Search | Recent Topics
Author Message
CaliforniaArchitect
Junior

Joined: November 02, 2007 22:03:49 UTC
Messages: 50
Offline

Could it be this story? Fred T is the only major candidate showing a significant downward drop since this rumor started circulating. How does one verify it?



Is the LA Times Sitting on a Bombshell Story That Could Devastate a Major Candidate?

http://www.blogsforfredthompson.com/la-times-sitting-bombshell-story-could-devastate-major-candidate
DFCSTech
Junior

Joined: October 20, 2007 21:45:36 UTC
Messages: 76
Location: Oklahoma
Offline

The reason Fred is tanking big-time has nothing to do with that, because nobody even knows about that yet.

He's tanking because he has attended the debates and everyone saw him act like this... http://www.itsaboutideas.com/


-----------------------------------
http://www.clintononobama.blogspot.com
[WWW]
CaliforniaArchitect
Junior

Joined: November 02, 2007 22:03:49 UTC
Messages: 50
Offline

Interesting website.

Who can actually debate Hillary without being mad at her?

How important is that?

Also, you neglect Duncan Hunter. Delphi notices that he's a conservative's conservative and he pushes the hot button issue of immigration. Huckabee doesn't.

Tozikio
Senior

Joined: September 22, 2007 23:58:21 UTC
Messages: 282
Offline

Thompson can't live up to the hype that was built up for him. He's the "Segway" candidiate. An underwhelming vehicle when you finally see it.

I expect his campaign will fare roughly like another Tennesseean - Al Gore - did in 1988. He'll get Tennesee and a few nearby states on Super Tuesday, and then fizzle out on the road afterward.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at November 02, 2007 22:49:12 UTC

DFCSTech
Junior

Joined: October 20, 2007 21:45:36 UTC
Messages: 76
Location: Oklahoma
Offline

Hunter is a good candidate with no traction.

I saw Huckabee in the rapid-fire session of his interview by Tim Russert quickly say, "Absolutely" when asked if there should not only be a fence on the south US border, but also on the North US border.

Trust me, he'll fight to get the fences built! Keep in mind, that as a Governor, he's not just ideological though; he's also pragmatic enough to not punish children who have not broken any laws.

Ideological, yet Pragmatic. That's what we want in America!

-----------------------------------
http://www.clintononobama.blogspot.com
[WWW]
CaliforniaArchitect
Junior

Joined: November 02, 2007 22:03:49 UTC
Messages: 50
Offline

Thanks for the response, Tozikio.

Where would his support likely land? He seems like the most viable right-leaning conservative. Would it go to Romney? It does look like Romney's been eating some of his lunch lately.
CaliforniaArchitect
Junior

Joined: November 02, 2007 22:03:49 UTC
Messages: 50
Offline

DFCSTech wrote:

Trust me, he'll fight to get the fences built! Keep in mind, that as a Governor, he's not just ideological though; he's also pragmatic enough to not punish children who have not broken any laws.

Ideological, yet Pragmatic. That's what we want in America!

/>



I don't think he has the same level of commitment on immigration as others do. Example:

http://theamericanwriter2007.blogspot.com/2007/10/mike-huckabee-bashes-immigration-bill.html

Monday, October 29, 2007
Mike Huckabee Bashes Immigration Bill as Race-baiting

Huckabee challenges GOP lawmaker on Christian views for limiting public assistance

David Hammer Associated PressArticle
January 28, 2005

LITTLE ROCK - Gov. Mike Huckabee heaped criticism Thursday upon immigration legislation in the Arkansas Legislature, describing it as "inflammatory ... race-baiting and demagoguery" and challenging the Christian values of its main sponsor.

Huckabee said the bill, which seeks to forbid public assistance and voting rights to illegal immigrants, "enflames those who are racist and bigots and makes them think there's a real problem. But there's not."
DFCSTech
Junior

Joined: October 20, 2007 21:45:36 UTC
Messages: 76
Location: Oklahoma
Offline

Okay, here is where we all have to be very careful of rhetoric. Notice that in the story, the quotation marks of WHAT GOV. HUCKABEE ACTUALLY SAID are NOT including the part about "the bill, which seeks to forbid public assistance and voting rights to illegal immigrants,"

However, the doofus who wrote the story, unfortunately for Gov. Huckabee, put those words RIGHT AFTER the words, "Huckabee said".

You see that?

This is from Gov. Huckabee's site:

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.Article&ID=82

It has been reported that Mike Huckabee supported benefits for illegals immigrants while he was Governor of Arkansas.

Governor Huckabee never supported benefits for illegal immigrants. In Arkansas, illegal immigrants do not receive welfare benefits or food stamps. Governor Huckabee has always, and will always be supportive of the laws and regulations of the country.

It has also been said that Mike Huckabee was in favor of providing college scholarships for illegal immigrants while he was Governor.

The governor only supported the measure that applied to those who met the academic qualifications and applied for legal citizenship. The measure didn't pass. Governor Huckabee stressed that any student would simply be treated as any other graduate of an Arkansas High School, and not given any special consideration.

Thanks for verifying it. Now, support the guy!

Also, remember that he's the only one speaking out against LOST (Law Of the Sea Treaty).

-----------------------------------
http://www.clintononobama.blogspot.com
[WWW]
Tozikio
Senior

Joined: September 22, 2007 23:58:21 UTC
Messages: 282
Offline

Thompson's support isnt as ideologicial as for the others, in my view. It's regional, southerners feel comfortable with him.Thompson's speeches are full of conservative generalities and few specifics.

People need to feel like they're voting *for* something and I don't see much of that happening with Thompson. They lean towards him because the other guys seem small in stature, or because there is something "odd" about them. My gut says he's an "older voter" candidate and he draws very mainstream middle America support.

I think when he drops out, the plurality of his support will wander to Huckabee, and the rest will splinter elsewhere (or just give up and not vote. )

Seriously. Much of the reason he joined the race, was because of all the polls back in August saying that people were not satisfied with the Republican slate. The Republican base is kind of glum this year.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at November 02, 2007 23:28:37 UTC

CaliforniaArchitect
Junior

Joined: November 02, 2007 22:03:49 UTC
Messages: 50
Offline

DFCSTech wrote: Okay, here is where we all have to be very careful of rhetoric. Notice that in the story, the quotation marks of WHAT GOV. HUCKABEE ACTUALLY SAID are NOT including the part about "the bill, which seeks to forbid public assistance and voting rights to illegal immigrants,"

/>


Thanks for that correction.

I'm not really all that interested in debating Huckabee and his stances. I get it -- you like Huckabee.

I'm trying to find out why Thompson is tanking and where his support would land. Huckabee does seem suitable for some of that support to fall in his back yard, and maybe his recent bump upwards is a part of that.
Tozikio
Senior

Joined: September 22, 2007 23:58:21 UTC
Messages: 282
Offline

Another reason Thompson is tanking, at least on here, is just the massive short interest that has piled up. I mean there are people putting some serious $XXXX figure wagers, and hundreds of lots short on him.

Most contracts just draw 1 to 50 size lot orders. There are some people out there who *really* have no faith in Thompson.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at November 02, 2007 23:50:40 UTC

Delphi
Sage
[Avatar]

Joined: September 11, 2007 06:28:38 UTC
Messages: 2495
Offline

It's an interesting and relevant question, where his support would go. As a liberal bystander but one who has paid close attention to the (anecdotal) quotes of his supporters when they are interviewed at GOP rallies, he seems to be the candidate for those who are yearning for Ronald Reagan II in some surprisingly general kind of way. Meaning that they don't seem to stereotype well as to a particular issue that burns brightest for them. I think they like(d) him for the sort of Eisenhower-era apple pie American confidence ("make us feel good about being Americans") they hoped he would evoke. There's probably a better metaphor but I am stumbling for it.

I agree that he seems to have turned out to be for this crowd roughly equal parts reality and unfulfilled wished-for charisma. (A digression here, but this whole Reagan-longing has hit the level of cliche where I wonder when we're going to see the first candidate start to phrase things like, "I'm not Ronald Reagan but here is what I believe..." or something, to try to establish that they don't NEED to be Reagan. The bizarre thing is that as some pundits have pointed out, Ronald Reagan was not "Ronald Reagan" either. He came into office an arguably pro-choice governor with no foreign policy experience. Maybe these guys should just try being themselves for a week or so and see how it plays...)

But back to the question. One simple observation. At the time Thompson had finally made his stage appearance, the dismayed GOP base had already been pretty well-introduced to McCain, Giuliani and Romney (albeit the latter to a lesser extent outside of Iowa/NH) and were non-plussed. Does this mean his supporters will go looking more closely than before at the second-tier crowd? I do note that Huckabee is a conservative, plain-spoken, somewhat self-effacing Governor, like Reagan (contradicting my advice to the candidates now!). I'm just sayin'... Full disclosure, I did buy in on Huck's presidential contract last night.
CaliforniaArchitect
Junior

Joined: November 02, 2007 22:03:49 UTC
Messages: 50
Offline

Tozikio wrote: Another reason Thompson is tanking, at least on here, is just the massive short interest that has piled up. .


Wouldn't that mean that someone knows something? Like the original article/rumor that the LA Times is supposedly spiking?


The fact that people have a short interest doesn't mean that it would push the contracts down in price.

Something is up.
CaliforniaArchitect
Junior

Joined: November 02, 2007 22:03:49 UTC
Messages: 50
Offline

Delphi wrote: It's an interesting and relevant question, where his support would go. ...Maybe these guys should just try being themselves for a week or so and see how it plays....


Now that would be interesting.

I do get the impression that Duncan Hunter is basically being himself. Maybe that's why he isn't moving. He does seem to fit the Reaganite mold the best. That really has me wondering. I suppose one explanation for his languishing candidacy is that the big money types in the republican party don't support his "fair trade" policies because it inhibits their ability to make money, and he isn't as fiscally conservative as, say, Steve Forbes. But, wouldn't that play well in the rank & file, as well as crossover democrats? Also, the big money is on the side of open borders rather than building a fence, so he's left out on that one.


It certainly does appear to be a wide open race on the republican side. Democrats have Hillary as a given. Her machine is likely to rip whatever republican in half -- they all have high negatives, especially Giuliani.
CaliforniaArchitect
Junior

Joined: November 02, 2007 22:03:49 UTC
Messages: 50
Offline

Tozikio wrote: Thompson's support isnt as ideologicial as for the others, in my view..... The Republican base is kind of glum this year.


Full disclosure, I'm a republican and I feel glum for our prospects. But I haven't bought into anyone's position because my wife won't agree to it.

If I could, I'd buy as much of Hunter at 0.1% as I could afford. He's probably going to pick up 2 or 3 points of the fallout from Thompson's meltdown.

Note that Thompson's numbers have dropped more than a full point just within this discussion thread today.
Go to:   
Powered by JForum 2.1.8 © JForum Team