Who is the Republican frontrunner?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Crazy scenario, but I think it could happen (1% chance):

Iowa:
Huckabee wins, Thompson 2nd, Romney 3rd, Paul 4th
Huckabee wins and gets a lot of momentum, but Thompson finishing 2nd hurts Romney incredibly and kills his momentum heading to NH.  Paul supporters are thrilled by his 4th place finish.  Ron Paul then takes the NH primary over Romney with Huck finishing 4th to Giuliani.  Huck wins SC w/Thompson 2nd, and Paul 3rd.  Paul uses this momentum and money to win NV and pull 2nd in FL.  He does well in the big states on Super Tuesday and gets the nod

haha! the only people that support paul are stoners and college kids.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Crazy scenario, but I think it could happen (1% chance):

Iowa:
Huckabee wins, Thompson 2nd, Romney 3rd, Paul 4th
Huckabee wins and gets a lot of momentum, but Thompson finishing 2nd hurts Romney incredibly and kills his momentum heading to NH.  Paul supporters are thrilled by his 4th place finish.  Ron Paul then takes the NH primary over Romney with Huck finishing 4th to Giuliani.  Huck wins SC w/Thompson 2nd, and Paul 3rd.  Paul uses this momentum and money to win NV and pull 2nd in FL.  He does well in the big states on Super Tuesday and gets the nod

haha! the only people that support paul are stoners and college kids.

don't forget the neo-Nazis and white nationalists.

and the conspiracy theorists.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Crazy scenario, but I think it could happen (1% chance):

Iowa:
Huckabee wins, Thompson 2nd, Romney 3rd, Paul 4th
Huckabee wins and gets a lot of momentum, but Thompson finishing 2nd hurts Romney incredibly and kills his momentum heading to NH.  Paul supporters are thrilled by his 4th place finish.  Ron Paul then takes the NH primary over Romney with Huck finishing 4th to Giuliani.  Huck wins SC w/Thompson 2nd, and Paul 3rd.  Paul uses this momentum and money to win NV and pull 2nd in FL.  He does well in the big states on Super Tuesday and gets the nod

haha! the only people that support paul are stoners and college kids.

don't forget the neo-Nazis and white nationalists.

and those who favor real change and small government, the biggest reason I support him is because he actually believes what he is saying

what he is saying is unrealistic. he looks at the world through rose colored glasses. no CIA? no FBI? Protectionism? No income tax and he may consider a flat tax? That may have worked back in the 1800s, but not today.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I'm one of the rare ones that still voted for Romney.

My disqualification of the other two:

Giuliani - His numbers look fairly impressive until you take into account he's probably at his ceiling of support. And they're only going to go down once he loses the early states. His strategy appears to be to ignore early states and focus on nationwide, and hoping he can weather the blows from the early states to win overall. Might've been valid back when it was a 4/5-way race, but not really at this point.

Huckabee - I'm not buying one poll that shows him with a nationwide lead in the MoE. There's still no guarantee he wins Iowa, and even if he does, he has nowhere to go from there. He ain't getting NH. He might be competitive in some of the new Super Tuesday states, but does he have the money or organization to compete with Romney? Not really. Plus I think this Dumond thing is going to hurt, and take a look at Free Republic's postings on it for proof (one guy has even flat out said he would vote for Hillary over Huckabee!)

However what Tweed said is largely true as well.

Romney has the most money and organization, but I still cant see him winning the nomination. He does too poorly in southern states and I think that will be exposed before he can win enough to secure the nomination.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Click on the December 4th video. http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/webcast_archives.aspx

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Paul, Fred Thompson, McCain, and Huckabee are the ones supporting a flat tax. (Not to mention that the current Republican darling Huckabee said in a nationally-televised debate just last week he was going to dissolve the IRS.)

Giuliani and Romney are strongly against it.

Paul is very VERY anti-protectionism. And a quick google search shows me that Paul has never said "no CIA" or "no FBI".

So...get some facts first?

I've seen Paul say in multiple interviews on TV say he planned to do away with the FBI and the CIA. I like the flat tax, but Paul never said he was for it .. simply that he would entertain some sort of idea like that. He's also for returning to the gold standard because printing money is unconstitutional. But I know I can't win an argument with a Paul supporter. They are sipping the same kool aid that he is.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I miss George Allen. He is the man.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Click on the December 4th video. http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/webcast_archives.aspx

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Paul, Fred Thompson, McCain, and Huckabee are the ones supporting a flat tax. (Not to mention that the current Republican darling Huckabee said in a nationally-televised debate just last week he was going to dissolve the IRS.)

Giuliani and Romney are strongly against it.

Paul is very VERY anti-protectionism. And a quick google search shows me that Paul has never said "no CIA" or "no FBI".

So...get some facts first?

I've seen Paul say in multiple interviews on TV say he planned to do away with the FBI and the CIA.

Link?

And who do you support?

Talk bad about us all you want, but I do know this. Adherents of the libertarian philosophy are about 15% of the country based on the diamond chart, and no Republican will win in 2008 against the Democrat without our support. It's one of the side effects of a 50/50 nation. So the eventual Republican nominee is going to have to moderate his position to appease libertarians due to Paul's passionate support.

He's gone from being someone I supported but thought would be down at Tom Tancredo numbers to someone that has had massive fundraising from a grassroots base that I did not know existed, and his numbers have jumped five-fold. He has way outperformed my expectations, which to me shows that there are a lot of Republicans out there sick at what the party has become while in power.

The link I provided was two professional pollsters that thought Paul would get double digits in Iowa and might even finish ahead of Giuliani. Not sure if it will happen or not, but the fact it's even being broached is in itself an achievement from where he started. Who'da thunk that six months ago?

So you better learn to love us. We're here, and we're not going away.


Republican Order:

1. Romney (still, although he's slipping)
2. Giuliani (he just needs to hang in there til the big states vote)
3. Huckabee (rising hard)
4. McCain (not sure who of the 3 above him he needs to take down)
5. Fred Thompson (needs to fight off both Romney and Huckabee now, as his YouTube ad in the debate showed)
6. Paul
7. Tancredo
8. Hunter

I don't have a video link other than the one when he was on Bill Mahers' show on youtube. It was on Keith Olberman's show on MSNBC. It's fine if you dont want to believe me. I know we need libertarian's in the election, but I simply said some of Paul's policies are just implausible. Bit like i said, i know i cant win an argument with a Paul supporter. You, like the rest, are so quick to jump and attack when someone says something negative about him.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Watch the Republican race end up being boring as watching paint dry, in the end...it could easily be "Huckabee wins most every state but NH and UT" at the rate this is going.

Yup, Huckabee wins, the GOP gets absolutely slaugtered in the GE for electing somebody like that, and hopefully then the Republican Party will wake up and dump the religious right.

Since the GOP is going to lose anyway, we might as well lose productively, I suppose.  Shame that that guarantees that Al Franken gets into the Senate on coattails, though.

You fellows are wrong - Huckabee is the Republicans best chance, both because he is the sort that appeals to their voters (people like the Mormon and the New York Italian Catholic are useless to them), and because he gives them a shot at Arkansas.  I think he'll still lose Arkansas and the election, but he will do much better than those so called 'moderates'.

The reason is, as I see it, winning PA or NJ is a pipe dream.. even NH is hopeless.  But they can still win with Ohio and Arkansas.

I think the idea of appearing to stand for something works for Republicans as well as Democrats.

winning PA is hardly a pipe dream .. it is tied in the latest polls and Bush came close to winning it in 2004. Outside of Philadelphia, it is very much a republican state. It is very much in play for a moderate like Giuliani. Not ever election will be like 2004. If Hillary is the Dem nominee, she will win Arkansas most likely even if Huckabee is the GOP nominee, and Huck will have no chance in the north at all. Rudy will bring Wisconsin, PA, NJ, and Conn into play, even if he doesnt win but one of them.