Ok, the Iowa caucus is done. Here is my rant: the only true pro-life conservative in this race is Fred Thompson (solid conservative, 100% pro-life.) GO FRED!! (by the way I donated to Fred long before the NRLC endorsed him). It is patently obvious that the guy is the second coming of Reagan. He’s articulate, smart, has real presence and is the only one that has proposed solid conservative answers to a range of problems. It’s amazing to me that conservatives would rather choose Huckabee or Romney over Fred. So why can’t the Republicans get behind the guy? That I can’t figure out. It seems the only complaint against Thompson is that the he’s been running a LOUSY campaign (at least that’s what the press says).
But assuming Fred continues to run a lousy campaign, my second choice is Mitt. Now I’m a little wary of Mitt because of his pro-abortion position as a governor and his shifting positions (was it a flip-flop or a conversion?) However, I can forgive him if I have no other choice, he’s a politician after all (George Bush Sr. had similar problem before he ran). I suspect that his Massachusetts stand was more a cave-in to the liberal electorate of Mass. and doesn’t really represent his real views. And maybe he really did have a true change of heart as he claims after he had to address the stem-cell issue. Anyway, that’s my hope.
Mike Huckabee is a likable fellow but I don’t like his class warfare rhetoric (main street v. wall street), nor neophyte rhetoric on foreign policy and Iraq. His surge in the polls recently and his win in Iowa I suspect may be propelled by (i) the media hoping Republicans will be dumb enough to nominate him (now of course, the media may be wrong, it could be Huckabee could actually win over enough Dems in the general election to win, he does give good stump speeches), and (ii) evangelicals’ anti-Mormonism. I hope that (ii) isn’t right but I’ve heard quite a few anecdotal anti-Mormonism references in the press and elsewhere to support it. And the fact that I’ve heard MANY callers to talk radio talking about how they are going to vote for “Mike HuckLEbee” (sic). If you can’t say his name correctly, I’ve just got to believe that the only reason they are supporting him is that he’s an evangelical and he’s not Mitt the Mormon. Here’s one of those anecdotal references (excerpt from tonight’s Wall Street Journal) :
“His belief is my belief,” said Carole Schafer, 79 years old, of Urbandale, who was decked out in a pink jacket as she prepared to caucus for Mr. Huckabee. While she thinks Mr. Romney “looks like a president” and is “qualified,” she had reservations about his Mormonism. “I’m not sure about his faith,” she said.”
Now what does that mean??? I MEAN FOR PETE’S SAKE WHAT HAS MITT’S MORMONISM GOT TO DO WITH ANYTHING??!! I’m astounded at the bigotry. The fact is that the guy is a moral family guy, has five kids, and is religious. His Mormonism isn’t going to affect anyone negatively. It’s sheer bigotry that goes a long way toward reducing my respect for the evangelical voter constituency in the republican party (which respect up to now has been high and far higher than any respect I have for the typical Democrat catholic voter who willingly shoves the unborn child aside to chase the next big government handout). I just hope it’s not true of 99% of the evangelicals out there and they are opposing Mitt for other reasons (like his shifting stances on abortion and gay marriage which to me are his biggest problems).
I just sent Fred some starbucks from our fair city of Seattle – a jolt of caffeine would do him good. That dude needs to give me a reason to listen for more than 30 seconds before falling asleep.
Romney needs to cool it on the hairgel.
Mccain is going to keep Romney competitive until he (Mccain) runs out of money, which will be shortly after South Carolina.
Mccain may pander to the news media, but thats only because he’s brain damaged (in a good way) and needs the love. In truth and in my heart, he will always be a conservative’s conservative that makes liberals all warm and fuzzy.
Its amazing to me that you would rather shun McCain for a Romney, a candidate that couldn’t stick to his moral guns when it mattered. Why should we trust Romney, because he’s a moral Mormon?
McCain has had his run-ins with GW, but he also has campaigned harder than any other national political figure of his stature to get GW re-elected. My personal belief is that he does tease the media a bit and is Bush’s foil when needs to be, but he’s someone that you can trust to have some character. The bigger upside is that his character is also appealing to independents and moderates (if there is such a distinction), and will siphon off obama’s support in the general election when Hillary gets the nomination.