No wonder he never polled above 1%
January 23rd, 2008 by joe
Duncan Hunter endorses the Huckster.
And yes, that faint popping sound you just heard was my head exploding.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 23rd, 2008 at 3:49 pm and is filed under Campaign 2008. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 23rd, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Translation, Hunter realizes McCain is simply to dangerous to allow anywhere near the Whitehouse.
However, he picked the wrong guy at the wrong time.
Listening to Mark Levin tonight on the radio, as I do every night, it is his contention, and I agree that any conservative with 1/2 a brain should be backing or voting for Romney or Rudy in Florida in order to stop the McCain train.
Hunters pick and timeing are bad. He should have gone to Florida and endorsed one of the other two or waited until the day before Super Tuesday and endorsed the strongest challenger.
In 1.25 days noone is going to care what Duncan Hunter did or will do. This was politically naive.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:03 am
It DOES make sense if you look at it from the religious point of view. Many evangelicals won’t support Romney because they believe he is a member of a non-Christian cult. Hunter & Huckabee - birds of a feather in this case.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:06 am
I am surprised that Hunter would back a an economic populist. Guess Hunter ain’t nowhere hear as smart as I thought. Or, he is ticked at the rejection, and this is a way to stick his finger in the eye of the party. Because I feel that Huckabee is more dangerous than McLame to the country the party and the economy.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:20 am
All three of you make excellent points. What I would give to corner Hunter and just ask him!
I got the sense there was some frustration within the campaign that he was not getting more support. The way I see it, he wasn’t getting the traction. I don’t know why. Just like Tancredo’s campaign, they were pretty disorganized. On top of that, Hunter really did not get to stand out in the debates. Neither he nor Tancredo, unfortunately, have the speaking gift that the Huckster has so there was no bump from any of the debates.
After he and Tancredo wowed us at CPAC almost a year ago, I thought for sure one of them was going to be in it until the end.
There was an interesting segment on Lou Dobbs last night and one of the guests noted that Americans “get the President they deserve.” They used the example of how Bush’s basically good idea of tackling Social Security went nowhere.
Both Hunter and Tancredo were largely focused on the very real problems we are facing, and maybe the typical American does not want to face them.
January 24th, 2008 at 1:45 am
Listen, I agree McCain is dangerous (McCain Feingold / bush’s illegal amnesty plan / and voting to kill good bills in committee year after year) but Guiliani is even more dangerous. Don’t forget that character counts.
January 24th, 2008 at 7:43 am
How anybody could think that Tancredo would have a shred of a chance must not have had a good think. He had absolutely no depth; a one-issue candidate if there ever was one. McCain isn’t perfect, but among the remaining candidates, he’s the best IMO.
January 24th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Lovisa,
When playing chess or checkers, you don’t make the move that causes your opponent to look happy. McLame and Huckabee make Democrats happy. Guess what, that means they are poison. Got it? If you really want us to like those two characters, attack them.
OK, I am lying. I have already made up my mind with those two and your liking them only confirms my estimate of them.
LC,
giulliani is less dangerous than McLame or Huck. He does not claim to be something he is not and more importantly he has kept his word in the political arena far better than either of those two.
His personal life is a mess. I won’t argue that.
McLame has a bad habity of making enemies of those who disagree with him AND those run against him in camapaigns. He has vilated far more of the ten republican commandments than Rudy.
January 24th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Jacob, What do you think about Romney? You may have thrown out your opinion but I did not catch it.
What if the Dems and media are playing a game and really are not scared of McCain? Are they that smart or in that much collusion?
January 24th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Forgot to add, when I heard Hunter endorsed Huckabee I said “That dirty dog.” I like Levin’s (and by extension G. Stone’s)hypothesis. His endorsement could have meant much more if he had waited.
January 24th, 2008 at 11:58 am
Option 1
He is supporting the religious angle.
Option 2
He is banking on Huckleberry as being the “most favored” candidate.
(with Hunter’s poor showing, how many votes will he really sway)
Option 3
He is trying to sink Huckleberry’s ship before the conservative south vote.
(to seal that deal he should have backed Paul).
This, to me, is just further evidence why you can NEVER trust a politician.
January 24th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
The fact that both Hunter and Tancredo were in this race at the same time, both from the lower house actually worked against our cause. The fact that both got zippy traction, flamed out early with little fanfare will be used by our opponents ( those who want to bury illegals as an issue )and the media. We are already hearing this from some of the knuclehead pundints- see immigration is not a big issue with voters, Tancrado and Hunter are gone with little or no support. My take is there was never enough room for them both anyway. Second they are both congressmen with only regional recognition. The house of represenatives is not the platform to launch a presidential run.
They are both smart , conservative and thoughtful men. Neither of these guys have many fans in the media. Let’s face it, they are outspoken conservatives and therefore the enemy of the MSM. They were marginalized from day one. Tancredo as Johnnie one note and Hunter as another boring conservative.
January 24th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
jacob - I’m flattered beyond belief that my opinion means so much to you.
January 24th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
Lovisa,
deary, take the time to read the whole comment, your opinion does not mean anything to me.
January 24th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
cathymac,
I am liking Romney better and better. I saw him on a few talk shows. He is very light on his feet, and, he has a lot of ideas. His breadth of knowledge on a host of issues is actually impressive.
Is he my ideal candidate. No. But he beats McLame and Huckybaby. The choice is narrowing down to Romney, Paul or Rudy. I think Rudy may not last till the 5th. We shall see.
“Are they that smart or in that much collusion?” In collusion and when it comes to winning election they are that smart. Never think your enemy is dumb. Even when he thinks you are.
January 24th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
Anyone watch the debate? Not much to write home about. I thought Romney did well. Huckabee’s good-ole-down-home-funny-dude schtick is getting a bit old.
January 25th, 2008 at 8:18 am
I was at Church last night so I missed it. Did McLame step on his tongue?