Today is Super Tuesday and Caucus Day in Colorado. And that’s why I find it surprising that my local blogging colleague Steven appears to be planning to sit out the Presidential vote:
Politics as usual does not cut it for me. I need a candidate with true compassion, true conscience, true understanding, and the ability to reason.
No candidate for President has demonstrated all these things that I can see. Not that these characteristics comprise anywhere near a complete resume for our nation’s highest office. And trying to compare Hugh’s show last night to push-polling? Not only absurd – I wouldn’t say the MSM is push-polling for McCain – but sounds desperate, too, a lot like Huckabee’s rhetoric of late. He’s run as good a race as anyone could expect, but his campaign is nearly out of steam.
As for me, I’m putting my perfect (-ly wrong) prediction record on the line by giving a second to Michael at Best Destiny, who writes:
All of which points to a rather sweeping night for John McCain.
I don’t have the exact numbers the Geraghty came up with, but I can say that the night will swing mostly for McCain. New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, all winner-take-all to McCain; worse, I’m guessing that Illinois, Missouri, and even California slip into the McCain pile. In the end, the default vote of Republicans across the country will give John McCain the prohibitive favorite status heading out of Super Tuesday, and on to the nomination.
Ditto.
While Michael and I both believe a McCain clinching sweep is in store for us today, Clay actually is cheering for it to happen:
McCain is the Republican candidate that can restore some form of order to the Republican Party. McCain is the only Republican candidate that can capture not only the votes of Republicans, but Independents and Democrats as well. He’s not perfect. Name one nominee that is or was.
If the GWOT is the #1 issue, and I believe it is, then McCain is who I want leading the charge. All other items on the priority list pale in comparison especially including the economy.
If you want a Republican in the White House throughout January of 2009, McCain is our only shot.
If I had any sort of inclination to believe all these observations, I too would be carrying the McCain banner right now. And in the very likely event that he becomes the nominee I undoubtedly will be voting for him in November. But gone will be much of the enthusiasm for the Party during this fall’s campaign season. (Then again, maybe my prediction will be wrong on this one, too.)
Plenty more coverage of the caucus at Slapstick Politics.
Colorado Republicans, if you want to participate in tonight’s caucus but aren’t sure where to go, follow this link. Look forward to an on-the-ground report from some Arvada Republican precincts tonight.
Can’t wait for primary season to calm down so we can all focus on other things.
Ben –
Of course I am not sitting this year out! I am just making my vote count! What that means is yet to be seen…
After yesterday, It is clear that McCain is the front-runner, and the other two contenders are nipping at his heels…
The situation is that Romney’s wins came across as losses… because he did not live up to the California Polling Hype, because he lost all states where he was actually challenged, and the county-by-county results in the states showed that he appealed to the higher density areas raising questions about his status as the voice of the true conservatives (Huckabee – who won the rural ares in most states)
Huckabee’s 5 state win left him with less delegates and less states, but it pumped up support, or at least some headlines that he is the guy who not only will not go away, but who won the rural / conservative vote.
My blog about the talking heads, I think, was accurate. To cry foul when push polling calls individuals and says “knowing what you know, are you SURE you still want to vote for your guy?”, yet when on a national stage a caller is subject to the same lines… but no one calls foul because it is an action helping their candidate… well, that is the hypocrasy that I was blowing the whistle on. To say that they are not the same is not accurate. Please explain how they are different?!?
You may not see my four criteria in any candidate, but I do… having had the opportunity to talk one-on-one with Mike, I have seen these qualities. I dont agree with him on all his issues, but I appreciate his independent thought process.
If you would like to have the chance to meet him, and see for yourself, I invite you to attend the LPR retreat where he will be the keynote speaker. For a few extra bucks you can join us in the VIP room… based on Last night’s Romney sweep of Colorado, I predict that it will just be he and I in the VIP room. But come, and see for yourself! 🙂
In closing, I am definately not sitting this one out… I am making my vote count the best way I know how!
Cheers!
I would love to meet Gov. Huckabee. Unfortunately, “a few extra bucks” are hard to justify on a non-profit salary, a wife, 1.5 kids, and a mortgage payment. Hope you enjoy the LPR Retreat. I know I did 2 years ago.
Your push-polling analogy is inaccurate for a basic, fundamental reason: Push-polling is bad because its purveyors portray themselves to be independent arbiters while secretly pushing an agenda for a candidate or an issue. What Hewitt did, like it or not, is different. He is open and up front about where he’s coming from, and he’s trying to use the microphone his sponsors pay for to persuade others of his position. You may disagree with his arguments, but he is not being deceitful or hypocritical.
Your attempts to equate “conservative” with “rural” is inadequate. The problem we are facing that is being manifested in the entire primary debate is a definition of conservatism. I’m not sure exactly where you come from, but trying to say “conservative” and “rural” are the same would tend to place you in the camp of Wilmoore Kendall and Richard Weaver. Perhaps? But I think Weaver especially would have a greater distrust for government intervention than Huckabee has manifested on the campaign trail.
Furthermore, what you wrote about Romney’s weaknesses could just as easily be turned around to Huckabee supporters – why can’t he extend his appeal beyond evangelicals and rural voters? This two-edged sword is why neither has much of a shot to win the nomination. I see a lot of debate about who Huckabee voters’ second choice is, but not much about Romney voters. Have you seen that info? It would tell us a lot about the validity of your thesis.
Nonetheless, you are to be commended for your devotion to your candidate. I believe he is the wrong guy to carry our Party’s presidential banner, at least for this year, but that doesn’t mean he lacks any good characteristics. I would hope you could at least say the same about Romney. Calling him “sleazy” doesn’t fit what I have seen and read about him.
Ben – to better define what I consider “sleaze” is best seen in the video of the reporter arguing with him about his claim that he has no lobbyists running his campaign… the argument continued and Romeny fell back on his “listen to my words… he is an advisor, he is not ‘running’ my campaign”… It is very similar to something I remember hearing when I was about 10 years younger than I am now: “That depends on what your definition of ‘IS’ is…”
Same situation with his gaffe about “seeing” his father march with Dr. King in Detroit…
It is these kind of double speaks that I equate with political sleaze (Clinton helped nme build that definition long ago! One positive out of the Clinton years)
In regards to the push-polling analogy – I think it was very well aired that this group was not an independent organization, and they had an agenda. Hugh and company made it clear to their listeners. I equate the two based on the “pressure” the voter feels to change their vote. In one case it is a push-poll, the other it is an on-air push broadcast. Granted, Hugh has never hid his love for Willard, but to directly confront caller after caller in an attempt to persuade the masses by fear of inadvertantly supporting McCain… it is on the same level.
I have devotion for a candidate, but more importantly, I have devotion for this great nation. I want to be part of the generation who can say “we started the change in Washington”… as such, I am supporting big idea candidates. (one example of Romney’s can’t-do attitude is on energy independence, where he said in a debate that it is impossible to acheive complete energy independence in 10 years. I say hrumph! Nothing is impossible if we all work together – see the moon program of the 60’s).
I have not seen numbers on which candidates Romney supporters have as their second choice… I think we have rung the towel dry, and these three candidates are what is left to vote FOR (as opposed to merely voting against another candidate). I know that should Huckabee drop, a lot of voters will move to McCain to block Romney… and I can forsee Romney supporters moving to Huckabee to block McCain… but I have not seen much active support for a second (or in some cases 3rd or 4th) choice… So it is great and a positive thing that super tuesday was a three man race… it removes the animosity, i think.
Sorry you wont be able to make the retreat. I know that none of us has a few extra bucks, let alone the $500 required to get the VIP treatment. I pretty much sold a kidney…
Take Care!