Monday, February 11, 2008
A 2008 recount?
Imagine the scene... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120269002843257513.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries.
Friday, February 8, 2008
POLLS
The vote tallies are in:
The internets are too confusing for MM to blog.
McCain and Thompson's wives are the ho**est.
Its a Huckabust.
Corecon has nominated Newt as its prime VP candidate.
Since Romney put his campaign on "hold" 5 of us were wrong to think that Huckabee would drop out before him.
The internets are too confusing for MM to blog.
McCain and Thompson's wives are the ho**est.
Its a Huckabust.
Corecon has nominated Newt as its prime VP candidate.
Since Romney put his campaign on "hold" 5 of us were wrong to think that Huckabee would drop out before him.
CPAC Conference and Beyond
Reluctancy was not a virtue in the Democratic party in 2004, but it will be alive and well in 2012 according to my take on Mitt Romney bowing out.
If John Kerry were a savvy politician he would have realized his chances against the incumbent and thrown Dean to the wolves (or at least allowed him to).
But a smart and savvy Republican candidate realizes the benefit of dropping out now. Romney now has two big fat aces in his back pocket:
The Ace of Diamonds: Romney leaves the race with the aura of being the strongest conservative in the field; AND
The Ace of Spades: By the numbers and figures TODAY, McCain is going to lose. I said it. Democrats are VOTING 2 to 1 over Republicans. Even in states where the delegates don't count they are leading. The base is NOT enthusiastic. And Independants are siding with Obama and Hillary more than McCain or even Paul combined. This is drastically different than 2000 and 2004. Romney realizes that a loss in 2008 against Hillabama is going to Kerry-ize him.
If he drops out now, he retains his credibility for a big run at the age of 64 in 2012 against the incumbent Demobama. If he drops out now and McCain wins, he still maintains his conservative aura, and his youth for a potential candidacy in 2016 at the age of 68.
The only question now is: what is he going to do until then?
MORE IMPORTANTLY...RON PAUL'S CPAC SPEECH WAS AMAZING...
I'd paraphrase it for you, but I HOPE that you take 25 minutes out of your day to watch the beacon of the
Part 1:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=nWdtMftHTtQ
Part 2:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GMtjgMTYE1Q
Part 3:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=2SblfSHWHnM
If John Kerry were a savvy politician he would have realized his chances against the incumbent and thrown Dean to the wolves (or at least allowed him to).
But a smart and savvy Republican candidate realizes the benefit of dropping out now. Romney now has two big fat aces in his back pocket:
The Ace of Diamonds: Romney leaves the race with the aura of being the strongest conservative in the field; AND
The Ace of Spades: By the numbers and figures TODAY, McCain is going to lose. I said it. Democrats are VOTING 2 to 1 over Republicans. Even in states where the delegates don't count they are leading. The base is NOT enthusiastic. And Independants are siding with Obama and Hillary more than McCain or even Paul combined. This is drastically different than 2000 and 2004. Romney realizes that a loss in 2008 against Hillabama is going to Kerry-ize him.
If he drops out now, he retains his credibility for a big run at the age of 64 in 2012 against the incumbent Demobama. If he drops out now and McCain wins, he still maintains his conservative aura, and his youth for a potential candidacy in 2016 at the age of 68.
The only question now is: what is he going to do until then?
MORE IMPORTANTLY...RON PAUL'S CPAC SPEECH WAS AMAZING...
I'd paraphrase it for you, but I HOPE that you take 25 minutes out of your day to watch the beacon of the
Part 1:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=nWdtMftHTtQ
Part 2:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GMtjgMTYE1Q
Part 3:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=2SblfSHWHnM
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Mitt Outney
Romney is out. Dennis Prager just reported it.
You can watch his speech RIGHT NOW (12:50pm) at cspan.org or listen on krla 870.
You can watch his speech RIGHT NOW (12:50pm) at cspan.org or listen on krla 870.
Foreign Correspondent: Sandra Day McCainabee
Romney's plan to win over conservatives failed because they realized that he became a conservative yesterday and may not be one tomorrow. Instead, they voted for the candidates that THEY wanted.
The Huckaboom staged a comeback on Tuesday. McCain is obviously in the driver's seat, but this 2-man race rhetoric needed to be put to bed. Now I am hoping for the McCain-Huck ticket.
Also, can anyone explain the vitriol against McCain? Here's my view - GOP voters have a lot of different priorities, but the one thing that unites them is a STRONG DEFENSE (see the 1980, 1984 and 2004 elections). They also like a person they can respect who has lived the values he preaches. Reagan fell into this category; so does McCain. (Dole did too, but there were some charisma issues there). A strong foreign policy candidate (McCain) with good character is what unites the party. He may be less anti-tax than his predecessors, but his critique of pork barrel spending is actually refreshing. Do I agree with him on every issue? No. And his support for the immigration bill was a tough pill to swallow. The good news is, despite its bipartisan support, the bill still failed.
Voters are connecting with McCain. He is even better for the country now than he was back in 2000 when he perhaps should have won the GOP nod.
The Huckaboom staged a comeback on Tuesday. McCain is obviously in the driver's seat, but this 2-man race rhetoric needed to be put to bed. Now I am hoping for the McCain-Huck ticket.
Also, can anyone explain the vitriol against McCain? Here's my view - GOP voters have a lot of different priorities, but the one thing that unites them is a STRONG DEFENSE (see the 1980, 1984 and 2004 elections). They also like a person they can respect who has lived the values he preaches. Reagan fell into this category; so does McCain. (Dole did too, but there were some charisma issues there). A strong foreign policy candidate (McCain) with good character is what unites the party. He may be less anti-tax than his predecessors, but his critique of pork barrel spending is actually refreshing. Do I agree with him on every issue? No. And his support for the immigration bill was a tough pill to swallow. The good news is, despite its bipartisan support, the bill still failed.
Voters are connecting with McCain. He is even better for the country now than he was back in 2000 when he perhaps should have won the GOP nod.
Hillabill and CPAC
CPAC starts today. I think we should attend next year.
All FOUR (YES 4 Candidates) are set to speak at the great conservative convention.
Last year McCain was booed and Coulter called Edwards a f*gg*t. Look for more great antics this year with Paul and McCain's speeches.
A few days ago they (the ACU and campaign advisors) were more set on timeslots, and they seem to be backing off on setting an absolute time for appearances. The info that I've gathered from blogs, candidate websites, and news articles point to these times:
Romney is set to speak at 12:15 today (R/2/7/08).
McCain is set to speak at 02:30 today (R/2/7/8).
Dr. Paul is set to speak at 04:30 today (R/2/7/08.
Huckabee is set to speak at 09:00 am on Saturday (R/2/9/08).
I think that cspan.org is going to host the speeches on its website. Nothing is showing up on its TV schedule and I doubt that Fox News will carry over the daily car chase.
Cheney is supposed to speak at 10am today so I will check and see if it is viewable via any website.
Anyone think its interesting that Hillary *lent* her campaign money, only to get it back over the next 48 hours? I wonder if she is allowed to take points on that? Fox News eluded to the idea that it was a tactic to appear in need of money, so that people would donate more of their hard earned money to her campaign. I guess they'll get it back in entitlements if she's elected.
All FOUR (YES 4 Candidates) are set to speak at the great conservative convention.
Last year McCain was booed and Coulter called Edwards a f*gg*t. Look for more great antics this year with Paul and McCain's speeches.
A few days ago they (the ACU and campaign advisors) were more set on timeslots, and they seem to be backing off on setting an absolute time for appearances. The info that I've gathered from blogs, candidate websites, and news articles point to these times:
Romney is set to speak at 12:15 today (R/2/7/08).
McCain is set to speak at 02:30 today (R/2/7/8).
Dr. Paul is set to speak at 04:30 today (R/2/7/08.
Huckabee is set to speak at 09:00 am on Saturday (R/2/9/08).
I think that cspan.org is going to host the speeches on its website. Nothing is showing up on its TV schedule and I doubt that Fox News will carry over the daily car chase.
Cheney is supposed to speak at 10am today so I will check and see if it is viewable via any website.
Anyone think its interesting that Hillary *lent* her campaign money, only to get it back over the next 48 hours? I wonder if she is allowed to take points on that? Fox News eluded to the idea that it was a tactic to appear in need of money, so that people would donate more of their hard earned money to her campaign. I guess they'll get it back in entitlements if she's elected.
The Presidency doesn't matter
We need to focus on the legislative elections and see how things look. Any place we can go to get a breakdown of the legislative races? If we can recover some of the legislative losses of '06, we stand better prepared to manage the Demos and any quasi-Republican who may win the WH.
If we suffer bigger legislative losses than what we did in '06, we are in real trouble.
Anyone want to quit the presidential politics and focus on the really important races?
If we suffer bigger legislative losses than what we did in '06, we are in real trouble.
Anyone want to quit the presidential politics and focus on the really important races?
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Is McCain the mathematical victor?
NO!
Here are the following dates and delegates up for grabs in the Republican primary:
February 9 – KA (39), LA (47), WA (40)
February 12 – MD (37), VA (63), D.C. (19)
February 19 – WI (92)
March 4 – OH (88), RI (20), TX (140), VT (17)
March 11 – MS (39)
April 22 – PA (74)
May 6 – NC (69), IN (57)
May 17 – HI (20)
May 20 – KY (45), OR (30)
June 3 – SD (27)
July 12 – NE (33)
I suggest (with hat in hand) that you guys use CNN rather than Fox to look at the analysis. Fox takes way long to load and the real analysis is difficult to find or absent.
OR just look at mine below:
John McCain has an estimated 604 delegates.
Romney has 244 and Huckabust (see Poll) has 187. (source: Real Clear Politics)
Therefore, McCain is about a 2.6 to 1 favorite to Romney right now and he needs 587 delegates to declare victory (whatever that means, maybe MM could explain if he'd join the blog). Romney is about a 1.3 to 1 favorite over Huckabee. So the figures are more like 2.45 to 1.15 to 1.
There are 996 delegates left up for grabs (337 within the next 14 days).
If that 2.45 to 1.15 to 1 stat is applied to the remaining delegates, McCain will have 590 more delagates to Romney's 230 to Huckabee's 176 delegates by July 12.
This means that McCain will end up with 1194, Romney will end up with 474, and Huckabee will end up with 313.
That's a pretty close margin. If Romney gets a significant bump or if Huckabee throws his support behind McCain, things could drastically change.
Although the media is pushing to declare McCain the clear victor, by this margin, anything can happen. So, again, don't buy the hype.
Here are the following dates and delegates up for grabs in the Republican primary:
February 9 – KA (39), LA (47), WA (40)
February 12 – MD (37), VA (63), D.C. (19)
February 19 – WI (92)
March 4 – OH (88), RI (20), TX (140), VT (17)
March 11 – MS (39)
April 22 – PA (74)
May 6 – NC (69), IN (57)
May 17 – HI (20)
May 20 – KY (45), OR (30)
June 3 – SD (27)
July 12 – NE (33)
I suggest (with hat in hand) that you guys use CNN rather than Fox to look at the analysis. Fox takes way long to load and the real analysis is difficult to find or absent.
OR just look at mine below:
John McCain has an estimated 604 delegates.
Romney has 244 and Huckabust (see Poll) has 187. (source: Real Clear Politics)
Therefore, McCain is about a 2.6 to 1 favorite to Romney right now and he needs 587 delegates to declare victory (whatever that means, maybe MM could explain if he'd join the blog). Romney is about a 1.3 to 1 favorite over Huckabee. So the figures are more like 2.45 to 1.15 to 1.
There are 996 delegates left up for grabs (337 within the next 14 days).
If that 2.45 to 1.15 to 1 stat is applied to the remaining delegates, McCain will have 590 more delagates to Romney's 230 to Huckabee's 176 delegates by July 12.
This means that McCain will end up with 1194, Romney will end up with 474, and Huckabee will end up with 313.
That's a pretty close margin. If Romney gets a significant bump or if Huckabee throws his support behind McCain, things could drastically change.
Although the media is pushing to declare McCain the clear victor, by this margin, anything can happen. So, again, don't buy the hype.
Did the proud son of Massachusetts vote?
The only reason I'm posting this is because Ron Paul is probably still going to remain in the race. If any of you have followed Ron Paul as nearly as closely as I have, you should be noticing that McCain and Huckabee are really starting to adopt some of the Paulinian ideas. They do it in a more attractive fashion, but the origin is clear, especially in Huckabee's speech last night from Arkansas.
At a West Virginia rally yesterday Paul, Romney, and Huckabee all spoke.
Paul introduced an interesting idea for the war on terror (notice no capital letters).
Hint: Letters of Marque for you history majors...
You can read about his idea here:
http://deathby1000papercuts.blogspot.com/2008/02/ron-paul-speaks-at-wv-gop-convention.html
At a West Virginia rally yesterday Paul, Romney, and Huckabee all spoke.
Paul introduced an interesting idea for the war on terror (notice no capital letters).
Hint: Letters of Marque for you history majors...
You can read about his idea here:
http://deathby1000papercuts.blogspot.com/2008/02/ron-paul-speaks-at-wv-gop-convention.html
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Don't buy the hype!
This "vote for Huckabee is a vote for McCain" is just as stupid as "a vote for Nader is a vote for Gore."
Al Gore didn't win...not because Ralph Nader ran, but because many liberal voters felt that the issues of green technology and increasing the scope of regulatory agencies were paraamount to the idea of a "lockbox".
Gore could have heeded those voices and attracted those voters by offering his own positions and plans on those issues. Instead, he cowered into agreement with nearly everything G.W. said in the debates.
"Electability" is an absolute distraction. If you vote because of a candidate's electability, jump the bandwagon, or vote out of fear that another candidate may win, you are ignoring your own ability to think independantly.
What McCain or Romney have to do to win the election, should have absolutely nothing to do with who you vote for. As a conservative, you must decide what conservative issues are most important to you and which candidate espouses them.
Does the party need to come together behind its nominee? Yes, after the convention! Do the voters need to agree with everything that candidate proposes? No.
We won't be voting in the primary until March. Let's leave it that way. If you like Huckabee, vote for him. If you agree with Paul's ideas, vote for him. If you are disgruntled by the frontrunner and miss Fred Thompson, Jimmy! WRITE HIM IN! Your vote for any of these candidates sends a message and means a lot more than causing another candidate to win.
I think we can all agree that we will support the Republican nominee over either Hilladonk or Barri.
So for now, don't buy the hype.
Al Gore didn't win...not because Ralph Nader ran, but because many liberal voters felt that the issues of green technology and increasing the scope of regulatory agencies were paraamount to the idea of a "lockbox".
Gore could have heeded those voices and attracted those voters by offering his own positions and plans on those issues. Instead, he cowered into agreement with nearly everything G.W. said in the debates.
"Electability" is an absolute distraction. If you vote because of a candidate's electability, jump the bandwagon, or vote out of fear that another candidate may win, you are ignoring your own ability to think independantly.
What McCain or Romney have to do to win the election, should have absolutely nothing to do with who you vote for. As a conservative, you must decide what conservative issues are most important to you and which candidate espouses them.
Does the party need to come together behind its nominee? Yes, after the convention! Do the voters need to agree with everything that candidate proposes? No.
We won't be voting in the primary until March. Let's leave it that way. If you like Huckabee, vote for him. If you agree with Paul's ideas, vote for him. If you are disgruntled by the frontrunner and miss Fred Thompson, Jimmy! WRITE HIM IN! Your vote for any of these candidates sends a message and means a lot more than causing another candidate to win.
I think we can all agree that we will support the Republican nominee over either Hilladonk or Barri.
So for now, don't buy the hype.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
More Clinton charades
See the following article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120191002786436761.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks. At the very least, there should be a way for this information to be timely released.
It is this type of behavior by the Clintons, both Bill and Billary, that drives me insane and leads me to dislike who they are and what they stand for. We talk about restoring respect for the U.S. with this next election (not that I necessarily think Bush has been all bad), but there is no way that will occur with the Clintons running the show again.
It is this type of behavior by the Clintons, both Bill and Billary, that drives me insane and leads me to dislike who they are and what they stand for. We talk about restoring respect for the U.S. with this next election (not that I necessarily think Bush has been all bad), but there is no way that will occur with the Clintons running the show again.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Why MM doesn't "blog"
Old world focus? Detestation for technology? Email is good enough.
Clarity on the subject is welcome!
Clarity on the subject is welcome!
Has JC found his nominee?
As in brother Jim and the big guy...
Brother Jimmy has linked us to the National Review article by Mark Levin which can be found here:
Our foreign correspondent's response is posted in the comments section.
Brother Jimmy has linked us to the National Review article by Mark Levin which can be found here:
Our foreign correspondent's response is posted in the comments section.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Foreign Correspondent, Brother Matt reporting...
"THE BOOM REACHES CALIFORNIA WOMEN!"
Good thing there was debate - that is where the underdog does best.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/8235.html
Good thing there was debate - that is where the underdog does best.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/8235.html
Who do you support?
It's that time again for Brother Jim to put his support behind another candidate...
and who wil that be?
How about Sonny? Any idea yet?
and who wil that be?
How about Sonny? Any idea yet?
Failure of universal health care
Check out the following WSJ editorial from yesterday: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120165320966126977.html. We need to stop this universal health care debate and get back to responsible ideas about how to improve, not fix, our health care situation. This lessson does not bode well for Romney, and this is something on which he actually took a position ... as Governor.
CNN Debate: Sandra Day, Trucks, Foot Soldier, Empire, Timetables, Jack Kemp, Timetables, and Timetables
Last night's CNN/Politico debate was unbearable! You can get the transcript here.
Anderson's constant interruptions was unprofessional. Ignoring Paul and Huckabee made it uncomfortable to watch. AND the "timetable" bickering between RomCain was flat out embarrassing.
MY WINNER: Romney/Huckabee:
Romney won last night. I thought it was a commanding victory, but then I talked to the wifey. Evan as a lib, she was impressed by Huckabee and his believability. I realized in actuality that Romney only beat McCain, and those two beat themselves. So Huckabee was a clear winner as well.
McCain and Anderson Cooper were the losers. Paul should've taken one of the long bathroom breaks we use when we want to get out of class.
CNN felt so bad about ignoring Paul, that they gave him nearly 7 minutes of air time immediately after the debate. You can watch the interview here.
McNasty: I don't know if I can put up with this John McCain for another 9 or 10 months. I've always liked him, but this shot at Romney was unnecessary. His constant references to Jack Kemp and saying "Reagan footsoldier" is dull and ridiculous.
Note to McCain, NOONE CARES THAT JACK KEMP LIKES YOU.
We do however have a new drinking game for debates and interviews:
Every time McCain says "foot soldier," you take a swig of beer;
Every time he says "foot soldier in the Reagan army," you chug your beer;
Every time he says "I'm proud of my record," you take your shirt off, give two fist pumps, and yell "I'm proud of mine!";
AND When and if he says "that's why people like Phil Gramm, Tom Coburn, Warren Rudman and Jack Kemp are supporting me," take a shot of whiskey.
Not only does this game make a debate and an interview less repititious and more bearable, but its aftermath will leave you with a soon familiar feeling...Shirtless, Drunk, and Dissatisfied with your candidate.
Sandra Matt O'Connor
We now know why Brother Matt doesn't like RP. I think Paul's quote was "I wouldn't have appointed her, because I would have looked for somebody that I would have seen as a much stricter constitutionalist."
ZING...Huckabee's answer was good. The rest of the candidates either copied Huckabee's or waffled. On a side note, Huckabee's answer sounded like a conservative-Ginsburg approach to abortion, a la declaring equal protection for the unborn.
Arnold:
In other news, Arnold is supporting McCain, which is somewhat perplexing. You could clearly see the Terminator shaking his head in agreement with a lot of what Huckabee was saying, especially concerning the 10th Amendment.
Anderson's constant interruptions was unprofessional. Ignoring Paul and Huckabee made it uncomfortable to watch. AND the "timetable" bickering between RomCain was flat out embarrassing.
MY WINNER: Romney/Huckabee:
Romney won last night. I thought it was a commanding victory, but then I talked to the wifey. Evan as a lib, she was impressed by Huckabee and his believability. I realized in actuality that Romney only beat McCain, and those two beat themselves. So Huckabee was a clear winner as well.
McCain and Anderson Cooper were the losers. Paul should've taken one of the long bathroom breaks we use when we want to get out of class.
CNN felt so bad about ignoring Paul, that they gave him nearly 7 minutes of air time immediately after the debate. You can watch the interview here.
McNasty: I don't know if I can put up with this John McCain for another 9 or 10 months. I've always liked him, but this shot at Romney was unnecessary. His constant references to Jack Kemp and saying "Reagan footsoldier" is dull and ridiculous.
Note to McCain, NOONE CARES THAT JACK KEMP LIKES YOU.
We do however have a new drinking game for debates and interviews:
Every time McCain says "foot soldier," you take a swig of beer;
Every time he says "foot soldier in the Reagan army," you chug your beer;
Every time he says "I'm proud of my record," you take your shirt off, give two fist pumps, and yell "I'm proud of mine!";
AND When and if he says "that's why people like Phil Gramm, Tom Coburn, Warren Rudman and Jack Kemp are supporting me," take a shot of whiskey.
Not only does this game make a debate and an interview less repititious and more bearable, but its aftermath will leave you with a soon familiar feeling...Shirtless, Drunk, and Dissatisfied with your candidate.
Sandra Matt O'Connor
We now know why Brother Matt doesn't like RP. I think Paul's quote was "I wouldn't have appointed her, because I would have looked for somebody that I would have seen as a much stricter constitutionalist."
ZING...Huckabee's answer was good. The rest of the candidates either copied Huckabee's or waffled. On a side note, Huckabee's answer sounded like a conservative-Ginsburg approach to abortion, a la declaring equal protection for the unborn.
Arnold:
In other news, Arnold is supporting McCain, which is somewhat perplexing. You could clearly see the Terminator shaking his head in agreement with a lot of what Huckabee was saying, especially concerning the 10th Amendment.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Saddam: "Seriously will you guys leave me alone, I'm trying to keep Iran off my back!"
I mean seriously guys, will you knock it off! Iran is gonna kill me if they find out that I don't have any WMD.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/24/60minutes/main3749494.shtml
Recap of 60 Minutes interview of Saddam's interrogator:
(1) Saddam claimed he invaded Kuwait, because Kuwait kept stealing oil and demanding loan repayments. And when Iraq asked them to tone it down, Kuwait's Emir told them that he would not stop until every Iraqi female was turned into a $10 prostitute.
(2) Saddam claimed he didn't disclose the non-existence of WMD because he was concerned that Iran would invade his country.
You can also see/read the interview of the American Guards who watched Saddam:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8288955/
Recap:
Saddam liked Dorritos
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/24/60minutes/main3749494.shtml
Recap of 60 Minutes interview of Saddam's interrogator:
(1) Saddam claimed he invaded Kuwait, because Kuwait kept stealing oil and demanding loan repayments. And when Iraq asked them to tone it down, Kuwait's Emir told them that he would not stop until every Iraqi female was turned into a $10 prostitute.
(2) Saddam claimed he didn't disclose the non-existence of WMD because he was concerned that Iran would invade his country.
You can also see/read the interview of the American Guards who watched Saddam:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8288955/
Recap:
Saddam liked Dorritos
Florida and Beyond
The AP is reporting the Edwards is dropping out of the race. A big endorsement is coming. Who is going to promise him the AG seat?
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EDWARDS?SITE=VTBEN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Paul received the support from none other than Arlo Guthrie...
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EDWARDS?SITE=VTBEN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Paul received the support from none other than Arlo Guthrie...
"I love this guy," said Arlo. "Dr. Paul is the only candidate I know who would have signed the Constitution of the United States had he been there."
The remaining conservatives would've pandered to their constituents promising them federal monies and bailouts for their votes. And the Dems would've clearly returned to Great Britain.
Thompson's dropout was supposed to give a boost to Huckabee in the percentages (especially in the South) yet his numbers, appearances, and airplay has dwindled since Fred went dead. It's being reported that Huckabee's big wigs are working without pay (some). If that $800.00 in stimulus doesn't come soon they're going to have to retreat to greener pastures.
Romney's move to Nevada was big for him and fatally ignored by Giuliani. In like five days Romney won two big states, Michigan and Nevada, which gave him a huge bump in delegates and put his face on TV a lot more than Huck and Rudy.
Had Rudy done the same and focused his efforts in both Florida AND Nevada, we may be looking at a two way race between McCain and Giulianni.
I know Paul's move is to attempt (and I mean attempt) to win bigger states that are somewhat ignored by RomCainabee, a la Romney in Nevada. These include Minnesota, Maine, and Washington.
Huckabee should also do the same in the South and mid-West where he is polling either first or second.
Paul was virtually ignored in the NBC debate with 5 candidates. TONIGHT @ 8pm on CNN it will grow more difficult for pundits and questioners to ignore him.
HOWEVER, Paul desperately needs to put the posters and bumper-stickers down and stand in front of his message rather than behind it. More comments like "As your President, I would..." or "As Commander in Chief, I will..." will boost his appeal.
Is McCain/Giules a viable partnership for November?