To hate John McCain, or to love Mitt Romney? That is the question for talk radio.
For the past several days, Rush Limbaugh has led the charge against John McCain, maligning the senator for his moderate-to-liberal views on issues ranging from tax policy to immigration. In hopes of thwarting the senator's nomination, Mr. Limbaugh (and others) have pushed and prodded for conservatives to come out in droves for Mitt Romney.
Last night, Mitt Romney lost BIG-TIME (to borrow a term from Dick Cheney) in key battle ground states. Romney got clobbered in California and Missouri--delegate rich states in which he was expected to be competitive. Then, to add insult to injury, he placed third in Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee--states where the supposed non-factor Mike Huckabee won.
Basically, it was a terrible night for Mitt Romney. At the end of the day, McCain gained about 600 delegates; Romney and Huckabee more-or-less split the rest.
Romney's performance raises an interesting dilemma for talk-radio. Limbaugh and Hannity know full well that either Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee must leave the race in order for John McCain to be defeated. Given that Huckabee had a strong showing last night in the conservative South, he is not going to leave the race. Conversely, Mitt Romney now has zero momentum.
Which brings me back to my original question.... If talk radio hates John McCain more than it loves Mitt Romney, then talk radio needs to rethink Mike Huckabee--otherwise Rush Limbaugh's most hated Republican senator will become the party's nominee for President.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
Rush is backtracking today. Says, "We like Huckabee here." Smart move, Rush. Maybe you're not as dumb as I thought. Bill Kristol is predicting Romney drops out this week, and everyone from Rush to Russert is talking up Huckabee as VP. Go Huck!
Please tell me one area where McCain has actually fought for conservative principles.
Crickets...
He will never get the votes of conservatives, and he will lose to Hillary.
So Huck, what are you going to do about it? Looks like you're the man of the hour, and you are the conservative left.
Um, Romney won bigtime in Minnesota, and Colorado, two battleground states. Huckabee won in the South, states Republicans will win anyway. McCain can only win states that are full of liberals - the "frontrunner" only got 48% in ARIZONA.
One problem with Minnesota and Colorado... they are caucus states. Romney has won only three primary states--Michigan, Utah, and Massachusetts. Of these three states, he has personal ties in each of these states. In every other primary state, he has lost big (with the exceptions of NH and FL, where he was second.)
Curiously, every other state he won was a caucus state, where people have to show up at one given time to vote.
Mitt is weak in primary states where people have all day to vote. This doesn't bode well for him.
I can't even listen to talk radio anymore lately. Supporting Romney doesn't make you smarter. They got on the wrong horse and are riding him to the glue factory.
The best move those who are opposed to Mccain can do is rally behind Huckabee. He has the capacity to communicate a conservative vision in such a way that draws the people inti that vision and want to be a part of that vision. he truly has those leadership skills that can people him faster than ever if given half a chance. Look at what he has done already against all odds - little name recognition, an extremely low budget campaign, negative bias from the media to the point of complete dismissal, and even being unfairly and inaccurately labeled a moderate by his own party. He is still standing strong because of his tenacity and the grassroots efforts going on throughout the nation. These people are valuable to the party and can get one the republicans best assets. You want a conservative in the White House? Get on the Mike Huckabee bandwagon - get his message out. People respond to him and is message when they are giving the opportunity to hear it.
Growing up a Mormon in TN I know first hand how much bigotry there is by Baptists against Mormons. I would go to vacation bible school with my baptist friends and get shunned by the preacher. One time, a preacher spent half the sermon on a tangent against the Mormon faith after he met me before service. Mike will do all he can to prevent a Mormon becoming the POTUS. HE WOULD BE ABOLISHED BY HIS FAITH IF HE UNITED WITH ROMNEY AGAINST MCCAIN. I do agree that if Huck dropped out that not all votes would go to Romney, since many people do not understand that Mormons are Christians, but rather a cult. Shame, since Huckabee is a nice guy but an obvious Mormon bigot. I will not vote for him when he becomes McCain's VP cause his deep rooted beliefs against Mormons is obvious to me and made him much less of a fellow Christian in my eyes.
I have never hear Huck say anything about Mitt's faith just his past stances on abortion and gar marriage rights. That makes him a biggot? Mike knows he's a better conservative candidate.
Talking about bigots, what percentage of votes did Huckabee pick up in Utah?
I'm pretty sure that Saddam Willard won Utah with 90% of the vote. Huck got 2%. Willard needs to drop out so Huck can pickup more of that Mormon vote!
Mike Huckabee: "i want to make government work for you like i did in arkansas."
Ronald Regean: "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."
http://mitt-tv.mittromney.com/?showid=718280
Alexander and Land of Da Free both seem to forget that Ronald Reagan, as California governor, raised taxes by close to a billion dollars in 1967. Moreover, President Reagan also allowed for amnesty in 1987 for illegals, and he raised payroll taxes in 1983 to the highest levels in history.
If Reagan himself were running today, he would likely be opposed by folks like you.
Romney brought this all on himself.
First he attacks Huck on pardoning when he himself never sent a single criminal to death
Second he lies that he is a conservative, when he gave a famous speech ( when he was running for gov of MA) about why he changed from pro-life to pro-choice (His relative apparenty had an illegal abortion that went bad.) He never gave a reason why he is back to pro-life now
He was for Ronald Regan before he was against him. Mccain got him on that.
Now he says that there was some secret deal about mccain voters voting for Huckabee in WV.. does he have proof?. Does he mean that the voters conspired against him.. what is he talking about?
Now his supporters say that because he is morman Huck is against him?- that is exactly how Jesse Jackson talks. Why did Utah vote for him?. He wants to have his cake and eat it too...
Mitt is not a nice person
These are Reagan's own words from December 7, 1973:
"So our first major lesson in government was painful: for the taxpayers and for us. We had to increase taxes by some $800 million to balance the unbalanced budget we inherited. At the time, I said we hoped this would be temporary, that when we had had time to institute reforms, to curb excessive spending, we would work to reduce the tax burden."
http://www.nationalreview.com/flashback/reagan200406080927.asp
Now if Reagan can raise taxes as California governor by some $800 million (which would be close to $8-10 billion in today's dollars) in one year.... then why are you so upset with Mike Huckabee on tax policy, of all things?
Then explain to me how such a tax raising Governor would lower taxes 94 times over a ten year period? Moreover, even if your numbers are correct, $500 million divided over 10 years would be $50 million per year. Reagan's one year tax increase in 1967 exceeded $800 million. In todays dollars, this equals close to $8 billion.
Which is bigger.... the $8 billion tax increase by Reagan in one year, or the $500 million raised by Huckabee over ten years?
Ah, but your analysis forgets about one very important variable: unfunded mandates upon state governments.
The biggest one is Medicaid. It's a joint program where 41% of the budget is picked up by the states. Total nationwide Medicaid spending soared from $159 billion in 1997 to 295 billion in 2004--an increase of 85%.
If these aggregate figures reflect proportionate increases in Medicaid spending in Arkansas during the same period (which coincides with Huckabee's administration), Mike Huckabee experienced a prodigious increase in his state budget---not because he wanted it, but because Washington mandated it. Moroever, since Arkansas has a balanced budget amendment, he had to make the ledgers balance.
When Reagan was governor, Medicaid was a much smaller program with lower costs. It didn't represent 20% of his state's budget as it did in Arkansas.
So, with all things being considered, had Reagan been saddled with unfunded government mandates, he wouldn't have become president because folks like you would have been whining about his tax increases as governor.
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/8/2/131641.shtml
I like McCain and Romney, but I'm passionate about Huckabee! Having read three of his recent books, two of which discuss his record and views on issues (as well as life), I'm prepared to say he IS a conservative, but a compassionate one. The unfortunate aspect of his campaign is that it has not, until last night, gotten much media coverage and thus many have simply forgotten and dismissed Huckabee. If you listen to him, really listen, I think you'll come away inspired and fell better for the experience. We also learn a few life lessons listening to him. I'd be more than pleased to enjoy four year, and perhaps eight, being inspired by this good man's conservativism and compassion.
Talk radio has been gunned down for Mitt who walked away scott-free.
Post a Comment