Candidate: Rudy Giuliani
Party: Republican
Political Background: Former Mayor of New York City, Former United States Attorney
Campaign Website: http://www.joinrudy2008.com/
GOP Appeal: Widespread name recognition due to 9/11 leadership, has become more and more conservative over past 15 years, proposed free market solution to health care problem, mostly conservative on fiscal issues, record of lowering taxes, strong record on crime, tough national defense stance, has optimistic view reminiscent of Reagan, executive experience, record of reforms in NYC very positive, pro-free trade, "BorderStat" program to control illegal immigration similar to successful "CompStat" crime-tracking program, supports state's rights to a large degree.
Cross-over Appeal to Dems: Supports unions as long as membership is voluntary, generally moderate-to-liberal stances on abortion and homosexual rights, has endorsed Democrats in the past if they were the best candidate at the time, has no problems "reaching across the aisle" while sticking to his principles.
Cons: Unclear stance on 2nd Amendment rights, mixed record on immigration, personal issues of the past could come back to haunt him on campaign trail, does not have a lot of social conservative/evangelical support despite Pat Robertson endorsement due to liberal social viewpoints.
My Personal Thoughts: Rudy was actually my pick until Fred Thompson came along. He's been a strong leader for a long time. He has a great record on fiscal and crime issues as Mayor of NYC. He's someone that people listen to, and he draws excellent attention to his record as a whole...not just 9/11.
While he has the tag of "Hillary-slayer", I can only image how nasty that campaign would be. Especially with Giuliani's well-documented past marital issues played up against Hillary "The Cheated" Clinton. I shudder to think about the nastiness that would ensue from all of that.
I'm not totally sold on his 2nd Amendment stance, as that is a bit cloudy. His proposed policies on immigration sound nice, but his past record is mixed. Then again, as he has said, how you govern New York City is different from the entire nation. The fact that he can recognize that is a positive mark in Rudy's favor, as it shows a willingness to adjust in the interest of the common good.
The thing is, if Rudy wins, will the social conservatives come out and vote for him (or vote against the Dem candidate), or will they just stay home? Having Pat Robertson's endorsement helps, but probably not as much as it would if this scenario were playing out 10 years ago. Robertson doesn't have as much pull any more. However, it also seems that Rudy has a handle on "what I personally believe may not be what the rest of the nation believes" on social issues, and that admission also helps him.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Saxman Decides Not to Run for U.S. Senate
The blogosphere is abuzz with the news that Del. Chris Saxman (R-Staunton) has decided against running against Jim Gilmore for the GOP nomination to run against Mark Warner for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by John Warner.
Saxman stated that, since Virginia law forbids fundraising during the General Assembly session (which is from January to mid-March), he believes it would be violating the spirit of Virginia law if he ran...even though that law does not apply in this case because Senate races are governed by federal law, not state law. I consider that to be a pretty honorable move on Saxman's part.
He has formed a PAC to raise funds for other candidates, and did not rule out a future run at statewide or federal office. Apparently, Saxman's speech on his decision was very well received by Republicans, who were gathered at the annual GOP Advance where Saxman made his announcement.
Right now, Jim Gilmore is still the only candidate running, with Del. Bob Marshall (R-Prince William County) still considering a run himself.
Saxman stated that, since Virginia law forbids fundraising during the General Assembly session (which is from January to mid-March), he believes it would be violating the spirit of Virginia law if he ran...even though that law does not apply in this case because Senate races are governed by federal law, not state law. I consider that to be a pretty honorable move on Saxman's part.
He has formed a PAC to raise funds for other candidates, and did not rule out a future run at statewide or federal office. Apparently, Saxman's speech on his decision was very well received by Republicans, who were gathered at the annual GOP Advance where Saxman made his announcement.
Right now, Jim Gilmore is still the only candidate running, with Del. Bob Marshall (R-Prince William County) still considering a run himself.
Candidate Analysis: Mike Gravel
Candidate: Mike Gravel
Party: Democratic
Political Background: Former Senator from Alaska
Campaign Website: http://www.gravel2008.us/
Dem Appeal: Hard-line liberal, pro-gay marriage, pro-national smoking ban, pro-marijuana legalization, hard-line environmentalist, supports single-payer universal health care, key player in release of "Pentagon Papers" in 1971, anti-nuclear stance, open-borders advocate, forced end of military draft during Senate career, pro-union, use of "viral video" appeals to younger Dems.
Cross-over Appeal to Republicans: Shares libertarian views on IRS, supports English as official language of U.S., supports merit-based pay for teachers and private school vouchers.
Cons: Believes United States has no enemies in this world, wants to have normalized relations with anti-American leaders (Chavez/Castro/Kim Jong-Il), more concerned with unemployment in Canada/Mexico due to NAFTA/CAFTA than in America, even Dems think he's a bit "extreme" and that he overstates issues like poverty in America to be worse than what they are, horrid fundraising, support for extending school day and year is not popular with either party.
My Personal Thoughts: Gravel, who is left of most of the Dems and a little bit "north" (libertarian) of Dennis Kucinich, is well beyond the support of most Dems...even to the point of drawing about 0.5% of vote in most polls. Gravel considers himself a "regular guy", but many in his own party consider him to be a "crazy old man".
Gravel's liberalism has it's appeal...usually to extreme progressives who feel the rest of the Dems aren't far enough left, and that Dennis Kucinich is too weak in leadership.
People likened him to the Democratic Party's version of Ron Paul, with the exception that Ron Paul's attempts to shake up the party are working to some effect...whereas Gravel has had no real effect except for allowing other Dem candidates appear "more sane and reasoned". So while Gravel is not going to win the nomination, he is still in the race and still debates, so he is deserving of an analysis, as well.
Party: Democratic
Political Background: Former Senator from Alaska
Campaign Website: http://www.gravel2008.us/
Dem Appeal: Hard-line liberal, pro-gay marriage, pro-national smoking ban, pro-marijuana legalization, hard-line environmentalist, supports single-payer universal health care, key player in release of "Pentagon Papers" in 1971, anti-nuclear stance, open-borders advocate, forced end of military draft during Senate career, pro-union, use of "viral video" appeals to younger Dems.
Cross-over Appeal to Republicans: Shares libertarian views on IRS, supports English as official language of U.S., supports merit-based pay for teachers and private school vouchers.
Cons: Believes United States has no enemies in this world, wants to have normalized relations with anti-American leaders (Chavez/Castro/Kim Jong-Il), more concerned with unemployment in Canada/Mexico due to NAFTA/CAFTA than in America, even Dems think he's a bit "extreme" and that he overstates issues like poverty in America to be worse than what they are, horrid fundraising, support for extending school day and year is not popular with either party.
My Personal Thoughts: Gravel, who is left of most of the Dems and a little bit "north" (libertarian) of Dennis Kucinich, is well beyond the support of most Dems...even to the point of drawing about 0.5% of vote in most polls. Gravel considers himself a "regular guy", but many in his own party consider him to be a "crazy old man".
Gravel's liberalism has it's appeal...usually to extreme progressives who feel the rest of the Dems aren't far enough left, and that Dennis Kucinich is too weak in leadership.
People likened him to the Democratic Party's version of Ron Paul, with the exception that Ron Paul's attempts to shake up the party are working to some effect...whereas Gravel has had no real effect except for allowing other Dem candidates appear "more sane and reasoned". So while Gravel is not going to win the nomination, he is still in the race and still debates, so he is deserving of an analysis, as well.
Candidate Analysis: Mike Huckabee
Candidate: Mike Huckabee
Party: Republican
Political Background: Former Governor of Arkansas
Campaign Website: http://www.mikehuckabee.com/
GOP Appeal: Supports FairTax and/or tax code overhaul and simplification, background as Baptist minister appeals to evangelicals, anti-abortion, pro-capital punishment, knows how to attract minority vote, energy plan includes nuclear power, pro-traditional marriage, anti-LOST, pro-free market but with fair trade, pro-strengthening of 10th Amendment (granting of powers to states and to people), pro-2nd Amendment, opposes universal health care, strong belief in personal responsibility, anti-Fairness Doctrine, strong stance on Iran, believes we have responsibility in Iraq, supports vouchers for private schools.
Cross-over Appeal to Dems: Fiscal moderate who appealed to progressives in Arkansas, acknowledges consensus on abortion can never be reached, anti-"3 strikes" law, does not pander to evangelicals despite rabid support from that bloc of voters, good environmental record, fair trade stance has bipartisan appeal, strong advocate of healthy lifestyles due to incredible weight-loss, does not support privatization of Social Security, equal support for public schools as private schools.
Cons: Has mixed record on spending control as Governor, FairTax has mixed support from both parties and many are against it, stances on abortion and gay marriage alienate many moderate and liberal votes, much of his cross-over appeal is at the expense of Republican support, mixed immigration record does not help with GOP base.
My Personal Thoughts: Huckabee is an interesting case, because his policies are all over the board. He's a definite social conservative (without overtly pandering to SoCons and evangelicals), and is a fiscal moderate. He has an honest, "this is who I am and I won't lie to you about it" attitude that people respect and it is an endearing quality to many people. Also, he has a sense of humor and ease about him that is similar to Fred Thompson.
What Huckabee does not have is a record that will appeal to enough Republicans to win him a nomination. Yes, Huckabee's policies will play well in places like Iowa, where you find that the majority of voters are SoCons and fiscal moderates...but he will have problems in other states, where guys like Romney, McCain, Giuliani, and Thompson all have distinct advantages.
Yes, he did cut taxes 90 times as Governor of Arkansas, and he also refused to raise taxes during a budget shortfall...but his state's spending went up 65.3% when during his two terms and he raised taxes 21 times. It's very hard to get a handle on Huckabee's actual positions when you compare his past record to his future plans.
BUT (there's always a "but"), Huckabee's honest approach is also the kind that GOP voters can respect and live with. The fact that he has said, "yes, this is how I feel, this is how I think, this is what I did, and this is what I'm going to do," on every issue and on every question thrown his way is why Huckabee has begun to win over many voters. While you may not agree with him on issues or policy, that kind of honesty is honorable and could win him some surprising votes.
Party: Republican
Political Background: Former Governor of Arkansas
Campaign Website: http://www.mikehuckabee.com/
GOP Appeal: Supports FairTax and/or tax code overhaul and simplification, background as Baptist minister appeals to evangelicals, anti-abortion, pro-capital punishment, knows how to attract minority vote, energy plan includes nuclear power, pro-traditional marriage, anti-LOST, pro-free market but with fair trade, pro-strengthening of 10th Amendment (granting of powers to states and to people), pro-2nd Amendment, opposes universal health care, strong belief in personal responsibility, anti-Fairness Doctrine, strong stance on Iran, believes we have responsibility in Iraq, supports vouchers for private schools.
Cross-over Appeal to Dems: Fiscal moderate who appealed to progressives in Arkansas, acknowledges consensus on abortion can never be reached, anti-"3 strikes" law, does not pander to evangelicals despite rabid support from that bloc of voters, good environmental record, fair trade stance has bipartisan appeal, strong advocate of healthy lifestyles due to incredible weight-loss, does not support privatization of Social Security, equal support for public schools as private schools.
Cons: Has mixed record on spending control as Governor, FairTax has mixed support from both parties and many are against it, stances on abortion and gay marriage alienate many moderate and liberal votes, much of his cross-over appeal is at the expense of Republican support, mixed immigration record does not help with GOP base.
My Personal Thoughts: Huckabee is an interesting case, because his policies are all over the board. He's a definite social conservative (without overtly pandering to SoCons and evangelicals), and is a fiscal moderate. He has an honest, "this is who I am and I won't lie to you about it" attitude that people respect and it is an endearing quality to many people. Also, he has a sense of humor and ease about him that is similar to Fred Thompson.
What Huckabee does not have is a record that will appeal to enough Republicans to win him a nomination. Yes, Huckabee's policies will play well in places like Iowa, where you find that the majority of voters are SoCons and fiscal moderates...but he will have problems in other states, where guys like Romney, McCain, Giuliani, and Thompson all have distinct advantages.
Yes, he did cut taxes 90 times as Governor of Arkansas, and he also refused to raise taxes during a budget shortfall...but his state's spending went up 65.3% when during his two terms and he raised taxes 21 times. It's very hard to get a handle on Huckabee's actual positions when you compare his past record to his future plans.
BUT (there's always a "but"), Huckabee's honest approach is also the kind that GOP voters can respect and live with. The fact that he has said, "yes, this is how I feel, this is how I think, this is what I did, and this is what I'm going to do," on every issue and on every question thrown his way is why Huckabee has begun to win over many voters. While you may not agree with him on issues or policy, that kind of honesty is honorable and could win him some surprising votes.
Friday, November 30, 2007
BREAKING NEWS: Hostages Taken at Hillary's Clinton's Campaign HQ in New Hampshire
This is NOT a joke.
A man has strapped a bomb to his chest, taken two hostages at Hillary's New Hampshire HQ in Rochester, and states that he wants to speak with Hillary Clinton herself.
Barack Obama's Campaign offices, just 4 doors down from Hillary's, have been evacuated as well.
Developing...
UPDATES:
-According to the front page at Fox News, the man has released the two hostages.
- In a show of bitter and disgusting partisanship, liberals over at NLS are posting that basically stating that this nutjob is obviously a Republican, because Republicans "have only anger and fear", and that only Republicans have histories of mental instability. Meanwhile, some Republicans believe this was a staged event to gain sympathy for Hillary. Both sides should be ashamed to put their partisanship above the safety of these people.
A man has strapped a bomb to his chest, taken two hostages at Hillary's New Hampshire HQ in Rochester, and states that he wants to speak with Hillary Clinton herself.
Barack Obama's Campaign offices, just 4 doors down from Hillary's, have been evacuated as well.
Developing...
UPDATES:
-According to the front page at Fox News, the man has released the two hostages.
- In a show of bitter and disgusting partisanship, liberals over at NLS are posting that basically stating that this nutjob is obviously a Republican, because Republicans "have only anger and fear", and that only Republicans have histories of mental instability. Meanwhile, some Republicans believe this was a staged event to gain sympathy for Hillary. Both sides should be ashamed to put their partisanship above the safety of these people.
Candidate Analysis: Hillary Clinton
Candidate: Hillary Rodham Clinton
Party: Democratic
Political Background: U.S. Senator from New York, Former First Lady of the United States.
Campaign Website: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/
Dem Appeal: Immense name recognition, husband still popular amongst Democrats, pro-choice, increased spending on welfare/entitlement programs and other social initiatives, creator of modern universal health-care movement amongst liberals, pro-environment, pro-gun control, embodiment of feminist movement, pro-amnesty/legalization for illegal aliens, pro-union, anti-Iraq War,
Cross-over Appeal to Republicans: Foreign policy and business/commerce stances somewhat moderate, supports "3 strikes" laws, fairly hawkish on anti-terrorism measures compared to Dem Party as a whole, has working relationship with Newt Gingrich, state's rights on gay marriage.
Cons: Incredibly polarizing politician - may be worse than Bush in that regard, is more socialist/progressive than husband who advocated "third way", supported "No Child Left Behind" as part of "village", has many image issues with both Dems and Republicans...Dems see her as "more of the same" and GOPers see her as part of the problems with government, has fairly long list of issues she has flip-flopped on, hated by anti-corporate liberals.
My Personal Thoughts: The Democratic front-runner has issues. She is wildly popular with the Democratic Party base, but fares badly elsewhere. Republicans and "change" voters hate her. Independents are indifferent to her. Radical leftists have luke-warm support for her. If you think George W. Bush was a polarizing figure, image what Hillary could do.
There are those who see an advantage if Hillary makes Bill part of her campaign and they use the 1992 strategy of "two for the price of one" and make a better appeal for independent voters. However, that would increase the polarization as Bill is too centrist for many hardline progressives and is a villainous figure in the eyes of many Republicans.
The question remains about Hillary...how well would she hold up against Republicans? She's already launching the attack dogs in campaign ads against the "Republican smear machine", which may play well now...but if this remains her theme for the next 11 months, she's going to lose. Period.
The time has long-been right for "a" woman (or a minority) to be President of the United States. However, it remains to be seen whether or not the majority of the voting public believes that Hillary is going to be "the" right person for the job.
Party: Democratic
Political Background: U.S. Senator from New York, Former First Lady of the United States.
Campaign Website: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/
Dem Appeal: Immense name recognition, husband still popular amongst Democrats, pro-choice, increased spending on welfare/entitlement programs and other social initiatives, creator of modern universal health-care movement amongst liberals, pro-environment, pro-gun control, embodiment of feminist movement, pro-amnesty/legalization for illegal aliens, pro-union, anti-Iraq War,
Cross-over Appeal to Republicans: Foreign policy and business/commerce stances somewhat moderate, supports "3 strikes" laws, fairly hawkish on anti-terrorism measures compared to Dem Party as a whole, has working relationship with Newt Gingrich, state's rights on gay marriage.
Cons: Incredibly polarizing politician - may be worse than Bush in that regard, is more socialist/progressive than husband who advocated "third way", supported "No Child Left Behind" as part of "village", has many image issues with both Dems and Republicans...Dems see her as "more of the same" and GOPers see her as part of the problems with government, has fairly long list of issues she has flip-flopped on, hated by anti-corporate liberals.
My Personal Thoughts: The Democratic front-runner has issues. She is wildly popular with the Democratic Party base, but fares badly elsewhere. Republicans and "change" voters hate her. Independents are indifferent to her. Radical leftists have luke-warm support for her. If you think George W. Bush was a polarizing figure, image what Hillary could do.
There are those who see an advantage if Hillary makes Bill part of her campaign and they use the 1992 strategy of "two for the price of one" and make a better appeal for independent voters. However, that would increase the polarization as Bill is too centrist for many hardline progressives and is a villainous figure in the eyes of many Republicans.
The question remains about Hillary...how well would she hold up against Republicans? She's already launching the attack dogs in campaign ads against the "Republican smear machine", which may play well now...but if this remains her theme for the next 11 months, she's going to lose. Period.
The time has long-been right for "a" woman (or a minority) to be President of the United States. However, it remains to be seen whether or not the majority of the voting public believes that Hillary is going to be "the" right person for the job.
Blast From The Past
CNN has a page with several political ads from the past. The ads currently in the archives are...
From 1952...Eisenhower's "Man From Abilene" and "Eisenhower Answers America", as well as Adlai Stevenson's "Music Man" ad.
From 1960...Kennedy's "Unoriginal Nixon" ad, where Eisenhower could not come up with one original idea from then-VP Richard Nixon.
From 1964...Lyndon Johnson's "Daisy" ad, where he scared America away from Barry Goldwater.
From 1968...Hubert H. Humphrey's "Laughing at Agnew" ad...a forgotten classic.
From 1984...Ronald Reagan's "Bear In The Woods" and "Morning in America" ads, the epitome of positive campaigning and playing to one's strengths.
From 1988...George H. W. Bush's "Can We Trust Dukakis?" ads, as well as Michael Dukakis' "Quayle: Just a Heartbeat Away" ad. This campaign had a lot of negative ads on both sides. Note: I had also mistakenly attributed the "Willie Horton" ad to Bush's campaign, but it turns out that it was an independent PAC that put that out. Thanks to Brian Kirwin for the correction on American history.
Go peer back into political history!
From 1952...Eisenhower's "Man From Abilene" and "Eisenhower Answers America", as well as Adlai Stevenson's "Music Man" ad.
From 1960...Kennedy's "Unoriginal Nixon" ad, where Eisenhower could not come up with one original idea from then-VP Richard Nixon.
From 1964...Lyndon Johnson's "Daisy" ad, where he scared America away from Barry Goldwater.
From 1968...Hubert H. Humphrey's "Laughing at Agnew" ad...a forgotten classic.
From 1984...Ronald Reagan's "Bear In The Woods" and "Morning in America" ads, the epitome of positive campaigning and playing to one's strengths.
From 1988...George H. W. Bush's "Can We Trust Dukakis?" ads, as well as Michael Dukakis' "Quayle: Just a Heartbeat Away" ad. This campaign had a lot of negative ads on both sides. Note: I had also mistakenly attributed the "Willie Horton" ad to Bush's campaign, but it turns out that it was an independent PAC that put that out. Thanks to Brian Kirwin for the correction on American history.
Go peer back into political history!
Candidate Analysis: Fred Thompson
Candidate: Fred Thompson
Party: Republican
Political Background: Former Senator from Tennessee, Former Chairman - Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, Former Minority Counsel - Senate Watergate Committee
Campaign Website: http://www.fred08.com/
GOP Appeal: Staunch federalist and state's rights supporter, folksy and humored demeanor appeals to middle- and working-class, has more-detailed policy initiatives than any other candidate in either party, supports constructionist judiciaries, promotes school vouchers, pro-capital punishment and "truth-in-sentencing" for violent crimes, strong pro-2nd Amendment stance, supports stronger border security, pro-"smart" free trade, free market advocate, long history of fighting corruption in government, strong stances on waste and fraud in government spending, "get tough" stance on national security.
Cross-over Appeal to Dems: Foreign policy views appeal to Reagan Democrats, would allow states to decide gay marriage and abortion issues with no federal bans despite personal views, supports expanding visas so larger flow of legal immigrants can come to U.S., stronger pro-environmental record compared with other Republicans, history of fighting corrupt government is bipartisan.
Cons: Entered race a bit late as initial tide of support had begun to wane, trying to shake tag of being "lazy", McCain-Feingold support while in Senate still remembered by some conservatives.
My Personal Thoughts: My man Fred. I personally believe that this man has all the answers to issues and that his methods would placate a lot of liberals as well as conservatives. For instance, on abortion, his "state's rights" stance allows for abortions to be legal in states that make it so...which means that liberal states get what they want, and conservative states get what they want as well.
The media does not seem to recognize this (accidentally or intentionally), he gets somewhat lumped in with a lot of other conservatives, even though his federalist viewpoints are at odds with some of the bigger-government conservatives.
Thompson had a lot of strong support over the summer, but I feel that the drop in support has less to do with his campaign performance than it does with the Huckabee surge in Iowa (due to Thompson not being a part of the Ames straw poll) and the general public's short-term memory in terms of McCain's immigration debacle. Thompson has run a more traditional campaign than many expected (especially compared to his early use of the internet in the exploratory stages of his campaign), and this caused many to think he would run a much different campaign than he has.
However, now that Thompson has fleshed out his ideas with more details and substance, he needs to start turning on the charm and turning up the heat left and right during the next several weeks leading up to Iowa (the CNN/YouTube debate was a great showing for him). If he can do so, and eat into the Romney/Huckabee votes, a strong 3rd place finish would bode well for him going into future elections (especially in terms of holding his higher numbers in the south). If not, then the GOP will be looking at a different candidate to make a run at the White House.
Party: Republican
Political Background: Former Senator from Tennessee, Former Chairman - Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, Former Minority Counsel - Senate Watergate Committee
Campaign Website: http://www.fred08.com/
GOP Appeal: Staunch federalist and state's rights supporter, folksy and humored demeanor appeals to middle- and working-class, has more-detailed policy initiatives than any other candidate in either party, supports constructionist judiciaries, promotes school vouchers, pro-capital punishment and "truth-in-sentencing" for violent crimes, strong pro-2nd Amendment stance, supports stronger border security, pro-"smart" free trade, free market advocate, long history of fighting corruption in government, strong stances on waste and fraud in government spending, "get tough" stance on national security.
Cross-over Appeal to Dems: Foreign policy views appeal to Reagan Democrats, would allow states to decide gay marriage and abortion issues with no federal bans despite personal views, supports expanding visas so larger flow of legal immigrants can come to U.S., stronger pro-environmental record compared with other Republicans, history of fighting corrupt government is bipartisan.
Cons: Entered race a bit late as initial tide of support had begun to wane, trying to shake tag of being "lazy", McCain-Feingold support while in Senate still remembered by some conservatives.
My Personal Thoughts: My man Fred. I personally believe that this man has all the answers to issues and that his methods would placate a lot of liberals as well as conservatives. For instance, on abortion, his "state's rights" stance allows for abortions to be legal in states that make it so...which means that liberal states get what they want, and conservative states get what they want as well.
The media does not seem to recognize this (accidentally or intentionally), he gets somewhat lumped in with a lot of other conservatives, even though his federalist viewpoints are at odds with some of the bigger-government conservatives.
Thompson had a lot of strong support over the summer, but I feel that the drop in support has less to do with his campaign performance than it does with the Huckabee surge in Iowa (due to Thompson not being a part of the Ames straw poll) and the general public's short-term memory in terms of McCain's immigration debacle. Thompson has run a more traditional campaign than many expected (especially compared to his early use of the internet in the exploratory stages of his campaign), and this caused many to think he would run a much different campaign than he has.
However, now that Thompson has fleshed out his ideas with more details and substance, he needs to start turning on the charm and turning up the heat left and right during the next several weeks leading up to Iowa (the CNN/YouTube debate was a great showing for him). If he can do so, and eat into the Romney/Huckabee votes, a strong 3rd place finish would bode well for him going into future elections (especially in terms of holding his higher numbers in the south). If not, then the GOP will be looking at a different candidate to make a run at the White House.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
