Who should conservatives vote for in the Republican primaries on Super Tuesday? Do we have to gag or panic that McCain might win? Should we vote for Romney to stop McCain as Lawrence Auster is suggesting?
If Huckabee and Romney split the conservative vote in winner take all states does that mean that McCain wins many of them with only 35 to 40 percent of the vote in those states? Could we see a McCain Landslide on Super Tuesday? Will the MSM anoint him as our leader, if they haven’t already?
On their websites, Huckabee and Romney both have positions against radical Islam and illegal immigration. However, Huckabees are better.
http://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/huckabee-v-romney-on-immigration-and-islam/
Romney is more likely to win according to some than Huckabee. Lawrence Auster is saying vote for Romney.
Where should Fred Thompson supporters go is discussed here, including that Duncan Hunter endorsed Huckabee:
http://vanishingamerican.freeforums.org/viewtopic.php?t=629
Tom Tancredo endorsed Romney, however. As has Lawrence Auster. Are conservatives coalescing around Romney as the alternative to McCain?
http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Rep-Pres-Primary.php
The national poll shows Huckabee and Romeny equal around 20 percent each. McCain is around 30 percent.
In Alabama and Georgia, Huckabee leads all. In Colorado, Romney leads by far. In Tennessee, Huckabee leads. Also in Missouri.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Duper_Tuesday
Not all states are winner take all, state wide. Wiki has a table in the above link for the Republican primaries on Feb 5, 2008.. WTA means winner take all. Not all are WTA.
For those who live in a southern state, it appears voting for Huckabee is the sound choice. For those in Romney lead states, Romney is a sound choice. There are some of those.
What about states like California, where Romney and Huckabee together could stop McCain but separately they can’t? California is winner take all at the district level not the state level. But the distribution is likely to be the same by districts. Nonetheless, there may be North South splits or East West or urban and rural, etc.
Lawrence Auster discusses Romney in many posts. One recent one with reader comments is here:
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/009805.html
There is, of course, Ron Paul. Ron Paul is a protest vote against the establishment and what it has done to us. This is a reasonable vote to make as well. Pollster indicates this is down to about 3 or 4 percent, although Poll may tend to get more votes than he polls.
There likely isn’t going to be a coalescing around Romney in the South. Whether that is what should happen in the rest of the country is hard to say. Lawrence Auster lives in New York, so maybe for the Northeast that is the best solution.
Voting Romney not Huckabee appears to apply in California and Illinois using the Pollster state by state polls at the above link. In California its McCain 37, Romney 26, and Huckabee around 12. So in that state, conservatives should rally around Romney if they want to stop McCain.
If state by state, voters are willing to join with Romney or Huckabee where they have a clear lead, then McCain can be stopped. Most conservatives don’t want McCain. So this is doable.
==
An analysis of Romney having negative ratings among Huckabee voters is at Opinionated Catholic:
http://opinionatedcatholic.blogspot.com/2008/01/myth-that-huckabee-voters-are-romney.html
This is a very good analysis. It basically indicates that Romney has done negative campaigning and this may make it hard for him to win voters from candidates he attacked. That also depends on how firmly those voters were attached to those candidates. Lawrence Auster advises Romney to go even more negative.
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/009806.html
==
A good state by state analysis by Ed Sistrunk:
==
Romney won the debate according to his roundup of views:
http://illinoisans-4-mitt-romney.blogspot.com/2008/01/mitt-romney-at-second-reagan-library_30.html
This is close to the above discussion.
