Thursday, January 10, 2008

Republican Chaos

Iowa was Huckabee's, Wyoming Romney's and New Hampshire belonged to McCain. I think it's pretty fair to say that the Republican race is very chaotic and very wide open. Rudy is waiting for Super Tuesday and Thompson is hoping for the South.

Fred Thompson will most likely not stay in it too long because he basically has no strategy.

It's probably do or die for Romney in Michigan. He has lost two races in which he has outspent his opponents by at least 7 to 1 or more (not to mention one was his neighboring state) and he has run a pretty negative campaign, voters don't seem to respect that very much. Romney may not drop out after Michigan because he does have the money to stay in the race for a while, but it would be highly unlikely that he gets much support. If Romney cannot win Michigan (the state in which he was born and his father was governor), I think it's pretty fair to say that his chances are pretty much gone.

Rudy is putting all his dice in Florida, but that may not work with Huckabee right there with him. If Huckabee can pull off a victory or good showing in the states leading up to Florida and Super Tuesday, and it looks like he could, then he may get enough momentum to upset Rudy in Florida. A loss in Florida would greatly hurt Rudy's campaign and would give McCain and Huckabee a better chance to make it a two man race between them.

Huckabee got a huge boost from Iowa and showed that he is viable from his third place in New Hampshire. He is currently running second in Michigan and South Carolina to John McCain. A second place finish to McCain in Michigan would most likely knock Romney out of the running (although Romney would probably stay in a little longer because he has the money) and give him more support in the primaries following Michigan, but a loss in South Carolina could do great damage his campaign because of the number of Christians in South Carolina. If Huckabee cannot keep those evangelicals then he will lose his greatest base of support.

John McCain has the brightest future in this race (in my opinion). He proved, like Huckabee, that money will not buy an election and defeated Romney in New Hampshire. He is also showing the he is the most trustworthy by telling the truth about his record and just straight-talking with the people. He's stealing Romney's support in Michigan and Huckabee's evangelicals in South Carolina. Another advantage the McCain and Huckabee both enjoy is their ability to attract the Independent vote.

Now I just want to set a few things straight for the people: Romney attacked John McCain about his record on the Bush tax cuts. The truth about that, and what McCain makes very clear, is that he didn't support the tax cuts because they didn't have spending cuts along with them. Romney also attacked McCain on supporting Bush's immigration bill but fails to mention that he also supported it until he decided to run for President, just another one of those flip-flops that are so common in Romney.

Next comes Huckabee. Romney attacked Huckabee because he raised taxes in Arkansas, again Romney is not telling the whole truth. Huckabee raised taxes only after the people voted overwhelmingly for the increase with 70-80 percent in favor. Romney also fails to mention that he raised taxes in his own state (though he calls them fees). He has also claimed that Mike Huckabee gives illegals special privileges, which is not true. What he is talking about is Huckabbe allowing the children of illegals, who have attended Arkansas schools their entire education careers, to pay in-state tuition rates for college. What Romney makes it sound like is that Huckabee was letting any illegal come to Arkansas and get those rates and that's just not true.

I've had lots of respect for Mitt Romney and even supported him as my second choice until he started with a negative ads. A few negatives are ok, but when that's all you do it's not what people respect.

Thank you for reading and God Bless.

12 comments:

Bobb said...

I think that this post was biased against Mitt Romney. He seems to me to be the most dignified and intelligent of the candidates. I think Huckabee would be my second choice but McCain, though he is a patriot and a hero, I don't think would make a good president. Though we have differences of opinions, God Bless and thanks for being a conservative.

mud_rake said...

Have you ever thought of supporting a Democrat or are you stuck with these losers because you won't go "D"?

Fonso_2006 said...

To Bobb, it's not that I'm biased, I just don't like what Romney did in Iowa and New Hampshire. Other than that I do like him. I've made it clear in my previous entries that I would like Romney as my second. My first choice is Huckabee. Thanks for commenting.

To Mud_rake, I can't support the murder of innocent babies, undermining our military, stealing money from successful people and preventing Americans from protecting themselves with their own firearms. That's why I will not support the a Democrat (that's what you get from them).

Yankee Doodle said...

I have thought about supporting Zell Miller, and I have endorsed Her Finest in the Democrat Primary.

Speaking of stucked with losers, John Kerry just endorsed Barack Obama.

mud_rake said...

Which Democratic president 'killed more babies' than George Bush?

mud_rake said...

I'm waiting for an answer to my question.

Yankee Doodle said...

That would be Clinton, Clinton, and Clinton again.

mud_rake said...

Sorry, doodle, you weren't invited to answer.

Yankee Doodle said...

Let me tell you something, you are not the owner of this blog, so shut up. If anyone is not invited, it is you. Nobody invited you to this blog to demand answers to stupid questions.

mud_rake said...

Mr. Doodle- it looks like I have upset you. Was it something I said?

Barb said...

Hi fellahs! I love to see Mudrake bothering others --then I don't feel so special!!

Why should Mudly care WHO answers the question, just so it is answered.

Bush can't compare to the democrats who have endorsed the murder of 40,000 pre-born americans since 1973.

Fonso_2006 said...

Just so everyone knows, I did answer his question. I answered on his blog.