TOP

I’m Not Selling Out, I’m Not Backing Romney

Apr 14
Posted by kevintracy in 2004 Elections, 2008 Elections, 2012 Elections, Barack Obama, Democrat, McCain, Obama, Politicians, Politics, Presidential Race, Presidential Race, Republican, Romney, Socialized Medicine, Tea Party

For the past few years, I have been on tirade after tirade arguing that it’s a mistake to vote against someone, we should only vote FOR someone. In general, I think the American people tend to follow this principle. It’s when we enter into the realm of political activism that this principle (like many others) goes out the window. Don’t get me wrong, there are a lot of Republicans who agreed with me that we’re only going to defeat Barack Obama if we have a candidate with a message – that we need to defeat him with conservative ideas and policies. I’m not saying I’ve been a lonely voice all this time.

What I am saying is that most of these people who agreed with me just a few weeks ago are soon going to flip-flop their way onto an enormous hypocrite bandwagon. Pretty soon, -according to these folks- the worst candidate in the Republican field will suddenly be the savior of conservatism, patriotism, and sanity in the United States. He’s going to be the greatest thing since Ronald Reagan. And when Mitt Romney loses, they’ll pretend like it never happened.

How do I know this?

That’s easy. Because it happened four years ago.

In 2006, I made it very clear to everyone that John McCain was on my short list of politicians I would NEVER support for President. In addition to telling San Francisco newspapers that he supported abortion, McCain’s blatant and aggressive support for blanket amnesty in 2006 was a sign to me that he was a leading figure in the BETRAYAL of Republican voters in 2004 – who delivered crushing defeats to Democrats that year. What’s more, a lot a conservatives agreed. John McCain was targeted by Sean Hannity and other conservative commentators for a long time after that.

And then he won the demolition derby that was the 2008 primary process. Suddenly, John McCain was Sean Hannity’s favorite Republican (at least until he picked Sarah Palin as his running mate). Likewise, most of the other bloggers and conservatives who once agreed with me, now were appalled that I was keeping my word… I wasn’t voting for John McCain.

Thomas Jefferson once said we should “Never put off till tomorrow what you can do today.” So let me save myself the time of having to write exactly this in 2016.

In 2008, I made it very clear to everyone that Mitt Romney was on my short list of politicians I would NEVER support for President. In addition to running left of Ted Kennedy for US Senate, Mitt Romney’s socialized medicine program provides tax-payer funded abortions on-demand. And throughout most of the next four years, it seemed obvious that these positions were a BETRAYAL of the principles and values that rallied the Republicans in 2010 to deliver crushing defeats to Democrats that year. What’s more, a lot of conservatives agreed. Mitt Romney was targeted by Sean Hannity and other conservative commentators for a long time for his Romneycare program.

And then Mitt Romney out-spent his conservative rivals 50-1 to buy the Republican nomination with more than a year’s worth of deceitful and slanderous attack ads. Suddenly, Mitt Romney was Sean Hannity’s favorite Republican. Likewise, most other bloggers and conservatives who once agreed with me, now were appalled that I was keeping my word… I wasn’t voting for Mitt Romney.

I can’t wait to link back to this post. :)

Read More
Comments (4)
TOP

Mitt Romney: Worse Than McCain?

Mar 17
Posted by kevintracy in 2008 Elections, 2012 Elections, Cain, Clinton, Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson, Gingrich, Huckabee, McCain, Obama, Paul, Paul, Pawlenty, Perry, Politics, Presidential Race, Presidential Race, Romney, Romney, Santorum, Tommy Thompson

First of all, if you don’t know, I’ve recently bought my first home and finding the time to write a blog post is very difficult when there’s painting, moving, unpacking, framing, hanging, shopping, and yard work to be done.  It’s even more difficult when you don’t have vacation time to get it all done in.  Thankfully, unlike my other moves to Texas, California, and Virginia; I have a ton of family around and a fiancee and her family all in the area to assist me.  In fact, I’m squeezing this blog post in between doing some yard work with Krista and leaving to go to Ikea with my parents for shelves and possibly more (I’m not usually a fan of Ikea, but they do tend to have some clever and stylish storage solutions).

Anyway, enough of that and more politics.

Watching the 2012 Republican Presidential Primary play out instantly brings comparisons to the 2008 cycle.  I mean heck, Romney is Romney.  Ron Paul is Ron Paul, just more of a populist this time around.  Santorum is Huckabee’s evangelical side while Gingrich is his “think-outside-the-box” side.  Rick Perry’s performance was a mirror image of that of Fred Thompson, just add alcohol and pot.  Tim Pawlenty was like Tommy Thompson (if you don’t remember who these people are, you just proved my point).  Herman Cain was a lot like Duncan Hunter, a very intelligent and well-spoken conservative who just lacked the what it took to be our candidate (Hunter lacked leverage and Cain lacked the ability to keep it in his pants).

The only thing we don’t have in 2012 that we had in 2008 was a moderate war hero who spent his political career selling out conservatives and costing us elections across the country in 2008 as well as 2006.  John McCain, in my opinion, was the worst Republican candidate our party had fielded in a very long time (worse than Gerald Ford – who unfairly gets a bad wrap for being the only unelected President in history).  This isn’t to say he’s the worst candidate ever, though he was a horrible candidate.  For the Republican Party, John McCain winning that demolition derby primary was probably the worst thing that could have happened to us.

Or is it?  By this time four years ago, John McCain had pretty much secured the Republican nomination.  Yes, Mike Huckabee was still hanging in there, but I think we can all admit now that the writing was on the wall after Huckabee lost South Carolina.

What does it say about Mitt Romney that, although he’s leading, the nomination is far from secured and there are increasing talks of an old fashioned brokered convention?  What does it say about Mitt Romney that the only reason he’s winning most of his primaries is because Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum are splitting the conservative vote?  Keep in mind, after South Carolina in 2008, Mike Huckabee (who was a much better campaigner than Rick Santorum) was the only Republican left in the race with any kind of enthusiasm behind him; which left McCain with the moderate and the “I want to vote for the winner!” zombie voters.

If you’re going to win the Presidency, you NEED your party’s activists to be enthusiastic about your candidacy.   The only people enthused about Mitt Romney are the people his campaign is buying off with promises of power, support, and money after he becomes President.  Those in the Republican Party who think ideas are the things to get excited about are rejecting Romney, just like they rejected McCain.  And look how that turned out.

Now, there’s one important key difference between the 2008 and 2012 Republican Primaries.  In 2008, almost all of the states were “winner take all.”  In 2012, a lot of states are using the proportional delegate system; which is similar to what Democrats were using in 2008 and what enabled that primary race to go on as long as it did.

By the way, did that long primary against Hillary Clinton hurt Barack Obama in 2008?  No.  The long primary isn’t going to hurt us, either.  And it certainly can’t hurt us anywhere near as much as a McCain 2008 or Romney 2012 nomination.

Proportionally dividing the delegates by states really minimizes some of Mitt Romney’s most important political wins in this cycle.  Michigan and Ohio were so close, for example, that the delegates were split almost evenly between Santorum and Romney.  The big difference in this race is that Mitt Romney is winning the few states without a proportional delegate system; including delegate heavyweight Florida.

By the rules of the last cycle, Mitt Romney would already be our candidate.

So is Mitt Romney worse than John McCain?  It doesn’t really matter.  Neither candidate is able to get the base enthused and neither one could beat Barack Obama; who the left is still enthused about (despite what Fox News may tell you).

Read More
Comments (6)
TOP

Mitt Romney is a guarantee Barack Obama will be re-elected

Feb 06
Posted by kevintracy in 2008 Elections, 2012 Elections, Barack Obama, Gingrich, McCain, Obama, Politicians, Politics, Presidential Race, Republican, Romney, Santorum, Tea Party

20120206-101646.jpg… and for the same reason John McCain lost the 2008 presidential election the moment he secured the nomination.

Look at the exit polls and see what the number one reason is that a Republican primary voter or caucus goer votes for Mitt Romney.

The answer: Can Defeat Barack Obama.

Why do they say he can defeat Barack Obama? Well, the media never asks that question in their exit polls; but I think we can safely conclude it has something to do with his massive amounts of money.

There is one enormous problem with this conclusion, though. It takes a lot more than money to win an election. The thing Republicans have generally failed to realize over the last six years is that you when give people something to vote for, you win elections. On the other hand, when you only offer reasons for voters to vote against something, they are far more likely to stay home. Whether we want to admit it or not, Americans are very apathetic and giving them a reason not to do something (ie. not to vote for your opponent) is guaranteeing your voter turnout will be low.

Now, progressive readers and some objective critical readers of this blog might counter that the Tea Party movement was dangerous in how extreme its hatred of Barack Obama was and that resulted in votes in the 2010 election.

I would argue, however, that the initial success of the Tea Party was the intense (and suppressed) desire of Republicans To have something to support. The Tea Party offered a platform of limited government, limited spending, and personal responsibility. In fact, as I’ve been saying for a while, the extreme hatred of Barack Obama (mixed with their frequent support of extremist and anti-conservative candidates and policies) was what caused the total implosion of the Tea Party movement across most of the country.

Mitt Romney is going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars telling Americans not to vote for Barack Obama again. What little he spends selling himself will be spent on generic messages with lots of American flags, lots of children, and lots of symbolism; but very few specifics (because he doesn’t have a lot of specifics that voters will like).

Republicans seem a little blind as to the reason of Barack Obama’s success. He wins not because he can raise mind blowing amounts of money, but because he promises action.

I’m not saying these actions are necessarily positive. In fact, this has nothing to do with policy. This has to do with offering something, anything, other than attacks.

I will not vote for Mitt Romney because he has given nobody any reason to vote FOR Mitt Romney.

Read More
Comments (7)
TOP

Romney Skipping Ames Staw Poll

Jun 10
Posted by kevintracy in 2008 Elections, 2012 Elections, Huckabee, Iowa, McCain, Politics, Presidential Race, Presidential Race, Romney, Romney

Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign has reportedly made the decision not to compete in the 2011 Ames Staw Poll. I have to admit that I’m a little bit surprised considering he won in landslide fashion in 2007 after McCain, Giuliani, and a then un-declared Fred Thompson decided not to compete.

The win solidified his status as the only top-tier candidate in the state. Huckabee came in a distant second place, but narrowly managed to edge out Sam Brownback, who was about even with Huckabee for the title of “best-of-the-rest.”

I’m by no means a Romney supporter, let alone an insider. Nor am I closely following this race since I doubt the GOP has a candidate that can defeat Obama. However, this development from the Romney camp is interesting.

There are three reasons not to compete. First, and most obviously, would be because you think you might lose. However, given that much of Romney’s 2007/2008 infrastructure in Iowa is still intact and no other serious candidate is in the race from four years ago, I seriously doubt Romney is afraid of losing.

The second reason not to compete is money. But Mitt Romney has plenty of that… Or does he?

Okay. He does. But Romney still spent a LOT on his 2008 bid and every dollar he spends in on this 2012 bid is being added to his 2007/2008 spending to become President. Although a lot of his money comes from the Mormon community and Massachusetts donors, Mitt Romney has invested a lot of his personal time and money to this cause. Somewhere, there’s a limit and the extravagant personal spending and investment of 2007/2008 may not be matched this time around.

The third reason not to run is because it takes you off topic. Iowa voters are values voters. Even though Romney does claim to be pro-life and anti-gay marriage, that’s not the message of his campaign. Romney sees the economic challenges the entire country is facing as an opportunity to beat Obama on the one issue he is universally viewed as weak on.

Let’s face it, we’re not going to beat Obama on opposing homosexuals in the military. We’re going to beat him on his failure to improve the crappy economy he inherited from President Bush. Opps! I mean “intentionally destroying the flourishing and prosperous economy he inherited from President Bush!!!”. I forgot that some of my fellow Republican readers sometimes have double standards.

If Romney competed at Ames, he would have to derail his exclusive economic message for at least a week or two. In the process, he knows he could turn off a few socially progressive moderates who he might desperately need in November 2012.

Still, I think this is an awful idea (not that I’m complaining, because I want him to lose). This is a solid opportunity to put a nail in the coffin of Newt Gingrich and call out the posers like Pawlenty, Bachman, Santorum, and the like.

Between dividing up the anti-Romney vote between themselves and lacking any kind of significant infrastructure, Romney would demolish the field.

Instead, this opens the door for the winner of the straw poll, and possibly the runner up, to potentially gain the momentum needed to upset Romney in Iowa (again).

The only problem he might have would be if Sarah Palin got in the race just before the event or announced her candidacy first thing that morning. However, it’s starting to look like Palin is going to sit this one out.

The real function of the Ames Straw Poll is to test your infrastructure well in advance of the Iowa Caucus. This gives the candidates the time they need to fix problems and fill gaps.

Romney’s infrastructure has been tested twice in the state in 2007 and 2008. Plus, I’m sure his PAC had plenty of victories in Iowa in 2010. From the housekeeping point of view, it’s money that doesn’t need to be spent. But the Ames Straw Poll is also an iconic event for Iowa Republicans. By not competing in 2007, Giuliani, McCain, and Fred Thompson all ensured their defeat. In the eyes of voters, not competing in the Ames Straw Poll is little different than ignoring the state entirely and they’ll remember that not only in the Caucus, but also in the General Election.

Mitt Romney has some really smart people working for him, so I’m sure I’m probably missing something pretty significant that could make this all make sense. If you think you know what’s going on in the minds of Romney’s people, let me know.

Or is it just that all the hair product is finally taking its toll on their cognitive abilities?

One thing is for sure, however: Ron Paul is an idiot.

Read More
Comments (0)
TOP

Rudy Giuliani to Charlie Crist: Go F* Yourself

Apr 03
Posted by kevintracy in 2008 Elections, 2010 Elections, Crist, Florida, Florida Senate Race, Giuliani, McCain, Presidential Race, Rubio

Okay, he didn’t actually say that. But you’re reading aren’t you? That there is a good title.

Seriously though, Former-Mayor and Presidential Candidate Rudy Giuliani is getting his revenge against Charlie Crist who backed out of his endorsement at the last minute to support John McCain in the Florida Primary. Crist’s betrayal of Rudy Giuliani was the final nail in the coffin of his 2008 Presidential aspirations. Well, Rudy knows how to hold a grudge and he’s back in Florida… campaigning for Marco Rubio.

Granted, Rudy Giuliani isn’t the most conservative Republican in the history of the GOP. But Rubio didn’t endorse him, Crist did. It just so happened that Giuliani is now supporting Rubio and, because of Giuliani’s service to this country in the aftermath of 9/11, he’s a great somebody to have campaigning for you.

I guess this just goes to prove that what goes around, comes around. Charlie Crist appears to be learning this the hard way, as yet another nail is placed in his political coffin.

If you’re in Florida and would like to attend this free, public rally, here’s what you need to know:

Monday, April 5, 2010
Rudy Giuliani to campaign with Marco Rubio.
Doors open at 10:30 a.m. EDT
Renaissance at the Gables
2340 SW 32nd Avenue
Miami, FL 33145

Read More
Comments (0)
TOP

Upcoming Porno Based on Sarah Palin’s Time as Governor

Oct 14
Posted by kevintracy in 2008 Elections, Alaska, Film, McCain, Palin, Presidential Race

You have no idea how much I hate to talk about this, but there’s an upcoming porno so tactfully (sarcasm) titled, “Nalin’ Palin” that’s unfortunately going to become one of the largest grossing films of this genre and, of course, it’s going to be coming out before the election.

Supposedly, the script revolves around several Russians whose tanker broke down and came knocking on Governor Palin’s backdoor. The film will also supposedly feature a three-way procreational scene with her, Condi Rice, and Hillary Clinton. In a flashback, a college professor will explain to Sarah Palin the “Big Bang Theory.” Yeah, supposedly the script took an entire three days to write. Quality stuff right there.

Playing the role of Sarah Palin is adult film star Lisa Ann and the film is being pushed out by Hustler.

Needless to say, this is probably going steal the title of “Least Tactful Political Drama” from Oliver Stone’s “W.” during this year’s award ceremonies. I feel really bad for Track Palin, the Governor’s eldest son, who is undoubtedly going to be harassed for this movie in the military.

I make it a point not to touch hookers, enter strip clubs, or watch pornography – which means that I won’t actually be reviewing the film on this blog, but at least now we know what to get John McCain for Christmas.

Read More
Comments (0)
TOP

State Polls Show Obama with a Significant Advantage over John McCain

Oct 13
Posted by kevintracy in 2008 Elections, McCain, Obama, Presidential Race

According to the latest Gallup Poll, Barack Obama is holding a 10% lead over John McCain with barely three weeks remaining until the November Election. For many Republicans, that’s enough of an advantage to the Democratic Ticket. But unfortunately for those few conservatives blindly standing by the candidate who screwed them over too many times to count over the last few years, the bad news doesn’t end there.

Take a look at the Real Clear Politics Average of 2008’s Battle Ground States. I’ll organize and color code this for you:

Bush States in 2004
Ohio – Obama 48.8% to 45.6%
Nevada – Obama 49.2% to 46.8% *
North Carolina – Obama 47.8% to 46.8%
Missouri – Obama 49% to 46.8%
Indiana – McCain 48.8% to 45% *
West Virginia – McCain 46.5% to 44.3% *
Colorado – Obama 49.3% to 45.3% *
Florida – Obama 50% to 45%
Virginia – Obama 50.6% to 44.1%
Georgia – McCain 50.8% to 44%
New Mexico – Obama 49.8% to 42.5% *
Iowa – Obama 52.8% to 41% *

Kerry States in 2004
Wisconsin – Obama 51.4% to 42.6%
Minnesota – Obama 51.3% to 43%
Michigan – Obama 49.1% to 41.3%
Pennsylvania – Obama 53.4% to 40%
New Hampshire – Obama 52% to 41.6%

* = John McCain can afford to lose only one of these states. He needs to sweep the rest of the Bush States to win in November.

It doesn’t stop there either. Also released by Gallup were numbers about enthusiasm for their candidates. 51% of Republicans said they were more enthusiastic about voting than in previous years. I know the people over at Gallup are my polling Gods and Goddesses, but I have to think that 51% figure is inflated by Republicans just doing what the party tells them to do and not what they actually think. 71% of Democrats said the same thing about Barack Obama.

In 2004, Bush had a slight edge over John Kerry when the same question was asked over this same period of time, 68% to 67%. In fact, throughout the entire 2004 campaign, enthusiasm from Republicans never dropped below 51%. John McCain’s low mark is 35% a couple months ago, which suggests the fear-mongering on behalf of the McCain campaign is accomplishing something.

What should trouble McCain more are the number of Less Enthusiastic Republicans this year. 40% said they were less enthusiastic about McCain in 2008 than they have been in previous years. Compare that to just 15% for Barack Obama. They say an elephant never forgets, I guess that includes 40% of the Republican base. The number comes as a surprise since so many Clinton voters were screaming Jihad over Obama’s surprise win of the nomination, but when push comes to shove, everyone ignores the fact that more Republicans voted against John McCain in the Republican Primaries than they did for him.

Hurting McCain in this Gallup data are comments he had to correct during his campaign rallies about Barack Obama being dangerous, evil, and “an Arab.” Independents and even many conservatives do not want to be associated with the racists and crazies that have been flocking to McCain rallies lately, which is naturally going to cause them to keep their distance from McCain.

It’s ironic that the same people who are playing “guilt by association” games are, in the process, making themselves the victim of it.

Read More
Comments (0)
TOP

Mike Huckabee Suggests “Economic Terrorism” Responsible for Continued Economic Pain

Oct 12
Posted by kevintracy in 2008 Elections, Crime, Digital, Economy, Global War on Terrorism, Huckabee, Internet, McCain, National Security, Politics, Presidential Race

Mike Huckabee is a pretty likable guy, but as you probably remember during the Republican Primary, I’ve never shied away from expressing my opinion when the former Arkansas Governor and my pick for President in 2008 was wrong about something. This weekend, Governor Huckabee has been making the rounds both on his show and across Fox News Channel suggesting that the continued failure of the US Economy is due to “Economic Terrorism” citing trends in the last moments of trading where large numbers of computer users begin suddenly selling their shares, causing the markets to close lower than they otherwise would have.

Just today, a friend of mine in the financial markets indicated that he’s been doing a careful analysis of the last 12 days, and there seems to be a manipulation of the marketplace – at the last half-hour of each day, there is an extraordinary rush of computerized trading going on. He believes that there may, in fact, be evidence of economic terrorism that is fueling a lot of what’s going on. Now it’s a fascinating idea, that if somebody could break down the world economy, it would have a greater impact that any bomb ever set off. It seems to be there is plausible argument for it.

What?! This is honestly the sort of wacky conspiracy theory I would have expected from Sean Hannity (a first class patriotic idiot) or Sarah Palin, not Mike Huckabee. I’d really like to blame this on the McCain campaign for using Huckabee to float a trial balloon, but Governor Huckabee hasn’t exactly been cozy with John McCain and I doubt they’d use him to float the trial balloon.

The more realistic explanation is that the average Joe Schmoe, who does his trading from online in his living room, has lost all faith in the market and is pulling out before he loses everything. The people have no faith in the economy and while it’s lovely to say the American Worker is the hardest working in the world, that doesn’t mean as much when they’re worried about finding or keeping a job. Additionally, as investment brokers deal with clients who want their money out, they are forced to sell those stocks to accommodate their customers.

What Huckabee has unintentionally done is call the American people terrorists for pulling out of the stock market and keeping their money under their mattress where it’s safe. I know he didn’t mean to do that and I know he doesn’t think that about the struggling American workers, but this is the kind of asinine idea that’s going to come back to bite him in the ass in three years if he runs for President again.

Now, what probably happened was that Huckabee was looking for a way to get involved in this general election. As we all know, the McCain campaign seems to believe that a huge terrorist attack would spell victory for John McCain on Election Day. Well, since the odds of a terrorist attack between now and Election Day are pretty small, why not invent a terrorist attack? One that would make John McCain the expert on the economy because it had to do with his “specialty issue” – national security.  BRILLIANT!

Obviously, this ridiculous idea isn’t sticking and nobody is buying into Huckabee’s notion that terrorists are intentionally throwing Trillions of dollars into our stock market with the intent of losing as much as it as possible. Huckabee better pray that nobody remembers this unfortunate and embarrassing event in a few years.

Read More
Comments (0)
TOP

Russia Can’t Be Allowed To Overthrow Tbilisi… but what options do we have?

Aug 11
Posted by kevintracy in 2008 Elections, International, McCain, National Security, Politics, Presidential Race, Russia, Russo-Georgian War (2008)

Russian ground forces have begun operations in Georgia outside of the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. While I still doubt Russia is going to try and overthrow Tbilisi’s regime, we need to be prepared for that event. The question is: what should our response be?

Even though this is Tbilisi’s fault, they are still an ally of the United States… and I have a feeling we may have put them up to this behind closed doors, which probably makes us a little more responsible than anybody’s admitting.

Economic sanctions won’t stop Russia because their sphere of influence is completely opposite of ours and our economies couldn’t be more disconnected. This is why I’ve been advocating closer US-Russo ties over the past 5 years, we’d have more leverage economically and it wouldn’t be in their best interest to continue the conflict.

A military response, as war mongers like John McCain are encouraging, would be absolutely disastrous. Thankfully, I think the President is smart enough not to pursue that course of action.  The truth of the matter is that the United States CANNOT be involved in an armed conflict with a country like Russia right now. As it is, our military has been stretched thin and our entire mentality has shifted to fighting an asymmetric war against a radical insurgency. Russia is NOT an asymmetric threat and we would be in a really bad position if we had to pull forces out of Iraq and Afghanistan to fight in the colder mountainous Caucasus region. The military option is not an option.

So if we can’t pressure Russia economically and we can’t become militarily involved, what options do we have left to protect the small American ally if Russia decides to press forward and implement a plan for regime change in Tbilisi?

Read More
Comments (0)
TOP

Romney Loses New Hampshire

Jan 09
Posted by kevintracy in 2008 Elections, Florida, Fred Thompson, Huckabee, Iowa, McCain, Michigan, New Hampshire, Paul, Presidential Race, Romney, South Carolina

How many Massachusetts millionaires does it take to screw in a light bulb? It doesn’t matter, this one’s chances at winning the nomination are decimated!!! McCain is surging in the polls now, mostly at the expense of Rudy Giuliani, and Mike Huckabee is for the first time at the head of the Republican pack according to the Real Clear Politics (RCP) average. Going into Michigan, the battle is really between John McCain and Mike Huckabee. Loser Mitt Romney is going into New Hampshire after having been dealt a knock-out blow in Iowa by Mike Huckabee and then was formally killed in New Hampshire by John McCain. Michigan, for Mitt Romney, is little more than a symbolic return to his old stomping grounds where his political career will hopefully be laid to rest.

During the first few weeks of December, when the last polls in Michigan were taken, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney were neck and neck for the lead. John McCain’s numbers were inconsistent, fluctuating up and down by as much as 10%. With Romney losing both of the first two important contests, his numbers in Michigan are without a doubt down and Mike Huckabee and John McCain are sure to see a bounce from Romney’s fall.

Depending on where John McCain’s real numbers are, this could potentially be another blowout for Mike Huckabee. Now, I’m not predicting that, there’s hardly enough evidence in the polls to back that up. But it is possible. I don’t know if anyone watched John McCain’s acceptance speech, but he was reading it off a piece of paper like a nervous child. It really was a good speech content wise, but the delivery was terrible. I’m not sure why McCain didn’t have teleprompters, but if this is what he looks like this on the campaign trail, McCain’s numbers in Michigan are going to be terrible.

Several months ago, when I laid out Huckabee’s game plan, I told you that Huckabee didn’t have to beat Romney in New Hampshire (admittedly thinking Romney would win the contest), all he had to do was defeat Rudy Giuliani. And he did that. At the time Rudy had a strong lead in South Carolina and a defeat of Rudy in both Iowa and New Hampshire would have seriously helped Huckabee win the first southern state. Since then, Huckabee has secured a solid lead in South Carolina (despite Fred Thompson), but the importance of the 3rd place finish over Giuliani is still the same. Instead of South Carolina, Huckabee is going to need that momentum to defeat Giuliani in Florida. Defeating Giuliani there will make February 5th a cakewalk for the former Arkansas Governor.

Huckabee, despite the momentum and increased fundraising, doesn’t have the national organization he needs to finish off his competitors on Super Duper Tuesday. A win in Florida will make that largely irrelevant. Hopefully by this time, Fred Thompson (who finished tied with Duncan Hunter at 1% in New Hampshire) will have dropped out of the race, which will help Huckabee considerably.

The only other candidate I want to discuss is Ron Paul. After meeting some of his less-stoned supporters in Iowa, I have a bit more respect for him. His anti-war rhetoric is starting to die down a little bit and he is starting to showcase his Libertarian domestic policies, which many Republicans, including myself, like a lot. That said, despite all the money, all the attention, and even a giant blimp, Ron Paul has failed to do anything impressive when it comes to mobilizing the supporters when the time comes to vote. I was hoping Paul could beat Thompson in Iowa – he couldn’t. I was hoping Ron Paul could beat Rudy Giuliani in New Hampshire – he couldn’t.

While Paul’s internet campaign is very impressive, the ground game is hardly anything extraordinary. At least in Iowa, the Ron Paul campaign picked some very unpopular people to run their campaign, but that should have effected the poll numbers, not the voter turnout. Maybe when things start calming down after February 5th, I’ll look into the topic a little more closely. If you have any ideas, feel free to share them in the comments section.

Read More
Comments (0)