MB's "Damn Good Question" blog

[clayflingythingy]

Was thinking the blog was worthy of an honest and frank discussion. As some already know I live in a May primary state so I have no say in choosing the nominee. If I lived in an early state I would vote Fred.  I have never voted Dem for prez because of the gun issue. I am a small government conservative with libertarian leanings. Just wanted to get that out there for any newbies.

I may ramble a bit here so please excuse.

What was the purpose of supporting Fred? Was it only because he was an A+ 2A supporter or was it because he was "the only real conservative"? I am a single issue 2A voter. If we are single issue 2A voters then is it more important to back a losing candidate to the bitter end or try to influence another candidate who has a real shot at winning?

At what point do we say enuff, this guy's a loser? Huckster started surging in the polls in Nov and Fred started going down. Was it reasonable to switch then? Probably not, given the Obama surge in the close of the Ia campaign and his win. Fred announced in Dec he was going all in in Ia. He did his 50 city bus tour and came in third. BARELY beating McCain for the spot. Afterward, some looked forward to a Fred surge in NH. Others believed Fred would surge and win SC. However, there was little evidence to support these hopes. Polling had never shown Fred doing well in NH. Polling had shown Huckster surging in SC. Polls after Ia showed a McCain NH surge and Huckster running away with the SC vote.

After Ia may have been the time to start rethinking candidates.

Fred may very well come in behind Ron Paul today in NH.

Fred is not going to win in Mi next week.

SC is going to be a battle between Huckster and McCain.

Just where does Fred break out in the process? Truth is, he has nowhere to make a breakout. I live in a Bible Belt state. Surrounded by Southern Baptists. The buzz I am hearing from fundamentalist coworkers/friends/relatives is Huckster. Fundamentalists have one of their own to vote for and no one turns out like fundamentalists when they are fired up on an issue. This alone dooms Fred in SC and much (ALL?) of the south.

And don't discount Hucksters "little guy against the big guy" appeal in the south. Southern Repubs are working stiffs who vote on the gun issue or social issues in general. We aren't wealthy corporate fat cats. Hucksters message will be appealing across the south, and I expect, a good deal of the country in general.

So, if my ramblings are anywhere near correct (and they are supported by polling) Fred is now out of the race.

Do we, as 2A voters stick with Fred until the bitter end? Do we boycott the election? Or do we try to make a choice between the winner of Ia and the winner(s) of NH and Mi?

If, as expected, McCain wins NH today and then goes on to win Mi that sets up a Huckster/McCain battle in SC. Who do we support?

Or do we sit around hoping for the Fred surge that the evidence tells us isn't going to happen?

I am afraid we are in danger here of pissing away 2A voter clout. If 2A voters stick with Fred to the bitter end, and the best he ever wins is 3rd, what message does that send to the antigunners? My fear is the perception will be that 2A voters can no longer deliver.

Lastly, I think this election shows that 2A voters alone aren't a big enuff voting block to choose a nominee. Something we should keep in mind for the future.

[jaybet]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, all primaries the same day...we all vote, count them, and no one gets left out.

[DonWorsham]

Do we, as 2A voters stick with Fred until the bitter end? Do we boycott the election? Or do we try to make a choice between the winner of Ia and the winner(s) of NH and Mi?

Do we, as 2A voters stick with Fred until the bitter end? YES
Do we boycott the election? NO
Or do we try to make a choice between the winner of Ia and the winner(s) of NH and Mi? NO. We support the Republican nominee unless it is Ron Paul,  then we vote  Democratic.

[Michael Bane]

I'm thinking maybe Don is right. I will probably support the nominee with my vote, because I am a single-issue voter. I say probably because Romney is antigun. read Jeff at ALPHECCA's thoughful commentary on that issue today:

http://www.alphecca.com/?p=596

Mitt Romney has stated time and again (example) that he supports the “assault weapons” ban and as President would sign such legislation if it was presented to him. That would put three of the rifles and one pistol in my gun safe on the banned list. Firearms I enjoy for sporting purposes as well as for possible future self-defense.

And let me tell you this, folks, if he’s the President, the Democrat controlled congress would use that opportunity and promise to do just that. It’s safe to say that such new AWB legislation would not have the “sunset” provision the last one did.

Then what? The gun control politicians would see that it has no effect on criminals and, as California and NJ and other states did, would take the next step of confiscating the legally owned “assault rifles.”

Romney is also a fraud on a host of other issues but gun rights are the ones that protect all the others.

Again: I will never vote for Mitt Romney. Ever. I’d sooner trust my gun rights to McCain or Huckabee or even Giuliani who has said that he would not support a new AWB (whether I believe that or not is another story). Romney is right out front stating that if he becomes President there will be a new AWB.

So. That leaves a third party vote and right away everyone will jump on me and say, “That’s throwing away a vote. Do you want to see Hillary or Obama elected?”

And I’ll answer, “If that’s what it takes to bring the Republican party back to its roots, yes.”

Quite frankly, I believe that Huckabee = McGovern, as profound a disaster for the conservative cause, especially the libertarian branch of the family, as McGovern was for liberals. I do not believe there is a chance in the world that Huckabee can be elected. I do however believe that Huckabee can accomplish what his campaign manager Ed Rollins keeps crowing about — the final destruction of the old Reagan coalition.

I believe, as President Reagan so eloquently stated in his first Inaugural Address, "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

Michael B

[2HOW]

clayflingythingy, I support Fred because he is pro 2A , he is not a career politician, he did a good job for us in Tennessee, and he is not in anyones pocket. He also has some experience in foreign affairs and is a straight talker. Unfortunately Fred looks like he could care less, so my next choice is Huckabee.  But lets not forget that Obama is the next Kennedy

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

I'm in NH, I just voted for Fred, If he looses here I'd say Huckabee or Ron Paul. I'd not vote before I would vote for Obama, who will probably get the Dem nomonation. I would not even vote for Bill Richardson because of the Liberal baggage any democrat will have to bring with him no matter how good his own positions may be. While there probably are "good" democrats who don't worship Lenin and Marx, the moveon crowd has the Soros money therefore the influence in the party.

[jnevis]

Let me start off by saying I have a great deal of skepticism whenever ANY politician opens thier mouth.

While looking hard at Fred, why hasn't anybody mentioned Hunter? He's currently tied with Rudy and only slightly behind Paul and McCain.  He's NRA Rated A, wants us to finish what we started in Iraq but make  the Iraqis increasingly more responsible for their security, and has similar views on imigration and taxes.  I was just poking around Commie News Network and read their page on issues and canidate responses and he is similar to Fred in most of them.  His one flaw is that he is from CA (but so am I).

just askin

[gemurdock]

Do we, as 2A voters stick with Fred until the bitter end? YES
Do we boycott the election? NO
Or do we try to make a choice between the winner of Ia and the winner(s) of NH and Mi? NO. We support the Republican nominee unless it is Ron Paul,  then we vote  Democratic.

I'm thinking maybe Don is right. I will probably support the nominee with my vote, because I am a single-issue voter. I say probably because Romney is antigun. read Jeff at ALPHECCA's thoughful commentary on that issue today:

http://www.alphecca.com/?p=596

Quite frankly, I believe that Huckabee = McGovern, as profound a disaster for the conservative cause, especially the libertarian branch of the family, as McGovern was for liberals. I do not believe there is a chance in the world that Huckabee can be elected. I do however believe that Huckabee can accomplish what his campaign manager Ed Rollins keeps crowing about — the final destruction of the old Reagan coalition.

I believe, as President Reagan so eloquently stated in his first Inaugural Address, "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

Michael B

+1 on most of it

But I believe that Social Conservatives will not vote for Giuliani, McCain, or Romney, and fiscal Conservatives will not vote for Huckabee, in sufficient numbers to ever win the presidential election, and hopefully even the Republican primaries.  The only viable compromise candidate is really Fred in a brokered Republican Convention.  I do not see anyone getting more than 30%, 35% tops before September (fortunately).  And I would rather have my enemies in front of me, than behind me, so I would sit out the election if Fred is not the candidate.  Sad that it took Jimmy Carter to bring us Ronald Reagan, but I have found that compromising your principles never gets you what you hope.

George Murdock

[ismram]

+1 on most of it

But I believe that Social Conservatives will not vote for Giuliani, McCain, or Romney, and fiscal Conservatives will not vote for Huckabee, in sufficient numbers to ever win the presidential election, and hopefully even the Republican primaries.  The only viable compromise candidate is really Fred in a brokered Republican Convention.  I do not see anyone getting more than 30%, 35% tops before September (fortunately).  And I would rather have my enemies in front of me, than behind me, so I would sit out the election if Fred is not the candidate.  Sad that it took Jimmy Carter to bring us Ronald Reagan, but I have found that compromising your principles never gets you what you hope.

George Murdock

A non vote is a vote against the 2A! I am afarid that that if we get another Jimmy Carter (AKA Hitlery or Osama Bama) we may lose our rights never to get them back!

[tombogan03884]

I apoligize for my state being full of idiots. To many massholes infiltrated among the refugees from the nanny state.
 Tom in NH