Saturday, January 05, 2008
Iowa caucus vs. New Hampshire primary
After placing second in the Iowa caucuses, Governor Mitt Romney is still in the game, as is Fred Thompson coming in third. Mitt's trouble is that he has to fight on many fronts at once, taking him away from his own message on how he will lead the nation. The media is on Mitts case, knowing he is the best qualified for the job, and the one democrats will need to beat later, so they're trying to push his rivals for an early knock-out.
Fred Thompson simply took too long to make up his mind about running, and placed a distant third with John McCain, but Fred has a good message, and now seems prepared to lead if he wins the nomination.
Despite these flaws, a Romney-Thompson ticket could be the best, in that order, for the Republicans against the Democrats next November.
Can Mitt come back with a win at the first primary in New Hampshire? Of course he can. He has the money and the organization to do it, right next door to where he was Governor. Besides that, there aren't nearly as many evangelicals there, to fall for feel good one-liners from a so-called minister holding the Bible in one hand, and flag in the other.
Mitt Romney sticks with the facts and records, which should be the real test of who is qualified to be president, and not one who panders to Christians with obvious ads trying to hood-wink voters with a Cross and Christmas tree, thus living up to his Huckster reputation.
Romney said he'd be satisfied with finishing second in New Hampshire. "I would like to take one of those two tickets out of New Hampshire," he told reporters.
Mitt realizes that Iowa's results showed voters are looking for someone who can bring fresh ideas to Washington, casting himself as the outsider.
"There is no way Sen. McCain is going to be able to come into New Hampshire and say he is the candidate that represents change," said Romney, who was once dubbed "Mr Turnaround" for rescuing the debt-ridden Salt Lake City Olympics in 2002 and erasing the Massachusetts state debt when governor.
"Every place I've been I've brought change."
Romney took a punch from the Huckster, who by the way is not a real conservative no matter how much he claims to be. The facts and his record as governor in Arkansas prove beyond doubt that Huck is far too liberal in raising taxes, and granting illegals sanctuary, as is New Hampshire rival John McCain, who voted against the Bush tax cuts twice while siding with democrats on legislation. Huck is also bad on national security and foreign policy as proven in debates.
Senator John McCain is way past his prime, while Romney is still in his. Also, McCain has been a senator for so long as to be a contributor of status-quo problems in Washington, whereas Mitt wants new solutions. Mitt handled security at the Olympic games soon after 9/11 with steady leadership, while McCain was giving excuses for bad legislation with his name on it.
McCain's problems stem from his dreadful CFR bill that was basically meant to appease democrats, but would effectively shut out the Republicans during election runs, thus giving the media full control over what gets advertised and talked about, which obviously would be for liberals and against conservatives. This is being proven now with the constant bashing by the media of Mitt Romney in favor of Hike Muckabee, who they see as an "easy kill" in the general election, or so they claim.
But perhaps the Huckster is the one they really want because he follows Bill Clinton, plays a musical instrument on Leno, just like Clinton did with the Saxaphone, and may do better for the democrats than Hillary would.
After all, the two former governors from Hope are selling the same moon shine, even as a new distributor, also running on H O PE, selling a 1970's dream of new-age utopia. The liberals are waiting in line with their Kool-aid cups ready to drink-up!
The inexperienced B. Hussein Obama won big in Iowa, because the alternative of Hillary Clinton seemed worse for folks in middle America. But their differences are only in age, color and gender, while the politics are the virtually identical, ie: promising the same old agenda of raising taxes as high as possible to increase dependence on bigger government, putting more constraints on businesses and free markets, increasing inflation, resulting recession. With the DNC pulling the strings, 1929 will seem like a good year compared to what could be coming if they dupe enough people with their same old schemes to pull off a win.
Dems are just a one-trick-pony with a bum leg.
The democrat controlled congress' approval rating shows beyond doubt that they cannot govern, as I predicted back before they won control of congress. Their presidents are incompetent, anti-American criminals, always pushing against freedom of the individual, with group-think-socializm, despite being proven wrong.
The current forecast for investors, business and the general economy calls for heavy storms if dems win, so batten down the hatches, prepare to get your money out of the market, and pray hard they don't. But most of all, VOTE!
© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.|