Archive for the 'Huckabee Romney Choice' Category

Stop McCain Vote Romney or is it Huckabee or Paul?

January 31, 2008

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.

https://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:

http://sistrunk.net/?p=82

==

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.

Advertisements

Huckabee v. Romney on Immigration and Islam

January 25, 2008

Who is better on these two issues for invaders/dis-inviters? (Meaning we invade them and dis-invite them from coming here.)

Huckabee and Romney both say radical Islam in some form or another is a threat. Huckabee seems to think we are at war and need to fight it. Romney seems to think we should give aid to our enemies, who he thinks are the answer.

Romney really believes in H-1B supremacy to Americans in the technical arts. Do we really want that?

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/009751.html

Huckabee “moved right on immigration to a huge degree (just contrast that with Dubya!)” Clark Coleman.

If invaders/disinviters are looking for someone who deeply believes in the war with Islam and will keep the base on anti-immigration is Huckabee their man?

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Issues.Home

Huckabee lists immigration as his first two issue points. He has adopted positions from Center for Immigration Studies and met with Roy Beck of Numbers USA.

Huckabee has gone to Beck and made his confirmation and put it in writing on his webpage. Romney hasn’t. To Romney, Roy Beck is not Harvard B-School material. Its impossible for Romney to do what Huckabee did, take Beck and us seriously as equals.

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_id=20

  • I believe that we are currently engaged in a world war. This war is not a conventional war, and these terrorists are not a conventional enemy.
  • The top priority of the President as Commander in Chief is first and foremost protecting our own citizens.
  • I believe in the Powell Doctrine of using overwhelming force to accomplish a mission.

Is this the Huckabee Doctrine? Will we actually fight our enemies instead of inviting them to give money to the Bush Clinton families?

http://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watch/index

Do Huck’s real views come out in his issues? While with Mitt you get marketing research spewed back at you?

The defeat of this radical and violent faction of Islam must be achieved through a combination of American resolve, international effort, and the rejection of violence by moderate, modern, mainstream Muslims. An effective strategy will involve both military and diplomatic actions to support modern Muslim nations. America must help lead a broad-based international coalition that promotes secular education, modern financial and economic policies, international trade, and human rights.

This is the summary first paragraph of Romney’s war with Jihad. This is the same HBS Bush plan? Its not a real belief in a war with people who hate us. Its the idea of just tinkering with them a little and they will understand us. They already understand us. They want to take our lands and subjugate us and then ethnically cleanse us.

Romney first paragraph on immigration:

Immigration has been an important part of our nation’s success. The current system, however, puts up a concrete wall to the best and brightest, yet those without skill or education are able to walk across the border. We must reform the current immigration laws so we can secure our borders, implement a mandatory biometrically enabled, tamper proof documentation and employment verification system, and increase legal immigration into America.

Romney insisted on saying at the end of one debate, ABC News before New Hampshire I believe, that everyone of the candidates supports legal immigration. When do we realize that Romney and Bush are both Harvard Business School MBA’s who really believe in this?

Bush and Romney both believe in the HBS approach to the war on Islam. Bush and Romney both believe in mass legal immigration. They both say this over and over.

Romney is just a smarter smoother version of Bush. Romney is what Harvard Business School wants to achieve. HBS is a hotbed of internationalism, far more so than it was in the 1920’s when the Soviets were recruiting Harry Dexter White as a Harvard econ Ph.D. Now that philosophy is taught from HBS.

HBS was once loyal to America. That was the HBS of McNamara. HBS taught making America the factory of the world. Now it teaches the Morgenthau Plan on America. De-industrialize Nazi Amerika is the attitude of HBS. Hillbillies are stupid and gullible is their attitude towards us.
Now HBS is against America and teaches disdain and contempt of hillbilly Americans in fly over country. We are workers to be subjugated to HBS. The HBS attitude to us is about the same as that of Islam. That is what Bush and Romney believe in their bones.

Both Bush and Romney are deeply internationalist and have no loyalty to Americans in any ethnic or genetic sense. The very idea of such a loyalty is repugnant to them. That means our ethnic cleansing is something they want.

Who we pick tends to be who we believe in. They have the soap box. Its very important to look at what they say in writing. If we look at what is on their webpages now in writing, Huckabee is writing what we write (invade them not us-ers that is) to a large extent. Mitt Romney is writing the opposite.

Romney is an invite them here and give them money there to be more moderate. That doesn’t work. If Romney can’t see that now, he isn’t going to.

Romney believes in the Gospel according to Harvard Business School. That has made him and that is who he is. That is what he wrote on his webpage. Read it. He isn’t going to be better governing than he is in what he writes now.

Compare Romney’s paragraph on immigration, which is Bush Rovian to Huckabee’s plan which is based on CIS as he says:

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_id=26

Huckabee has moved to our side at least in writing. Romney is against our side in writing. That means Romney is no choice for us.

Huckabee has strengthened (Auster says solidified) his position against amnesty.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/009709.html

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=1206

==

January 19, 2008 – 11:38 PM

Numbers USA: No Amnesty Pledge

Yesterday, I signed the following pledge:

AMERICANS for BETTER IMMIGRATION

NO AMNESTY PLEDGE

“I pledge to oppose amnesty or any other special path to citizenship for the millions of foreign nationals unlawfully present in the United States. As President, I will fully implement enforcement measures that, over time, will lead to the attrition of our illegal immigrant population. I also pledge to make security of our borders a top priority of my administration.”

To learn more about my Secure America Plan click here.

To view the pledge Governor Huckabee signed, click here (pdf-384kb).

Important points:

1. The 12 million illegal immigrants now here will have to go home.

2. They will not get any legal status while here that allows them to remain long-term.

3. Once in their home countries, they may apply for re-admittance to the U.S. as immigrants, visitors or temporary workers through normal channels.

4. Once in their home countries, they will not receive any special privileges on the basis of their having been in the U.S. illegally, such as being put to the front of a visa line.

5. There will be no new categories or programs through which they may re-enter the U.S.

6. There will not be an expansion of green cards in any existing categories that will speed up their movement to the front of the line.

(The Governor agreed to this pledge made to the American people with his public signing before the national media on Jan. 16, 2008 at North Greenville University, South Carolina.)

%d bloggers like this: