Palmetto Primary
The State ran an article about the early Primary race in South Carolina. Their conclusions? With Allen faultering, many of the folks in the "anybody but McCain" crowd are heading to Romney, while a few are moving towards Huckabee.
Their first pick, U.S. Sen. George Allen of Virginia, lost standing when he made highly publicized racial slurs during a heated re-election campaign.
That left conservatives — mostly evangelical Christians — with one real challenger to McCain.
“Social conservatives are absolutely going to line up behind Romney,” said Dee Benedict of Greenville, a prominent activist. “What I’ve found in talking with pastors and activists is that a number of them are already committed to Romney — to my surprise.”
But the McCain folks are satisfied with where they are at.
Richard Quinn, McCain’s S.C. consultant, rejects the notion that large numbers of conservatives are shopping for an alternative.
“McCain now has more conservatives on board than any other potential candidate,” he said.
McCain’s people say they aren’t worried. The “anybody-but-McCain” crowd, they say, is a loose federation of malcontents who never are going to support the senator.
The major news is that Romney is noticeably starting to line up the anti-McCainiacs. Everything we at the Cooler here from people in South Carolina is that it is going to be a bloodbath in the Palmetto State.
posted by Caucus Cooler at 10/11/2006
10 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
These folks will leave Romney and flock to Huckabee the moment they learn more about what Mormons truly believe. They just aren't paying attention yet. They also don't really know how flimsy his abortion position is.
Huckabee's the man. Time will tell.
Is there anyway to stop spam besides putting comment filters on. We hate comment filters. Someone help!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Polls polls polls. That's all the Romneyites quote. That, and the Book of Mormon, I guess.
Polls don't mean anything. Especially not in Iowa, where we have a caucus and not a primary.
Go ahead and quote polls until you're blue in the face. We'll see where people end up on election day. For some reason, I don't think it will be in Romney's camp.
Now, go find a poll that questions how much faith people put in polls.
South Carolinians won't vote for a Mormon "cultist," so Romney's out.
They won't vote for someone who votes for all of Kennedy's legislation (NCLB, campaign finance "reform," illegal immigrant coddling) or equates our troops' interrogation techniques with terrorists' treatment of their prisoners, so McCain's out.
Huckabee gives benefits to illegals and loves to pardon criminals, including murderers, to the tune of nearly 700 since taking office - 10 times more than even Clinton, so he'll be out.
Allen? Already out (he's makaka.)
Guess your blog's "front runners" are all "out." Who does that leave conservatives in SC, or in Iowa?
Anon 2:36
Your sole argument against Romney is that he's a "Mormon Cultist"? If that's the best you've got against him, you better start preparing for a Romney presidency. I'm pretty sure SC voters are smarter than to go for that line. Got anything else against him? If not, I'll have to write off your comments as religious bigotry and pray you come around when you actually meet a Mormon.
Peter, that's not my view of his faith and I actually like Mormons quite a bit, but that's how the Christian Right sees him and they vote heavily in SC (in case the Uberpundits here didn't know that.) But let's ignore that issue and look at his numerous, well-documented and strongly worded pro-choice statements, his signaure on a bill banning "assault weapons" in MA, and the fact that he vigorously opposed a measure to end the income tax when that was on the ballot as a referrendum.
He did oppose Gay Marriage, but then again, he's appointed a lot of liberal judges who made it happen. He's got a habit of governing as a liberal, while privately saying he's a bit more conservative (and on abortion, he doesn't even do that. He's on record as saying he wants abortion legal.) This is not a profile in conservative courage here.
Sounds like he's either been pretending he's a liberal for four years, or is lying about being a conservative now. Either way, not presidential timber, my friend.
It was my understanding that Mitt signed an executive order that led to gay marriage. Does someone have the real story there?
Murph, it wasn't 1994, it was 2002 when he was running that he said he was strongly pro-choice. Namely, "I respect and will fully protect a woman's right to choose."
But don't call him pro-choice. He doesn't like that.
Post a Comment
<< Home