about holding your grand daughter and wondering how to improve the future for her. You talk about the legacy that you want to leave to your grand children.
You talk about reforming the government so that it works better. You talk about the changes that you would make and how those would make a particular street in IA or NH safer.
Romney has to talk in terms of how he can directly benefit specific individuals.
Voters decide based on "is this candidate like me". (Carl Rove). I would modify that statement. Voters decide based on "what is in this candidacy for me". "How will I benefit"? How will my children benefit? or How will I be harmed by the other candidates (if you need to use a fear appeal). I has to be both logical and emotional.
The great politicians like John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton could talk directly to people as individuals and connect emotionally.
Romney has not been able to close the sale due to his inability to reach voters emotionally. Huck does that and they react without knowing his record and what he really believes. Rudy has the same capability but in a different style.
You have to create a compelling emotional reason in the voter to vote for you or against your opposition. |
|
Excellent post -- balanced, rational. How was this allowed on hughhewitt.com? More of the same, please.
Romney should avoid 'bashing' and simply set forth the reasons economic populism hurts the people it intends to help. |
|
I support Rudy because of his results in NY: crime, welfare, taxes, spending, general cleanliness. It is silly to imagine that this doesn't play into his support!
The idea that this article gives an intellectually honest analysis of Rudy's campaign is ridiculous. Sometimes, I think the GOP is just as bad as the dems: so many analysts, like Patrick here, make things up to justify their a-priori favorites.
|
|
|
Mike Huckabee = the Democrats' favorite GOP candidate (as all the Lefty shills on this blog have confirmed). Think about that. Then vote wisely. |
|
Many voters are deciding on feel. They have no idea what Huck's position are but he has a good feel. Romney has to bag the power points and talk one on one to the voters. He has to put his points into every day terms that they live.
To many of the voters just don't get the right feel from Romney because he talks at them with logic as apposed to talking with them and communicating to their emotions.
The CBS poll internals have many positives for Romney. This is essentially a 3 person race and the biggest problems for Romney is not his religion, it is not his flip flop label it is how he communicates with the voters. Both Rudy and Huck do that better on a personal level.
Romney has to stop talking to the voters as a group and pick out a few representative individuals in the audience and talk directly one on one with them through the camera.
He can learn this. It should not take him to long to master it. He is getting better. They are not a bunch of students. It is not a lecture. He is not teaching them. He has to talk to them as neighbors. He has to signal that he is one of them. |
|
|
It's far too reasonable and insightful to be posted here these days. Besides, haven't you heard (ad nausem) that this is a two man race? |
|
Let's assume Huckabee wins Iowa and South Carolina. Romney will likely win New Hampshire. Giuliani will likely win Florida. Thompson and McCain will likely hang in with a couple of place and shows. The race will remain wide open for a while.
When it dawns on people that Huckabee probably cannot beat the Democrat challenger, I predict his appeal will drop. Mitt's lackluster national appeal is probably alot more to do with people thinking he cannot win than any anti Mormon bias.
But when you have people on this site slamming Rudy on a regular basis, others (me included) slaming Romney in return, John McCain being treated like a pariah, Ron Paul acting the roll of Pied Piper of the Libertarian Losers, and Fred Thompson taking a nap. . . the rise of Huckabee is not that hard to figure out. |
|
|
is what most voters will do in the primaries and if that does not work then definitely in the national election. Romney has changed his mind multiple times on multiple issues that are important to most americans (abortion, stem cell research, marriage etc). Will the real Romney please stand up! voters do not trust a person who has never made any mistakes and whose moral values keep shifting - he appears to be either confused or dishonest. Either way, there won't be a mormon in the whitehouse. |
|
|
|