He makes a valid point, and since the Red November Initiative is about inclusion of any and all ideas to stop the Shrillary Express, I'm posting it here:
Why No Push For Duncan Hunter?
As we look at the potential candidates, there are too many who follow the MSM’s push like little lambs. We look at polls, name recognition, and electability factors. What we should be looking at are the issues that matter to us.
As far as conservative principles go we can throw Rudy Giuliani out of the picture straight up. The only thing he has going for him is the National Defense/anti-Hillary thing. It’s hard to tell where Mitt Romney really stands. Tom Tancredo has a great stance on the border issue, and solid conservative credentials…but he is running on a one issue platform. Huckabee is just too much of a nannystater for me. Ron Paul? I really don’t want to go there. Suffice it to say that I personally disagree with him on the war on terror and several other issues.
While I have tried to be neutral in coverage here, because I am still undecided at this point, I have been leaning towards Fred Thompson. He has solid conservative credentials and a record to show for it. Our friend, and fellow contributor here, Lobo, likes Duncan Hunter. Duncan Hunter has a great conservative record as well, and is definitely right on the issues that are important.
I like Duncan Hunter as well. I’ve continued to lean towards Fred on the electability factor. However, that factor may be fading. In a recent poll of New Hampshire he is really sliding. It’s also a little worrisome that some of his original backers are losing faith. Of course none of that matters. We are throwing out the polls and electability factor in this discussion. There have been plenty of surprises so far and anything can still happen.
The folks at Freerepublic have narrowed their choice down to Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter. These are the two they think can beat the defeat the liberal abortionists Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton. Some folks there are rooting for a Thompson/Hunter ticket. They have put up a poll if you are interested in participating.
However, the point I’m trying to get at is the unfair treatment by the MSM towards Duncan Hunter. I’ve also been curious as to why so many conservatives are backing a liberal like Rudy Giuliani and questionable characters like Mitt Romney. Why is so little attention being paid towards a solid conservative like Duncan Hunter?
I’m not the only one wondering. Rush Limbaugh had this question brought up while talking to a listener.
CALLER: All right. The question is this. I think the most conservative candidate that we have for president is Duncan Hunter, going through his website, listening to what he’s got on the news, his different interviews and stuff, I mean he definitely meets the conservative agenda head on. And we’re just not hearing a lot from him. And we’re not hearing a lot from him, from you. And I’m wondering, sir, do you have any plans in the near future for interviews with him, for talking to him on the air? I mean, I did hear, you spoke about an e-mail update you got from him the other day, but other than that it looks like the best candidate here is not getting pushed by the strongest conservative people.
RUSH: Well, here’s my answer to your question. I’m asked this a lot and historically I have not gotten involved in primaries, because if I had any of these people, and they have all asked to come on this show, and I respectfully say no, because I’d have to ask them all back. And I really don’t look at this program as a campaign vehicle during primaries. Among other things, I, frankly, Mark, I have the belief that political candidates have a duty to get noticed themselves. It’s an unfair process in terms — Mrs. Clinton. Mrs. Clinton is strictly there because she didn’t divorce her husband. In fact, she’s strictly there because she married him. If her last name weren’t Clinton, she’d be the dean of some all-girls’ school in Albania touring villages at night and doing whatever you do in a village at night, when you run an all-girls’ school. She’s just benefiting from conventional wisdom. In the case of Rudy, the reason Rudy is getting a lot of attention is the northeastern bias in the media. The northeastern bias in the media wants two northeasterners to run.
Even some of our conservative journalist friends who are headquartered and work in the northeast, in New York and Washington, are willing to overlook, in some cases, the lack of genuine conservatism in some candidates because they’re from the northeast. They have a geographical bias because of where they live. People in the northeast think it’s at that it’s the heartbeat and the pulse of the country there, and the rest of the country is flyover country and all of that. So it’s tough to get out of the bottom tier. You need a really humongous debate performance, and you need an early announcement in some cases when you’re going against somebody that’s going to benefit from all the conventional wisdom, the media and others. But I sit and watch until one of them surfaces because that’s what their job is to do, not mine.
Rush brings up a good point. You do have to overcome the unfair treatment of the media, and get yourself noticed. So does this bring us back to the factors of electability and name recognition? Those factors do weigh heavily on many voters. I guess we can’t throw them out, but wouldn’t it be nice if conservatives put more weight on the issues that matter instead of compromising to the MSM’s popularity contests? In the meanwhile, I’ll pray that the more conservative candidates start doing something to get noticed more.
Out of my two favorites, Fred Thompson probably still has the better chance. Hopefully he wakes up from his lackluster campaigning and does a few slams at the next debate. If Hunter has an opportunity handed to him, I hope he goes for it as well. In the meantime, a Thompson/Hunter ticket might not be a bad thing to hope for. Time is ticking, but at this point…anything can still happen.
