After reading this post it just hit me like a friggin brick.
I’m not excited about anyone who’s running. Nobody. Not even a little. I seriously may stay home election day for the first time since I voted in 1992.

Huckabee may become the Howard Dean of ’08. No yearrgghhhs but doesn’t seem substantial on things that matter, like foreign policy and national security. Pastor, yes, but president, no.
For me, Rudy is now the least bad choice, well ahead of any Dem.
Greg, if you don’t vote, you are voting Dem. Sends a message to the Republicans, but we can’t afford four years of any of the Dems.

There is no question that Huckabee is picking up Thompson voters.
Thompson’s numbers have fallen dramatically. Giuliani’s numbers have also fallen, although not to the degree of Thompson. Romney and McCain seem locked at around 10-13% and after his brief surge, Ron Paul has settled in with about 5% of the vote.
Strange, but this election might be determined by which candidates drop out. If McCain were to drop out, Giuliani would most likely pick up votes, as the conservative block would be fragmented. However, you’d have to think that Romney or Thompson dropping out would help Huckabee.
It’s amazing that with all the money that has been raised, a guy like Huckabee can even compete.

“Rudy may not be the most conservative in the field, but he offers the best hope for a conservative Presidency.”
I take it you haven’t actually read anything about him.
Rudy and Linc Chafee are the same species. RINOs.

Barry, Huckabee’s path to citizenship views on immigration will hand the election to the Democrat.
EMT, on the issues that really matter and where a president can really have an impact (national security and the economy) Rudy measures up as a Reagan Republican. On Abortion and Gay Marriage, what impact can a president really have other through the judges he appoints. Rudy will appoint strict constitutional constuctionists. Chafee would have Barbara Streisand and Michael Moore on the bench if he could.
Charlie Bakst has lead you into believing abortion and gay rights are the critical issues that will decide the election. Your average working family, Democrat and Republican is going to look at security and their wallet first. Voters who vote on social issues (in either direction) are a weaker fringe.

PDM, trouble is our Constitution alone won’t protect us against Islamic extremists hell-bent on exploiting our freedoms to kill us.
In the early 1980’s I was stationed at Ft. Meade Maryland, home of the National Security Agency. My barracks was about a par 5 from the NSA building. At the time the Nation’s most secret agency had no fence around it, no Jersey barriers, no guards. Ft. Meade was an open campus, anyone could cut through to get from Laurel to Glen Burnie. You could bring your family and have a picnic on the front lawn of NSA. Now only military and their families can enter the base. There is an armed guard posted at each entrance. NSA is surrounded by Jersey barriers and other such obstacles.
This didn’t happend because we lost respect for the Constitution. This happened because we need to protect our country from the kind of enemy who will make a complete ass out of Ron Paul if he were to be President (God forbid!).

>>Ron Paul is the best hope for this country. Preserving, protecting, and defending the US Constitution is the best way to insure security for the people and the “homeland”. He has my vote.
I don’t agree with all of his positions, but he is the candidate that most adheres to his oath to uphold the Constitution.
The problem is that (for now) he’s unelectable. FDR trashed the Constitution, created a dependent class, and most Americans don’t understand the Constitution (intentionally, thanks to our leftist public education system).
Someone like Paul might have a chance someday, but probably not until after Social Security, Medicare etc. collapse and default – after which Americans will discover the folly of socialism and dependency on government – and then may be open to rediscovering the genius underlying, and true application of, the Constitution.

>>What is all this about Rudy in a dress?
Some years ago he dressed in drag (I believe for a charity event). Google it and I’m sure you’ll find photos. Or here:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49595
The imagery for a potential President is terrible – and raises real questions about his judgment.
>>So, Tom W. who’s your dog… and what’s he got?
At this point …
Thompson by default – not perfect, but acceptably conservative (with a consistent record therefore). Readily acknowledging disappointment in his campaign performance thus far, and fear that unless he pulls a rabbit out of his hat very soon he’s toast.
If Romney gets the nomination I might hold my nose and vote for him, but won’t donate or volunteer time to help him beforehand.
If it’s Giuliani / Huckabee / McCain I’ll probably sit out voting in the Presidential race or vote for Ron Paul (or a third party candidate) as a protest vote (just as I did for Perot in 1992).

>>So when you don’t get a “conservative” of your definition, you go with the nut.
I support Republicans; I don’t support RINO’s.
If the so-called “Republican” nominee is some combination of pro-amnesty / pro-abortion / pro-gay marriage / pro-gun control, there’s no substantive difference from the Democrat. So there’s no upside point in voting for them, and much downside – it weakens the Republican Party over the long term.
A liberal claiming that they’ll be tougher in “The War on Terror” might make for a slightly less noxious Democrat candidate, but doesn’t make for an appealing Republican candidate. Trashing virtually every Republican principle in the name of “fighting the war on terror” is not a path I choose to go down.

Would Giuliani be better than Hillary in a “crisis” or in the “War on Terror?” Yes.
But I’m not going to let the 9/11 tail wag the dog on every other issue.
Giuliani would transform the GOP into a national version of the RIGOP: “me too Democrats” that stand for nothing and wonder why their party keeps shrinking.
No thanks.

>>For me its about the country much more than it is about the party.
Yes, but parties and politics determine the direction of our country.
>>But, I think the party’s platform on national security, the economy and immigration will improve under Rudy’s leadership.
How?
>>I don’t see Rudy trying to influence the party on the issues that scare you; abortion, guns, gays, etc.
He probably won’t try to influence the party on those issues. The problem is, neither will he oppose the Democrats in Congress on those issues – just like he did in NY.
>>Obviously he’ll want Repubicans to get elected to the House and Senate.
Maybe. OTOH, maybe he won’t really care.
>>And Rudy’s record in NYC goes far beyond 9-11. The city was crime-ridden, dirty and bankrupt when he took office. It was vibrant, clean and safe when he left office. No small feat for a Republican in liberal gotham.
Granted he did much to improve NY. He was a law and order liberal. That’s why I believe that a lot of the NYC based media wants him to be the Republican nominee – if the Democrat doesn’t win they get the next best thing – a liberal “Republican” – which they can live with.

I like Huckabee.What I like best is a quote from USA Today where he states he’s pretty matter of fact and a free wheeler. He almost assumes he’s going to say something that will get him into hot water, but said he’s not shying away from who he is.
I’ve always admired candidates like that and the more of the nation’s mayor I see the less I like. Same with Thompson. Same with Romney. The only candidate thus far that I am a little excited about is Huckabee.

Ron Paul is the only conservative running. America needs to stop being the world’s bully. Bully’s are hated and plotted against.
We need to mind our own business. Our business is defending the Mexican border which has been left wide open by traitors Bush and Clinton.
Despite Bush’s “wide open border” policy there hasn’t been a terrorist attack yet. We need to stop fearing the Al Qaeda boogeyman that DOES NOT exist.
We’re wasting a trillion dollars a year on the thirst for world domination while our country is collapsing from within both morally and economically, just like the “progressive” Soviet Union; yet, we are supposed to be in fear of some guy living in a cave, with no flush toilet, living on a transistor dialysis machine.
Grow up people. It’s your own government that’s the threat to everything you have not some chimera in a cave 6000 miles away.

Barry, your defense of Huckabee’s imigration policy explains why he’s not electable. If you have to explain it too much , you’ve already lost. The average voter won’t go that far to seek meaning. They want to undertand the candidates position without studying it. Same goes for the “Fair Tax”. Most voters won’t go for it because it takes too much splainin’. … another loser for Huckabee.
I’m very suspicious of the NEA’s endorsement of Huckabee. Are they just trying to knock Romney out?

Huckabee has long had the endorsement of the primary homeschooling legal association for good reason: he is the only governor who has appointed a representative of homeschooling on a state education board. It was primarily the homeschoolers and fair taxers (in addition to value voters)who got him the surprise early win in the Iowa straw vote. To say the man leading in his party’s first caucus state as well as nationally (ref.: Rasmussen), who is surging nationally while others are dropping, is vying for Vice President or is unelectable seems quite strange. [Would you say the same about Hillary?] He won the governorship in a very Democratic state, and apparently knows how to run a successful campaign. On another note, one should be cautious in seeing conspiracies where there may be better explanations.

From what I understand (correct me if I’m wrong) Huckabee supported last’s summer’s attempted amnesty bill. Let’s not forget that the illegal immigrant chicken processing industry (Tyson, etc.) are some of the biggest employers in Arkansas.
Huckabee went and spoke to the NEA, and obviously told them what they wanted to hear. There’s NO WAY they would have endorsed him if he’d offered even one hint of a pro-child / pro-parent / pro-taxpayer agenda. Maybe he figured the home schoolers wouldn’t find out. This from MSNBC:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/12/05/497082.aspx
The 16,000-member New Hampshire affiliate of the National Education Association has chosen to recommend to its members Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary and Mike Huckabee in the Republican primary, according to a source within the state NEA.This is the first time the state affiliate has picked a candidate in the GOP primary, and it follows Huckabee’s showing as the only Republican who spoke to the NEA convention in July.
The state chapter’s membership is more than 25% Republican, said the source, and the committee didn’t want those members to be ignored. When Huckabee spoke at the convention and participated in an interview with the state affiliate, deciding members felt it would be right to point that out to members. Only education and related positions were considered, and the board appreciated Huckabee’s “strong views on public education,” especially supporting the arts and music. The board might have felt differently if it had considered the former Arkansas governor’s opinions on “social values issues” and “war issues,” the source said.

Anyone else think that Giuliani is going to bed every night praying that Romney and Thompson stay in the race?
Huckabee would more than likely pick up votes if either Romney or Thompson dropped out and that looks to be enough to overtake Giuliani.
I agree with rhody. Huckabee has moved up because people feel he is intellectually honest.
Giuliani has been hurt because while he claims to be conservative, his pro-choice, pro-gun control and gay rights positions (even though he supports gay civil unions, but not marriage) make it difficult to believe is he conservative at all.
McCain has been hurt by his positions on the Bush tax cut, campaign fiance reform and a belief that he tried to re-package himself from a moderate into a conservative.
Romney has been hurt by his apparent flip-flops on abortion and gay rights that started with his run for Senate. His religion has been a factor with fundamentalist Christians.
Thompson was hurt by the revelation that he once lobbied for an abortion rights group that he couldn’t recall and accusations that he is lazy.
In the midst of all of it, Huckbee is benefiting from an appearance of consistency.
I don’t know if it attracts general election independent voters, but it’s the only reason that can explain how an underfunded B-list candidate has somehow put himself on the A-list.
Huckabee’s strategy appears to be waiting until the A-list candidates “re-invent” themselves to oblivion and attempting to walk over the dead bodies en route to the GOP nomination.
Talk about a weird election.

Anthony, Huckabee is anything but consistent. He’s an Arkansas smooth talker whose beating around the bush nearly rivals that of the more famous Arkansas smooth talkers. When challenged on his path to citizenship proposal for the children of immigrants, he gives a convoluted explanation attempting to appeal to both sides of the issue. When confronted about his tax record in Arkansas, he gives anyting but a comforting straight answer. If he had very good reasons for raising taxes, he should just say it. The spin leaves you wondering where he really stands.
I don’t like the fact that Rudy is pro-choice. But I love the fact that he’s been consistent and when asked about it he just says yes.
You’re right, all the candidates have problems. But I still think Huckabee will only shine in the very early contests. The only Republican who can go all the way is Rudy Giuliani.

Huckabee now has a 22 point lead over the next closest Republican in Iowa, essentially destroying the first part of Romney’s early state strategy.
Romney is still maintaining a strong lead in NH, which as a neighboring governor, is crucial for him. If Romney loses NH, he can’t win the election. Huckabee is the only candidate trending upwards in NH, but he hasn’t surged in NH like in Iowa. Giuliani and Thompson are taking nosedives, while McCain is staying steady.
Next up is Michigan which is anyone’s guess. Giuliani has been thought to hold a slight lead (under 5 points) over Romney, but Michigan moved its primary date up and some of the votes may not even count.
Romney is in the lead in Nevada, taking the top spot from Giuliani, but nobody appears to have any real depth of support in NV.
South Carolina comes next. At various points, Giuliani, Thompson and Romney polled in front, but all three candidates are freefalling and Huckabee has surged into the lead.
Next up is Florida, another state that may be penalized for moving its primary up. Giuliani has a huge lead and Romney is in second, but Huckabee has more than doubled his numbers in the past month, taking advantage of Thompson’s nosedive. McCain has stayed locked in 4th place.
The bright spot for Giuliani is that he should win California, New York and New Jersey. But if Huckabee catches fire in NH,NV or MI, the coasts might not be enough to carry Giuliani.

“At least President Bush cut taxes. With Mike Huckabee you don’t even have that,” he warned.”
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjZjYjYyZDEwMDIwYzJmN2Q0NWJmY2FmMWIxYjFiMTM=

The Detroit Free Press is speculating that Democrats will cross-over to vote for Huckabee in the Republican primary, thanks in part to Huckabee’s union endorsements. Sounds reminiscent of the RI Dems coming over to vote for RINO Lincoln Chafee now, doesn’t it?
http://www.eyeon08.com/2007/12/10/is-michigan-huckabees-firewall/
Huckabee endorsed by unions?
Marc Ambinder reports that the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers endorsed Mike Huckabee. I wonder how many of these are Republicans? Does it hurt Huckabee by confirming his less-than-conservative economic record?
http://www.eyeon08.com/2007/08/30/huckabee-endorsed-by-unions/