Campaign 2008 – President – Page 11

Odds and ends no. 8

Haven’t done an “odds and ends” post since February but I have a few itty-bitty items tonight that I wanted to touch on:

Saw this in my e-mail box today. Apparently Mike Huckabee’s campaign manager Chip Saltsman agreed with my assessment last night about his amount of face time:

Well that debate was definitely different. Gov. Huckabee hit every question out of the park but he wasn’t asked nearly enough questions…Given the actual amount of air time the Governor had at today’s debate, we are clearly going to need the financial resources to cut through the media filter and speak directly with voters.

Yes, he couched it as a fundraising appeal but it’s nice to have my observation validated. However, one thing I’ll promise Governor Huckabee is as much time to answer my questions as he desires. On his blogsite he does solicit “blogs for interview” and I’d certainly be happy to ask him a few tough but fair questions that I feel would better inform the voters. And he can take just as many words as his heart desires to answer them. After all, while I’ve endorsed Duncan Hunter bear in mind that even my bottom choice among the GOP hopefuls is far, far better than any Democrat.

Speaking of Democrats, another e-mail I got was from Bill Richardson’s Presidential campaign. I’m not sure he’s yet gotten the memo where President Bush can’t be elected to a third term. But he sure borrowed a page from his cohort John Edwards and is one of eight governors suing President Bush over his veto of the SCHIP reauthorization. Richardson notes:

The President has been openly hostile to children’s health care. New SCHIP regulations that his Administration issued in August violate the intent of Congress, interfering with the states’ existing SCHIP programs and limiting their expansion.

And now we’re joining forces with New York, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, Washington, Arizona, and New Hampshire — and we’re taking President Bush to court.

Somehow I KNEW Maryland would be in on that. Naturally, all of the governors involved are Democrats.

On another recent post, the results are in for the “In Honor” fund drive. 35 blogs helped with the effort, and the total raised was $5,823. It was short of their revised $10,000 goal but blew by the original $2,000 benchmark they set. So if any of you donated, give yourselves a hand.

I’ll leave you with this for tonight. On a totally unrelated note, it’s time to crank up the Iron Maiden. I didn’t notice it until the very end but my last post on the Green Fund was post number 666. It’s sort of a funny milestone I guess, and given the tendency of radical environmentalists to equate their cause to a religion it’s possibly more appropriate than one would think at first glance.

All quiet on the western front

A couple quick items about the Presidential race and Maryland’s part in it to start this evening. I may scope out the rebroadcast of the GOP debate just to hiss at Chris Matthews. Who puts a debate on at 4:00 in the afternoon anyway?

Over the weekend, I pledged to keep tabs on Barack Obama’s upcoming Maryland visit. It’s not like I expect him to say anything other than his faux-populist big government solutions to all of America’s myriad problems; no, the reason I find it interesting is the split that it puts in Maryland’s highest offices because our Attorney General Doug Gansler is listed as a co-host for the Obama stop while Governor O’Malley endorsed Hillary way back in May. And while my memory is that a big deal was made days ahead of Hillary doing a fundraiser in Annapolis a few months back, I’ve heard nothing from Maryland’s or DC’s major news outlets regarding the Obama stop in Largo.

The other interesting note comes from the Maryland for Fred Thompson blog as blogger Ted Pibil participated in a conference call with Thompson campaign manager Bill Lacy. As would be expected, Lacy was upbeat about Thompson’s camapign and having done a similar conference call myself with Duncan Hunter, I would expect nothing less.

I’m still a little p.o.’ed about Thompson skipping the Maryland debate, but in a conversation I had recently with a political strategist I’ve come to know from a local campaign he postulated that Thompson had everything to lose by participating in a debate with the so-called “second tier” candidates. If he dominated the field, well, it was just a bunch of the also-rans in the polls that he beat. On the other hand, if he were outshone the Thompson campaign would have to deal with spinning a number of excuses for his poor performance.

Thompson is already getting a reputation as not too great of a speaker on the campaign stump. There’s at least one national story circulating just today about Dan Bartlett, onetime aide for President Bush, who’s quoted that Thompson “peaked in the spring before he became an official candidate and has little chance now to become the nominee,” and that Fred was the biggest dud thus far compared to expectations. However, a close reading of the story by AP writer Jennifer Loven shows that Bartlett made these comments in a speech back on September 13, shortly after Thompson entered the race. Interesting how that timing works, huh?

What I think I’ll do is post this now and add accordingly after I’ve watched some of the debate. The monoblogue world headquarters is situated where I can’t see my TV so I’ll shut down for now and come back with quick reaction to what was said this afternoon.

Debate notes, 12:30 a.m.

No, the debate didn’t last that long, I was waiting for a storm to clear since my lights flickered a couple times. Anyway, did it seem to those few of you who watched (after all, the debate was on MSNBC) that Rudy, Mitt, and Fred got the most face time? Much like a TV show cast, you had three lead stars, the comic relief (Ron Paul) and the people who get a couple lines in the background (Huckabee and McCain to an extent, but Brownback, Hunter, and Tancredo really got the shaft.)

And they had their share of annoying questions – are topics like CEO profits and the “shrinking American dream” really questions or editorial comments? Quit playing the class envy card already.

So how did I rate the participants? In order, I’d say Giuliani and Tancredo did the best, Hunter did well, and Fred Thompson scored well with his points but for an actor he really stammered through a couple questions. Romney was sort of a mixed bag for me, while Huckabee and Brownback went back to pandering again on a couple questions. I wasn’t impressed with John McCain and frankly Ron Paul was irritating.

That’s how I looked at it, but I’m sure several comments are forthcoming with a lot of differing opinions.

Reevaluating Fred Thompson

Since I have a couple or three new readers, let me start out by saying welcome to monoblogue. This isn’t a new site, so you pick me up doing something I promised to write last weekend for those who get a weekly e-mail update that I do (if you wish to be added to the list, my e-mail address is in the upper left-hand corner.)

Back in May I attended the Maryland state GOP convention. Yes, we have a few Republicans here despite Governor Martin O’Malley’s bid to tax us out of existence. Anyway, at the convention it was encouraged that we figure out which candidate to throw our support behind and do so relatively early. And since I’m one that really HATES campaigns based on thirty-second commercials and writes a website dedicated in part to informing voters, I decided to make a public show and series of posts on how I arrived at my decision. In turn, the issues I base my decision on come from what I call my “50 year plan”, in which I make suggestions to the future leaders of America on policies they should follow and attempt to base my ideas on our founding principles.

So the original series of posts is here, and if you go to the start of the 50 year plan topic to the left you’ll see where I stand on them.

Now, to Fred Thompson. I originally included him in my evaluation but could only base it on the little I knew at the time in July and August. Now that he’s a full-fledged candidate this gives me an opportunity to finish this job. Each of my topics was assigned a point scale that increased with greater importance, so I’ll go through what I know about Fred from his website. However, feel free to add items if you think I’m incorrectly interpreting something said…I’ve added points when people have pointed out items I didn’t see.

Unfortunately, Fred doesn’t go into eniment domain or property rights (as in the Kelo decision) in any meaningful way, so I can’t give him any points there. Not many candidates did, so his zero points of 5 don’t put him far down the list.

On the Second Amendment, here’s what Fred has to say:

I strongly support the Second Amendment of the Constitution, which protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms. Gun control is touted as a major crime-control measure. But some of the places with the strictest gun-control laws also have high violent-crime rates. Disarming law-abiding citizens does not prevent crime. The answer to violent crime is smart, effective, and aggressive law enforcement. The real effect of these gun-control measures is to place onerous restrictions on law-abiding citizens who use firearms for such legal activities as self-defense, sport-shooting, hunting, and collecting. I am committed to:

Strictly enforcing existing laws and severely punishing violent criminals.

Protecting the rights individual Americans enjoy under the Second Amendment.

In comparison to the rest of the field, Fred is better than average – but I wish he’d talk as much about repealing some of the more egregious federal laws as he does about strict enforcement. I’d rerank him about where I ranked John McCain, who got 5.5 out of 7 points in my previous Second Amendment post. So Fred has 5.5 points and would move up to tie McCain for third. Since I’d previously talked about Fred, he jumped 3.5 points from my original ranking.

Unfortunately, Fred still doesn’t go into election or campaign finance reform so he remains with no points of the nine I gave on that topic. And on trade and job creation, aside from a call to “open markets abroad to American goods” he doesn’t go into nearly the specifics that other candidates like Duncan Hunter have on their individual websites. However, having used the Club for Growth as a guide to many of the other candidates, I’ll defer to their generally positive evaluation of Senator Thompson’s record and award him points accordingly. Sam Brownback had top marks among the candidates on my original post, and I think Thompson deserves the same 7 points of 11. He now has 12.5 points overall and would rank second at that point.

Education also ranked as an important issue with me. Fred has generally agreeable things on his mind for what to do with the federal government and education:

A well-educated citizenry is vital to our security, our economy, and our democracy. Despite the tens of billions of dollars spent on education by Washington each year, and the hundreds of federal education programs now in place, our children are still falling behind, particularly in subjects crucial to the global economy in which we live. At a time when America is behind other developed countries in education excellence, the federal role in education is too intrusive and too bureaucratic, and has become part of the problem. State and local governments are closest to the parents, the kids, and the schools, and best situated to implement changes and innovations that best educate children. I am committed to:

Giving parents more choices in education and schools less bureaucracy.

Reviewing federal programs for cost-effectiveness, reducing federal mandates, returning education money to the states, and empowering parents by promoting voucher programs, charter schools, and other innovations that enhance education excellence through competition and choice.

Encouraging students and teachers to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and math—fields that are crucial to our security, competitiveness, and prosperity.

Promoting transparency to assess performance, promote accountability, and share innovations in education at all levels.

There’s only two quibbles I have with this set of ideas. One is asking the question of how he would encourage the students and teachers to pursue particular careers and the other regards transparency. Keeping something valuable behind glass is less useful than taking it away altogether. Let the states be laboratories as you stress in the opening paragraph. And how about money following the child? What Thompson says is good, but a couple others say better things in my view. I’ll award him 8 of 13 points, which leaves him with 20.5 points but puts him in the overall lead!

Only John McCain among Republicans talked about my next subject, which touched on veterans affairs. More or less it became a look of the role of the VA since I decided to defer actual military strategy to a later discussion of the Long War. So no points of 15 for Fred, but it didn’t affect his ranking any among the GOP contenders.

My next topic was energy independence. Senator Thompson has this to say about it:

The energy challenges our nation faces today are real and significant. Our dependence on foreign sources of oil threatens our national security and puts our economic prosperity at risk. America must rise to the challenge and take the steps necessary to become more energy independent before this becomes a crisis. No one solution will solve the energy challenges we face; all ideas must be on the table. Greater energy security will enhance our ability to pursue our foreign policy and national security objectives. Increasing our energy independence and investing in alternative energy sources will also produce a healthier environment. And while we don’t know for certain how or why climate change is occurring, it makes sense to take reasonable steps to reduce CO2 emissions without harming our economy. Overall, I am committed to:

A balanced approach to energy security that increases domestic supplies, reduces demand for oil and gas, and promotes alternative fuels and other diverse energy sources.

Investing in renewable and alternative fuels to promote greater energy independence and a cleaner environment.

An energy policy that invests in the advanced technologies of tomorrow and places more emphasis on conservation and energy efficiency.

Conducting research and development into technologies that improve the environment, especially the reduction of CO2 emissions.

My biggest question is who makes all these investments that Fred speaks of? Shouldn’t we leave that to the private sector and not give out the opportunities for boondoggles and pork we see too often with federal research grants? This doesn’t really jibe with where I stand on the issue, but also talking about increasing domestic supplies saves him from a deduction. I think one point of a possible 17 is fair since there were other candidates I docked here. Fred loses the lead but stays in contention with 21.5 points, falling to third.

On the subject of entitlements, Fred doesn’t touch the third rail but does discuss his thoughts on health care:

Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some, however, choose not be insured; others cannot afford it. Every American should be able to get health insurance coverage that is affordable, fully accessible, and portable. Coverage should meet their individual needs and put them in control. Those who propose a one-size-fits-all Washington-controlled program ignore the cost, inefficiency, and inadequate care that such a system offers. Access to affordable, portable health care can be made available for all Americans without imposing new mandates or raising taxes. Current government programs must also be streamlined and improved so that those who truly need help can get the health care they need. I am committed to a healthcare system that:

Realigns programs and creates a system around individual consumers and patients by providing more information and more opportunities to choose affordable health care options that best meet their needs and those of their families.

Improves the individual health of all Americans by shifting to a system that promotes cost-effective prevention, chronic-care management, and personal responsibility

Modernizes delivery and administration of care by encouraging the widespread use of clinical best practices, medical information technology, and other innovations.

Increases competition and consumer choice while streamlining regulations through free-market solutions that benefit individuals and reduce costs for employers.

Promotes and speeds medical research and life-sciences innovation.

In many ways, the criticism I have of the Thompson healthcare plan reflects that I had of his energy plan. For his talk about federalism, it seems like he looks to the bureaucracy to push particular solutions rather than vowing to decrease federal involvement. None of my contenders achieved more than 9 points and Mike Huckabee looked more to the private sector for his healthcare solutions for the most part. So I award Thompson 6 points, raising his total to 27.5 points and jumping him back to second overall.

I noted in my introduction to the next part that “Ben Franklin noted that nothing in life is certain except death and taxes. While you can’t argue with those two truisms, a third corollary one is that Americans feel like they’re being taxed to death. I know I do.” So how does Thompson look at taxes? Here’s what he says on his site:

The U.S. tax code is broken and a burden on U.S. taxpayers and businesses, large and small. Today’s tax code is particularly hostile to savings and investment, and it shows. To make matters worse, its complexity is a drag on our productivity and economic growth. Moreover, taxpayers spend billions of dollars and untold hours each year filling out complicated tax returns, just so they can send more money to Washington, much of it for wasteful programs and the pet projects of special interests. We need lower taxes, and we need to let taxpayers keep more of their hard-earned dollars—they know best where and how to spend them. And we need to make the system simpler and fairer for all. To ensure America’s long term prosperity and economic security, I am committed to:

Fundamental tax reform built on the principles of simplicity, fairness, and growth.

A new tax code that gets the government out of our citizens’ pocketbooks, while enhancing U.S. competitiveness abroad.

Dissolution of the IRS as we know it.

Well Fred, you certainly identify the problems, but to borrow a phrase from a long-ago Presidential campaign and commercial slogan, where’s the beef? Originally I awarded Ron Paul 2 points based on the same idea and lack of specifics, I think that’s fair for Fred as well. No one got more than 14 points of the possible 21, so the small increase won’t hurt Fred a lot. He sits in third place with 29.5 points.

I said this about Fred regarding my next topic, one I call “role of government“:

As far as Fred Thompson’s treatise on federalism goes, it misses the target by just one tick as he says, about education, “It is appropriate for the federal government to provide funding and set goals for the state to meet in exchange for that funding.” No it’s not. Other than that, the man almost sounds like me and I’ll leap him into the running with 22 points. He may become a formidable candidate worth my support once he fleshes out some of the underlying issues he’s not gone into yet.

I’ll stand by what I said then, give Thompson the 22 points (of a possible 23) and now he vaults back into the lead at 51.5 points.

Now we talk about my second-most important topic, immigration. It was worth 25 points to start with and many candidates really helped themselves on the subject. Fred looks at immigration thusly:

The United States is a nation of immigrants. Throughout our history, legal immigrants have brought energy, ideas, strength, and diversity to our country, our economy, and our culture. This must continue. But in the post-9/11 world, immigration is more of a national security issue. A government that cannot secure its borders and determine who may enter and who may not, abrogates a fundamental responsibility. I am committed to:

Securing our borders and enforcing immigration laws. Amnesty is not an option and the toleration of “sanctuary cities” must end.

Reviewing our immigration laws and policies to ensure they advance our national interests.

Uniting Americans by welcoming legal immigrants willing to learn English, assimilate into our communities, and become productive citizens.

Again, a lack of specifics hurts him to an extent. Some of the other candidates are very thorough with their plans and if I agreed with them ranked pretty highly. I’d have to rank Thompson among the lower tier of candidates at this time, giving him 6 points of 25. Since I deducted from people like John McCain, this isn’t so bad and keeps Fred in the running at 57.5 points. He’s right near the top.

Finally, we talk about the Long War, or as Fred puts it, national security. My views are here, and Fred’s are here:

The first responsibility of government is to protect the American people, the homeland, and our way of life. Today we face the urgent threat of radical Islamic terrorists. Al Qaeda is committed to attacking us here at home, and wants to use weapons of mass destruction (WMD) to kill millions. We must never give them that opportunity. We must defeat the terrorists abroad, and that begins in Iraq and Afghanistan—the central fronts in this global war. We must show the world we have the will to fight and win. A weakened America – or an America that appears weaker – will only encourage further attacks. We must persevere. As Commander-in-Chief, the president must ensure the United States has the means to achieve victory. Presidential leadership requires talking to the American people about these stakes, mapping out a clear vision for success, and devising a comprehensive strategy for achieving it. I am committed to:

A larger, more capable, and more modern military that can defeat terrorists, deter adversaries, and defend the U.S. and our interests.

A missile defense system that can protect the U.S. and our allies from long-range ballistic missiles.

An enhanced intelligence community, with robust human-intelligence capabilities, focused on terrorism and proliferation.

A robust approach to homeland security that will protect our nation from terrorists and WMD, regardless of where they come from.

A strengthened system of global alliances to better combat terrorists, proliferators, and traditional threats to our interests.

A judicial system that deals with the realities of terrorists and unlawful enemy combatants.

Perhaps the only two I’d rank higher are Rudy Giuliani and Duncan Hunter, and it’s only because I’m wondering about whether the global alliances Fred speaks of would or wouldn’t include the UN that I don’t give him the full point total. As it is, I’ll rank him next down with 23 points. That puts him right next to the top at 80.5 points.

There were also categories I called “intangibles”, topics that didn’t rise to major issues with me but were enough to swing the totals by a point each. For Fred, he has one negative intangible, which is “(c)ombating the spread of obscenity over TV and other media by making sure parents can better exercise their responsibilities.” It sounds just a touch too much like censorship, so he loses one point from the total. He’ll finish with 79.5 points.

So I’ve now reevaluated Fred Thompson and added Alan Keyes to the mix yesterday. This is how the candidates shake out then:

Duncan Hunter, 82 points
Fred Thompson, 79.5 points
Rudy Giuliani, 79 points
Mike Huckabee, 76 points
Alan Keyes, 62.5 points
Mitt Romney, 45 points
Tom Tancredo, 41.5 points
Ron Paul, 34.5 points
Sam Brownback, 20.5 points
John McCain, 18 points

Really, I’d be happy with any of the top four candidates at this time. Thus, I’ll add Fred Thompson to my list of “recommended” candidates along with Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee, while still maintaining my endorsement of Duncan Hunter. But I’m still a little miffed at Thompson for skipping “our” debate in Baltimore since some of the proceeds from ticket sales were supposed to go to our state and local county parties. I hope he really doesn’t think that poorly of Maryland, since it’s a state I chose to live in (being born originally in Toledo, Ohio.) Maybe an appearance at Wicomico County’s 2008 Lincoln Day Dinner next February will make up for that. (hint hint)

And one final note for the Rushalanche of folks: if you’re curious about my blogging origins this post may answer the question.

Looking at the Keyes campaign

Faithful readers know I went through all of the Presidential candidates and how I felt about their stances on the issues. It culminated in mid-August with my endorsement of Duncan Hunter for President. That post also links to each issue as a reminder.

However, Alan Keyes jumped into the race after I did all of these evaluations so I wanted to see where he stacked up. Thus I’ll go through the issues as I did with the others – luckily with one candidate it’s one post. Keyes has a laundry list of topics on his website but fortunately for keeping this a short post I can link to each as needed!

We’ll start with eminent domain. Keyes talks about the broader subject of property rights on his site. It doesn’t really read to me as addressing the issue of eminent domain, so I’ll give him just 1/2 point of 5 possible. So he has 1/2 point so far and would rank 4th.

The next issue in line was the Second Amendment. Keyes goes deeper into this issue and I agree with the sentiment, but without more specifics I can’t give him many points. I noted in July that Duncan Hunter had a similar statement without specifics, so I’ll give Keyes what I gave Hunter: 3 of 7 points. That brings the Keyes total to 3.5 points and he’d slip to 7th place.

On election and campaign finance reform, Keyes makes quite a statement and also has a video link. I agree with part of what Keyes says, the second principle and the idea of repealing McCain-Feingold. But I can’t abide the first portion because corporate entities and unions, despite their donation patterns, don’t forgo their First Amendment rights. In the video, he does show support for term limits which gave him a couple bonus points.

For that I’m going to give Alan 4 of a possible 9 points. Now he has 7.5 points and a tie for second.

Trade and job creation was my next pet issue. Keyes has a long spiel on the subject of fair trade. Alan really didn’t address the area of job creation, and while he makes some good points I thought he went a little too far toward protectionism. He is a little like Duncan Hunter in that he wants to renegotiate bad trade agreements so I think 5.5 out of 11 points is fair. It would bring Alan to 13 points overall and keeps him in second. At that time Ron Paul led with 13.5 points.

My next step up deals with education. Here’s what Keyes has to say about school choice. He wasn’t doing very well until the last sentence, which saved him to an extent but it’s still sort of vague what concrete steps he’ll take to achieve that end to the government monopoly. I’ll give him 5 of 13 points. At 18.5 points so far, he’s right up near the top – second behind the leader at that point, Tom Tancredo.

Surprisingly, Keyes had nothing on veterans’ affairs or energy independence so he gets no points on either subject. Luckily for him, no one else really made a big move in that time period so he only fell to fourth place overall.

On entitlements, here’s what Keyes states on health care and Social Security.

There were 19 points at stake in my original post. On the plus side for Keyes is his advocacy of HSA’s and his eventual Social Security stance, although it doesn’t go so far as to eliminate it. Deductions include drug importation (which would harm the drug companies) and the preventative care portion, which is similar to something I jumped on Mike Huckabee about. Since Huckabee is in favor of a national smoking ban in public places, would Keyes react the same way? No one had more than 9 points in my original posting and Keyes is not better than any of those. I’ll give him 7 points of 19. That gets him up to 25.5 points and bumps him to third place overall.

Now we move to taxation. Keyes has this to say about the subject and also covers the next area with it as well (role of government vis-a-vis spending.) Had Keyes talked about the other necessary step of repealing the 16th Amendment, he’d get all the points. I’ll match what I gave Tom Tancredo as the highest total for a candidate: 14 of 21 points.

And while I like the idea of a balanced budget amendment, I can just see how many devious ways the government and courts will come up with to get around it. Fiscal conservatism doesn’t need a Constitutional amendment, just a President with cajones to risk a government shutdown to get a steamlined budget to pass. With a lack of specifics, I have to match what I gave similar remarks from Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo, 10 points for that aspect. By combining the two and adding them to his total, Keyes is moving smartly up the list – 49.5 points at this stage is one point off Tom Tancredo’s lead at the juncture.

Two to go, immigration and the Long War. On immigration Keyes is for enforcing existing laws. While it’s well put, just wish he were a little more specific on how you’d secure the border and treat employers who hire illegals. It’s reasonably close to what Ron Paul advocates, so I’ll say it’s worth 15 of 25 points. Surprisingly, Keyes grabs the lead at this point with his 64.5 points.

Unfortunately for Alan, this is where he blows it. When he talks about the war in Iraq, he notes:

I will not for the moment go into the question of whether it was right or wrong to choose Iraq as some kind of strategic priority in the war against terror. I frankly have said in the past and would say now — and not with the wisdom of hindsight either — it was not what would have been my choice.

I take that to mean he would have left Saddam Hussein, a member of the Axis of Evil, as a continuing supporter of groups like Hamas and al-Qaeda. Unacceptable. In particular, I think the statement contradicts what he says in the video here. Since the video is from his Illinois U.S. Senate campaign in 2004 and I’m assuming the statement above is more recent, to me it could even be considered a flip-flop.

Alan makes some good points with what he says about the Long War in general but I cannot let the first part stand. I’m not going to hammer him like I did Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo, but he does deserve some deduction so I’ll dock him 5 points. He’s at 59.5 points now before I look at intangibles, some of the other subjects he goes into on his website that are minor issues to me.

On the intangibles:

Add ponts for being a supporter of Israel, against embryonic stem cell research, abstinence-based sex education when parents allow it, and his stance on the United Nations.

Subtract points for supporting a Constitutional amendment banning abortion. I’m pro-life but don’t think that belongs in the Constitution because it’s a states’ rights item.

His net on intangibles is +3, so his final total is 62.5 points. Here’s how the field now stacks up with Keyes included:

Duncan Hunter, 82 points
Rudy Giuliani, 79 points
Mike Huckabee, 76 points
Alan Keyes, 62.5 points
Mitt Romney, 45 points
Tom Tancredo, 41.5 points
Fred Thompson, 37 points*
Ron Paul, 34.5 points
Sam Brownback, 20.5 points
John McCain, 18 points

*Thompson will be discussed tomorrow since he’s updated the information on his positions for some of the issues since I originally did the list.

I sort of suspected Keyes would be up there and if not for his misunderstanding of the role of Iraq in the Long War he would’ve at least made the “recommended” list. But if you’re one who lies strongly in the “moral conservative” camp Keyes would be at or near the top of your candidates for President.

Election Calendar: October 1-14

A very, very, very slow Election Calendar this time, at least with events I’m aware of. So I’ve added a few short election-related items at the end.

Saturday, October 6: State Senator Rich Colburn has scheduled a fundraiser at the Cambridge American Legion Post #91. Festivities start at 5:30 p.m. and dinner’s set for 6:30 p.m. Admission is $50 – checks should be made payable to “Citizens for Colburn Committee” and mailed to: Citizens for Colburn Committee, 5210 Heron Road, Cambridge, MD 21613. Reservations should be made by calling (410) 924-0098. Congressional candidate Andy Harris is the featured speaker here too as he was yesterday.

Thursday, October 11 (tentative): Once again, it should be Congressman Wayne Gilchrest‘s turn to wax poetic on the AM Salisbury radio show with Bill Reddish. As always, the fun begins at 7:40 a.m. on WICO-AM 1320. This is assuming Wayne gets back from Iraq in time – more on that in my next post.

I also found another intriguing event that will occur just outside the boundaries of my area on October 10, and I’m curious what the press reaction will be. Apparently Barack Obama’s “Countdown to Change” tour will be in PG County so he’ll tread into what’s ostensibly Clinton territory given O’Governor’s support of Hillary. Maybe there’s a Gansler/O’Malley schism brewing because Doug’s listed on the sponsor bill along with Rep. Elijah Cummings.

So juicy doings among the liberal set. Meanwhile, I’ve found out that Joe Arminio pays attention to those things I write about him because he now cites me properly on his site and my coverage of the Wicomico Straw Poll is his top news item. Very good.

Also relating to last week’s events was John Leo Walter, who trumpeted his Straw Poll win from last Monday in the paid vote category. I’d be curious to see the pictures from that since I believe it was his wife Wendy snapping away as we went on. Hopefully I didn’t break their camera.

Hey, I managed to mention all four Republicans running for Congress. So let me talk about the Democrats – while Chris Robinson has done a nice update to his website, his opponent Frank Kratovil hasn’t updated in months. What gives? Makes my job a LOT easier if there’s an updated event list.

Thus ends another week’s Election Calendar. I’ll probably have to update it tomorrow as Andy Harris updates his site – most likely he has other area events besides the Colburn fundraiser.

A free state half-debate

Last night we had a half-debate (plus one) up in Baltimore as just six of the leading ten GOP Presidential contenders bothered to show up for the event purporting to be about “minority” issues.

With the “presumption” that the GOP is for the “majority”, in opening remarks Michael Steele noted that the GOP and blacks had been traditionally at “arm’s length” to the benefit of neither.

Steele was also joined in the crowd by former GOP head Ken Mehlman and Newt Gingrich. It would’ve been much more intriguing had Newt been onstage, but we’ll see what he does in future days. As for the debate itself, here’s how I scored the contenders, in reverse alphabetical order. (I’m standing up for those of us at the tail end of the alphabet – and ballot.)

Tom Tancredo

I was afraid when he stated that he was the only GOP candidate to attend the NAACP convention that Tom would descend into an evening of pandering. But he recovered when he told the assembled he wanted his legacy to be one of helping “all” Americans and that the politics of race was “destructive.” He continued on with that vein, noting that he couldn’t agree with the “race-baiting” of the employment disparity question, saying it had “nothing to do with race”.

Overall, Tancredo made the case for fewer federal laws, particularly in the area of drugs. He also scored points with me on his answer to the DC statehood question, saying that if they want representation they could simply dissolve and become part of Maryland (he also incorrectly stated the same about Virginia, which long ago annexed the portion of the District south of the Potomac.) Another nice touch on the same answer was saying voter ID was “not too much to ask.” Tom also made a winning comment at the end, saying that it was “racist to assume you couldn’t teach” minorities and coming out for school choice.

The only faults I found with Tancredo were the slight pander in the opening statement and talking in favor of drug importation. Overall, I think he showed the best of any candidate including my personal choice, Duncan Hunter. He increased his standing in my view, but I’m still not totally sold on his Long War stance yet – that’s what cost him my endorsement.

Ron Paul

It was obvious by the audience reaction that the “Paulbots” were there in full force. Paul also did his best to advocate for his issues and show that they crossed racial lines. In his answer to the opening question about his absent colleagues, Ron said that he shows up wherever he’s invited to “talk about freedom.”

Much of what he said then was couched in the idea of “emphasizing rights” and building a “free society.” In particular, I enjoyed his citation of black (by popular demand) economist Walter Williams on the minimum wage. In most of his answers, his idea was getting government out of our lives, which I agree with. Unfortunately, Paul spent some of his time talking about a war we entered under “false pretenses”, a “non-declared” war. Like it or not, we are there so I think we need to finish the job with victory. He also struck a negative tone with me by his opposition to the federal death penalty.

Like Tancredo, I agree with Paul on a lot of issues but his opposition to the Long War is the millstone around his neck as far as endorsing him goes.

Alan Keyes

Keyes had a chance to introduce himself as a candidate both to the debate viewers and to me personally since I haven’t looked yet at how he compares with other aspirants on my pet issues. And to start out, if he was attempting to be humorous about him showing up at debates where the “top-tier” candidates skip but not invited to debates where they show, he came across as whining a bit. I doubt they’re really “afraid” of him.

Alan spent a lot of time speaking about a return to morals, referring to the minority community as being affected by “promiscuity” and “hedonism” and their morals being destroyed via government policy. I found his comment about restoring local justices of the peace intriguing, too.

Keyes did do a little bit of pandering though, referring to “corporate interests” and invoking the name of Katrina in his answer to illegals’ path to citizenship. He also talked about creating jobs in black areas – personally I’d like the government to get out of the way and allow job creation in all areas. On foreign policy, he was “appalled” by the “fortress America” attitude some of his cohorts exhibited on Darfur, but also chided President Bush for not choosing “security over democracy” in Iraq.

But looking at his performance overall, he didn’t do a lot to help himself in my standing. I’m thinking he’ll be a middle-of-the-pack candidate on my scale.

Duncan Hunter

Duncan did a good job of sticking to message, even getting a complaint from the moderator that he didn’t answer the question on equal justice for blacks and Latinos. He started out well by not talking about his absent opponents but instead talking about leaving Iraq “in victory” and the border being “on fire.” He refused to pander on the legacy question, correctly pointing out that the GOP led the civil rights effort in the 1950’s and 1960’s. He also made a point on the voter rights/DC voting question that it was Democrats who were allowing their votes to be diluted because illegals were also voting fraudulently. Also I found humorous that he’s in support of statehood for the District if they get the right to keep and bear arms – that was the sticking point in recent legislation to grant statehood.

Hunter also gave a good reply to the question on health care, refusing to make it a racial issue and talking about being able to buy insurance across state lines and tort reform – items that would help all races. I’m not as wild about the idea for tax credits for income derived from home visits, but on the whole Hunter represented himself well. Overall, I’d rank his performance second to Tancredo’s.

Mike Huckabee

Being a top-tier candidate in my ratings and moving up the scale nationally, I expected more from Huckabee. Unfortunately, like Tancredo, he slipped a bit on his opening statement and he never really got back on track as I saw it. First of all, why are you “embarassed” about the other candidates not showing up? It makes you look better. And saying we have a “long way to go” on racial issues only creates more excuses and makes the problem worse.

On too many issues, I was disappointed with Mike’s answers, which to me smacked of various levels of pandering. From talking about a legacy for blacks (as opposed to all of us), to saying there’s “not equal opportunity yet”, and supporting a “Veteran’s Bill of Rights”, Mike went on an opposite tack to those who look to government as needing to become smaller and more colorblind.

While Mike has his heart in the right place about prisons being too crowded with people who simply let their drug and/or alcohol problem get the best of them, I don’t think the three strikes and out policy is “nonsense” like he does. Huckabee’s answer on health care makes sense on the intervention vs. prevention front, but I’m not sure if he wouldn’t succumb to the allure of the single-payer system.

But Mike had company at the bottom of my rankings.

Sam Brownback

Similar to what I said about Huckabee, don’t apologize for those not there. He was correct about the GOP expanding by growing its base, but to do this we need to stick to our principles, not play to whichever specific group is in the crowd. Like Huckabee, Brownback did a lot of pandering. It gave me more questions than answers.

No, we do not to apologize for slavery. I can personally say I’ve never had a slave, since it was illegal for almost a century when I was born. So why apologize?

And if you say we don’t have a colorblind society, does that not become a self-fulfilling remark?

It’s admirable that you spent nights in jail and in a homeless shelter (by choice, not through illegal or immoral activity). Does that really qualify you to be President?

With the three-region solution for Iraq you advocate, do you honestly think that it won’t disintegrate into the civil war some claim is already going on? Wouldn’t that give al-Qaeda three bases of operation?

And finally, why is it so important that education be integrated through affirmative action? It correlates in reverse with what Tom Tancredo said about being racist to think that you can’t teach minorities unless they sit next to a white child.

The only thing Brownback said that I liked was bringing up HSA’s in his answer to the health care query. But overall, he and Mike Huckabee did the least to help themselves in selling their campaign to me.

That’s how I saw each candidate. What was actually said aside, here’s what I really thought of the event and the surrounding aura.

The Maryland GOP is already in somewhat dire straits financially, although because Maryland didn’t vote Republican in the last election we’re all going to be in more dire straits financially as the redistribution of wealth from the producers to the slackers continues apace.

*ahem* Back to my point. There was an effort to have a breakfast featuring the candidates as a fundraiser but that was cancelled when too few expressed an interest. And given the participation tonight, we can see that the so-called frontrunners a) are apparently afraid to debate issues in what’s likely a not-so-friendly setting, and b) value trying to raise money so they can do yet another 30 second commercial more than actually interacting with willing voters in the Maryland GOP. (Yes, we have a few, and we’re working on getting more.)

So here was a chance for Presidential candidates to help out the state party, and many chose to do something else. This should be remembered as you make your selection February 12, 2008.

By the way, I found (h/t to Caughtit and WorcesterRight) a website that matches you with the candidate who agrees with you most on the issues. It’s actually sort of similar to how I came up with my choice but they don’t weigh the particular issues to the extent I do nor do they cover all of them I did. So this is how I matched up with each on the site:

Tom Tancredo – 86.11%
Sam Brownback – 83.33%
Fred Thompson – 83.33%
Mitt Romney – 79.63%
Ron Paul – 77.78%
Duncan Hunter – 76.85%
John McCain – 66.67%
Rudy Giuliani – 64.81%
Mike Huckabee – 64.81%

As I said, Tancredo led my personal rankings for awhile until we got to the Long War. What I find odd is that this site almost comes out in reverse of how I ranked them, with the exception of McCain being near the bottom in both. The website qualifies in the “things that make you go hmmmmm….” category.

They also gave me the Democrats. My highest “match” was a tie between Joe Biden and Bill Richardson, both at 24.07 percent.

Crossposted on RedMaryland.

A discussion with Presidential candidate, Congressman Duncan Hunter

Tonight I was invited to participate in a conference call for supporters in the Maryland and Virginia region, so I accepted the invitation and found out a few interesting things going on with the Hunter Presidential bid. I also got a question in as you’ll read below.

Duncan started out by talking about the “great momentum” his campaign was building, from winning the townhall.com Texas Straw Poll earlier this month to a enthusiastic reception (he was “overwhelmed”) by Michigan Republicans last weekend at their conference on Mackinac Island. A key factor in his reception among Michiganders was his tough stance on trade, vowing to stop allowing China to “cheat” on our existing trade agreements and devaluing its currency. Further, China was using these ill-gotten gains to purchase military hardware that (in my personal opinion) will be used against us in the next couple decades.

While the Congressman is low-ranked on most polls, at this point Duncan saw the race as still one predominantly based on name recognition, where candidates like Fred Thompson have an advantage. Once the campaign got more into issue mode, Hunter thought he’d start moving up the ladder. To that end, beginning next week Duncan would start buying TV time in key states – one thing that surprised me was how inexpensive commercial time is in certain early primary states ($100 for a spot on Fox News, as one example.) Also Hunter pointed out that these commercials would be featured on his website.

This was in response to the first question that was asked. I asked the second one addressed in the twenty-minute call. It was one I’d ask any Republican candidate given the situation here on the Eastern Shore: what policy do you feel is your best for attracting the conservative Democrats to our side to vote for you?

The Congressman likened the situation to that which attracted the Reagan Democrats in 1980, and it was about the same key issue – jobs. There’s pressure on good jobs in this country coming from two fronts – China cheating on its trade agreements as discussed above and illegal immigrants undercutting wages. Hunter gave an example of a drywall contractor who he met in Iowa that employs all American workers getting underbid constantly by unscrupulous contractors employing illegals. Further, Duncan claimed that the established Hispanic community in our country is dead-set against amnesty. I think he qualifies as an expert since he represents San Diego in Congress.

So I thought he gave me a good answer to my question. Then he went further into talking about his efforts to secure the border – Rep. Hunter wrote the law authorizing the double border fence to continue along the entirety of our Mexican border. This is a fence style that has cut smuggling 90% in the San Diego area where it exists now.

Finally, Congressman Hunter urged us to tune into tomorrow night’s Baltimore debate. Locally, it’s on cable channel 22 – for the rest of you it’s the proverbial “check your local listings.”

I’m a bit concerned about that debate. First of all, most of the so-called “top tier” aspirants are skipping out. Participating are Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, Hunter, Alan Keyes, and Ron Paul. (Late note: Congressman Tom Tancredo also participated.) Secondly, the focus will be on “minority” issues and the audience likely will be less-than-friendly to the GOP. According to the Sun:

Debate planners have been working behind the scenes to produce a program that won’t be overly hostile to the Republicans, including an effort to seat an audience that is as neutral as possible, according to a person with knowledge of the preparations.

Still, the candidates who show up will expect tough questioning on issues such as immigration, the federal response to Hurricane Katrina and their party’s dismal standing with black and Hispanic voters.

Personally, I’d love to see Hunter or someone else turn the tables and ask why minority voters continue to vote for a party that has promised them so much yet delivered so little over the last 50 years. I don’t believe in “minority” issues, I believe in American issues.

We’ll see what Duncan and the others say tomorrow night. It’ll be a rare PBS viewing for me, that’s for sure.

Crossposted on RedMaryland.

WCRC meeting – September 2007 (Straw Poll)

Last night I posted the results of the Straw Poll; tonight I go into what was said.

Unfortunately I didn’t get quite the participation or attendance I expected; then again, this was a first-time event and we have competition from hundreds of other organizations – not to mention we’re not located in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, or South Carolina. Maryland is the primary backwater state once again despite moving up to mid-February.

On a personal level, I am pleased that the event went off well despite the lower than expected crowd. It’s the first time I attempted putting together an event like this and insofar as anything we made last night from the purchase of ballots was “free” money, $300 (plus $100 in 50/50 money, plus signing up one new member) is nothing to sneeze at whatsoever. And I managed not to sound too stupid at the podium, either in handling the event as it went on or my presentation advocating Duncan Hunter for President. I actually thought I did that pretty well, four minutes off the cuff without notes or reading. Just wish I’d convinced another few voters.

We had four local speakers who exhorted the gathering to vote for their guy. As you’ve likely guessed, I was one on Duncan Hunter’s behalf. But I’d also like to thank BJ Corbin for his support of Mike Huckabee, Ryan Hohman for advocating Ron Paul, and Bonnie Luna coming up to press Fred Thompson’s candidacy. Obviously she was the big winner given the results. We also found out that Bonnie is Fred Thompson’s Wicomico County coordinator, so I guess she’s really the first to step up to assisting on a national campaign to that extent. Finally, from a message standpoint I thought each of us were well-received so that was a nice experience. I was getting a thumbs-up from Joe Arminio in the back on a couple points regarding Congressman Hunter (as did BJ with Mike Huckabee) so I made a little impact.

The four of us were a pretty good opening act for the remaining four speakers.

First to speak was Congressional candidate and Arnold resident Joe Arminio. This gives you a little idea of the crowd as well.

Joe Arminio drew first blood. The author, consultant, and newspaper publisher from Anne Arundel County began his ten minutes by referring to what he termed “colossal developments” in our economy, particularly the devaluation of the dollar against the euro. (He refers to it farther in this recent press release from his website. I received it but hadn’t had an opportunity to post it yet – so here you go.) Arminio even raised the specter of a possible depression since so many of our dollars are held overseas. Joe continued by stating that our country was “on fumes” in many economic respects.

His solutions lay in going back to an era before America hit its “apogee” as he put it; or to an era before 1972 when real wages peaked for the American worker. A return to something akin to the gold standard to discourage borrowing and increasing tariffs on imports to preserve our industry were just two parts of the cure, along with a sharp decrease in immigration. Arminio did not have kind things to say about the prospect of a North American Union, either. (I edited the above slightly based on Dr. Arminio’s comment below.)

Another idea I found intriguing in what Joe said was the idea of creating committees of voters to assist him and give feedback on how he’s doing. In a respect, Arminio wants to create democracy within the republic, although he didn’t go into many specifics on the idea.

Cathy Bassett, District and Communications Director, served as the pinch-hitter for Congressman Wayne Gilchrest.

Cathy Bassett was a late fill-in for Congressman Gilchrest but did a good job in his stead. She termed Wayne as the “most electable” of the four, claiming that he gets a lot of crossover Democrat votes that the others might not get because the Democrats will “run hard” for the seat. She also alluded that out-of-district interests are out to “buy” (my term) a Congressman as opponents are taking PAC money that Wayne does not.

Saying that Congressman Gilchrest supports making the Bush tax cuts permanent, Bassett also made a jab at Gilchrest’s opponents by talking about earmarks in a positive light, couching it in terms of bringing home the bacon. Wayne would pursue “certain” earmarks, ostensibly those bound for the First District. One example she gave was the dualization of U.S. 113 in Worcester County.

If there’s one thing Cathy said that troubled me a bit, it was when she talked about corruption and bad behavior in Congress. She gave four names out, and while I did not write down the names, if my memory serves she cited Duke Cunningham, Tom DeLay, Mark Foley, and Larry Craig – it may not have been that specific four, but I’m positive all four she called by name were Republicans. I’m not saying the Congressional GOP is clean and pure as wind-driven snow, but what about William Jefferson or Alan Mollohan?

Congressional hopeful John Leo Walter makes his point during his remarks at the Wicomico County Republican Straw Poll.

In my remarks about the recent WCRC Crab Feast, I said that John Leo Walter was “probably the most ‘average Joe’ in the race (but was) facing a pretty steep learning curve as far as running a race goes”. Well, Joe did two smart things for this Straw Poll. One, he brought a big family and other supporters down from Centreville and they must have had a few dollars for the paid ballot portion of the Straw Poll. Secondly, he quoted what I said on my website as part of his remarks. And yes, he began by talking about his family.

John didn’t really go into specifics as far as policies go, except to brand himself as “similar to Fred Thompson.” (Given the Straw Poll results, another shrewd move.) He stressed instead his thought that Congressmen go to Washington and after a time “lose their way”, whereas in Walter’s mind he shared the idea of the Founding Fathers – a person going to serve for a few terms then returning to his business or farm. (He didn’t come out and impose a term limit on himself, though.) John also described himself as full of youth, enthusiasm, optimism (in the mold of Reagan), and energy. Also he made a key point of his daily experience in dealing with the law and Constitution as a practicing attorney.

As the Political Director for the Andy Harris campaign, Chris Meekins came down to talk in Andy's place.

Unfortunately, Andy Harris could not be with us last night as we had the misfortune of scheduling our event on top of another he was committed to. But we arguably had the next best person to describe him in his Political Director, Chris Meekins.

Meekins talked a little bit about Andy’s family and active-duty military background (Operation Desert Shield/Storm). He also touched on the support Andy has from his fellows in the General Assembly (7 of 8 district Senators and over 10 Delegates), and termed Harris a “principled conservative.” In terms of policy, that translated into a hard line on illegal immigration (the idea of in-state tuition for illegals was “ludicrous”), taxes (Harris would oppose “all new taxes”, while Meekins claimed that Gilchrest voted for $15 billion in new taxes via the farm bill), and the Ahmadinejad visit (Harris would move to cut off federal funds to Columbia for inviting the Iranian despot.)

Another issue raised by Cathy Bassett was addressed by Meekins. Disputing the claim that Gilchrest was the most electable, Meekins pointed out that the Democrats redistricted the state in such a way that all of the Republicans were lumped into two Congressional seats (1st and 6th Districts.) So the Democrats conceded these two districts in order to solidify six seats in Maryland’s delegation.

All in all it was quite informative for the people who made it out. There is one more polling list I wanted to mention though.

I found it interesting to see how many “paid” votes a candidate got per “raw” vote. If you divide the two numbers you see who supposedly has the deepest support (or the deepest pockets). On the Presidential side it worked out this way:

Sam Brownback – infinity (1 divided by zero)
Duncan Hunter – 19.0 (19/1)
Ron Paul – 13.5 (54/4)
Fred Thompson – 7.27 (160/22)
Alan Keyes – 3.0 (3/1)
Mitt Romney – 2.5 (15/6)
Rudy Giuliani – 2.0 (12/6)
Mike Huckabee – 0.67 (4/6)
John McCain – no votes in either poll
Tom Tancredo – no votes in either poll

The average was 5.82 paid votes per raw vote.

Congress:

John Leo Walter – 11.36 (125/11)
Joe Arminio – 7.4 (37/5)
Andy Harris – 4.14 (91/22)
Wayne Gilchrest – 2.25 (18/8)

In this case, the average was 5.89 paid votes per ballot.

I also want to point out that I got promotional items from just two campaigns – Ron Paul’s and Mitt Romney’s. (You can see some of it in the photo backgrounds.) I also made up a few Tom Tancredo items since his handout was readily available on his website. For the record, Ron Paul’s campaign was also the most responsive about sending someone down but backed out toward the end. I also got a late reply from Alan Keyes’s camapign but having started so late I didn’t figure on getting anything there.

By the way, I still have a boatload of items so the next time you see a GOP table most of the items are leftovers!

Finally, the thanklist:

My fellow WCRC officers: George, Marc, Brad, Helen, Dave, and Tom – couldn’t have done it without you. I had the easy job standing in front of everyone.

Those speakers representing Presidential candidates: BJ, Ryan, Bonnie – thanks for sticking your neck out for a person you believe in. I may not agree with them but you argued for your people well.

The Congressional candidates and their seconds: Joe, John, Cathy, and Chris – most of you came a long way to speak to us and we wish you all the best. Let’s make it a good, hard-fought, and clean campaign that discusses issues.

Finally and most obviously thanks to all of you who participated in the audience. It was a complete crapshoot how this would turn out. It may be I was shooting for the farthest of stars, but I got pretty far past the moon nonetheless. And I did find out tonight at the WNC meeting that Joe Gidjunis will post the results on his Daily Times blog so we’ll get a little bit of pixels besides me anyway.

Here’s hoping we don’t have to do this Presidential Straw Poll thing for another 8 years!

Wicomico GOP Straw Poll Results

I’ll have more on the actual event and what was said tomorrow. For tonight, here are the results of the “raw” ballots, filled out by each of the 46 people attending:

Presidential:

Fred Thompson, 22 votes – 47.8%
Rudy Giuliani, 6 votes – 13.0%
Mike Huckabee, 6 votes – 13.0%
Mitt Romney, 6 votes – 13.0%
Ron Paul, 4 votes – 8.7%
Duncan Hunter, 1 vote – 2.2%
Alan Keyes, 1 vote – 2.2%
Sam Brownback, no votes
John McCain, no votes
Tom Tancredo, no votes

For 1st District Congress:

Andy Harris, 22 votes – 47.8%
John Leo Walter, 11 votes – 23.9%
Wayne Gilchrest, 8 votes – 17.4%
Joe Arminio, 5 votes – 10.9%

Club members also had the opportunity to purchase votes for a separate ballot for $1 apiece. This raised over $300 for the club and made that set of results a little different. I added this feature to see the depth of support for each candidate, and it also allowed people to split tickets, as it were. I know I did.

Presidential:

Fred Thompson, 160 votes – 57.6%
Ron Paul, 54 votes – 19.8%
Duncan Hunter, 19 votes – 7.0%
Mitt Romney, 15 votes – 5.5%
Rudy Giuliani, 12 votes – 4.4%
Mike Huckabee, 4 votes – 1.5%
Alan Keyes, 3 votes – 1.1%
Sam Brownback, 1 vote – 0.0%
John McCain, no votes
Tom Tancredo, no votes

For 1st District Congress:

John Leo Walter, 125 votes – 46.1%
Andy Harris, 91 votes – 33.6%
Joe Arminio, 37 votes – 13.7%
Wayne Gilchrest, 18 votes – 6.6%

Tomorrow night after I attend the Wicomico Neighborhood Congress inaugural meeting I’ll post more on tonight’s Straw Poll – what the candidates said and other interesting items. I got pictures and text of tonight’s event so look forward to it.

Crossposted on RedMaryland.

Can Ron Paul help Wicomico Republicans?

On Monday I got an interesting letter in my mailbox. As most of you should be aware, I’m the driving force behind the Wicomico County Republican Straw Poll being held this coming Monday (which helps to explain the busy week in my last post.) The letter in question was hand-addressed from Ron Paul’s campaign.

I had contacted all of the campaigns regarding sending a representative to the event, and Ron Paul’s workers had gotten back to me regarding doing just that. So I thought this was a confirmation, but instead the note was a little different. This is what it read:

Dear Wicomico County Republican:

While the Republican primary election is still several months away, you have a change (sic) to indicate your support for the GOP nomination at the Monday, September 24, 2007 Wicomico County Republican Club straw poll. Club members and guests are welcome. It will occur at the monthly club meeting in the Salisbury Area Chamber of Commerce building at 144 E. Main Street in downtown Salisbury. The social period begins at 7:00 p.m. and the meeting begins at 7:30. Representative (sic) of Presidential and Congressional candidates will make presentations and then you’ll have a chance to register your preference. And you can purchase additional votes with the money going to the club’s efforts to get Republicans elected.

As you think about the best candidate and the best person to be the next president, give serious consideration to Dr. Ron Paul, a ten term Texas Congressman, who believes in liberty and freedom. Who? Dr. Ron Paul, the only true conservative whose philosophy follows true Republican thinking. Smaller government, adherence to the Constitution, avoiding foreign entanglements, and individual liberty.

Well, you may be saying he hasn’t got a chance and he’s not even showing up in the poll numbers. It’s true that he’s not showing up in the mainstream polls but most polls rely upon land-line telephones and not on cell phones like many Ron Paul supporters use. Additionally, the traditional news media are not providing coverage to Ron Paul’s campaign and therefore he is not well known and therefore is showing up poorly in the polls. The news media won’t cover him until he shows up higher in the polls but he won’t show up high in the polls until the news media give him coverage. It’s a vicious cycle. But among Internet users and freedom believing Americans, Dr. Paul is a champion. And in many recent straw polls he is the leader. Check out the ~~enclosed sheet~~ (website).

Dr. Paul is the man. Momentum is building. Yesterday (which would have been September 13th – editor) was the most successful fundraising day in the campaign’s history. If you believe in traditional Republican values and smaller government and getting out of Iraq and stopping American intervention in foreign nations and individual liberty, then we seek your support for Ron Paul. Cast your vote at the Wicomico County Republican Club meeting on September 24.

I believe you need a couple commas in that last paragraph and a proofreader – not necessarily a spell-checker because the wrong words were spelled correctly. And doesn’t that paragraph about being so low in the polls sound just a little bit like a conspiracy theory? Anyway, it’s obvious they got the information on the event I sent to each campaign, so a plus for them. Moreover, they’ve been by far the most responsive campaign since they also sent me a package with 300 palm cards and other items. It’s more than I’ll ever need for this event but we have others coming up.

Also, as I sit here I recall that I had placed in my original note to the Presidential campaigns that we were having our recent Crab Feast as another event where plenty of GOP supporters would be. Guess whose signs were there bright and early?

What also surprised me about it was that apparently someone hand-addressed a number of similar letters to others in the club. We had an officers’ meeting tonight where I was told about them getting a similar letter. While there’s nothing wrong with that, I suppose it just looks less professional.

With all that said there is one question that bears asking. Given the response my requests received from the Paul campaign, along with what is apparently passionate support from the true believers in the Congressman from Texas, what kind of turnout and results will he get in our version of the GOP Straw Poll? We’ll all find out Monday night.

Crossposted on RedMaryland.

Placing our demands

Had an interesting e-mail over the weekend and I have to hand it to Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee for thinking out of the box.

Huckabee hit upon a novel idea I hadn’t heard about by using the Eventful website to “demand” Huckabee make a campaign appearance. So I went ahead and did it. While frequent readers know that I endorsed Duncan Hunter, I also recommended Mike Huckabee as another of my top-tier candidates.

Once there are three “demands” for Huckabee in a particular location, they’re added to his map. Right now in Maryland only the DC area, Baltimore, Waldorf, and Annapolis are represented so I’d like to get some additional support from Salisbury and the Eastern Shore. After all, why would Huckabee want to go to Democrat territory when he can come here?

So give it a shot; hell, make up an e-mail address if you want, half my commentors do. Let’s see if we can get some love from the Presidential race here.

Election Calendar: September 10-23

This is the first edition of what will be a weekly calendar of appearances and events leading up to the February 12, 2008 Presidential primary. It’ll be a little sparse at first as I get ramped up, hopefully I’ll have a few things each week to add. While most of the Presidential campaigns do have at least a rudimentary calendar of events, I’ve only found Joe Arminio’s site has one at the Congressional level. (I also get Andy Harris’s e-newsletter which details some of the events he’s attending as well. Unfortunately he’s going on a Monday format so it’s a week old when I do this. Oh well.)

For this exercise, the inclusion rule will be appearances on the Lower Shore (Dorchester, Wicomico, Somerset, Worcester) for Congressional candidates and anywhere on the Eastern Shore or Delaware for Presidential hopefuls.

Using that rule, at this moment I have just one event within this timeframe:

Saturday, September 15: GOP Congressional candidate Andy Harris has confirmed he’ll appear at the Wicomico County Republican Club Crab Feast at Schumaker Park in Salisbury. Also expected to appear (no official word yet) is fellow Republican candidate John Leo Walter. The event begins at 1 p.m. and ticket information is here.

We all have to start somewhere. So, Bill Reddish, when you read this consider it the bat-signal to start feeding me your political morning guests when you get them – I know you have Gilchrest on about every other Thursday and I’m sure you’ll have the others sooner or later. (Wonder if I can get a searchlight to project a small “m” someplace?) And for those of you connected with the other campaigns, let me know. Hey, I’ll even put up Democrat events, just don’t expect me to show up with a check for you. There are monoblogue readers of the Democrat persuasion though who might.

So be looking for this Election Calendar on a weekly basis, generally on Sunday nights. I’ll take a break around the holidays but from here on out this should be a fixture in your reading.

By the way, I sent out the 2008 edition of the Ten Questions last night. We’ll see if anyone cares to bite first.