Thread: Huckabee’s jolt to GOP may benefit McCain

Things look bleak for Romney and good for McCain. I'm getting a queazy gut feeling that after NH, we are likely to have a 2-horse race with the Huckleberry and McLame vying for the nomination. McCain will destroy the Huckleberry as the GOP establishment circles the wagons around him. Then we'll have a McLame - Osama election choice and....whew!!! I just woke up from a nightmare. That couldn't really happen could it????

Huckabee’s jolt to GOP may aid McCain
Out of turmoil, a new opportunity may arise for Arizona senator
By Adam Nagourney and Carl Hulse
The New York Times
updated 4:32 a.m. ET, Sat., Jan. 5, 2008

MANCHESTER, N.H. - Mike Huckabee’s defeat of Mitt Romney in the Iowa caucuses jolted a Republican Party establishment already distressed about the state of its presidential field.

But out of the turmoil may rise yet another opportunity for Senator John McCain of Arizona, whose candidacy all but collapsed last year.

If only by default, Mr. McCain is getting yet another look and appears to be in a strong position competing against a weakened Mr. Romney in the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday.

Mr. McCain is the latest beneficiary of the continuing upheaval in the Republican field that has seen nearly all of the candidates rising at various points. Among them were Mr. McCain, former Senator Fred D. Thompson of Tennessee and Rudolph W. Giuliani, a former mayor of New York.

Mr. Romney’s defeat in Iowa only underlined concerns that many Republicans had expressed about him, while the success of Mr. Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas, gave rise to new worries among the Republican establishment.

“Among the intelligentsia of the party, there is definitely a deep concern about Huckabee getting the nomination because a lot of them think he can’t win,â€

Unbelievable!!! You have to watch this newly released video of McCain and Lieberman campaigning together in NH. After McCain speaks for a while uttering his gibberish about illegal immigration and the illegal's are god's children, etc...LIEberman takes the mike and says..."To say John McCain ever supported amnesty for illegal immigrants is a lie..." This is further proof that many politicians are among the lowest life forms on the planet and will lie about anything even if there is irrefutable proof that shows they are lying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Er3gSPhNSEM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How about we send McLame and LIEberman an e-mail setting them straight on what amnesty is AND remind them both of the fact that McLame was a main architect, contributor and proponent of the Comphrensive Immigration Reform bills (s. 1348 and s. 1639) of 2007 to grant amnesty to illegal aliens.

Contributing to this effort will only requiring sending an e-mail (or two or three) to the links below:

McCain 2008 campaign website blog where you can post comments:
http://www.johnmccain.com/Blog/

McCain’s senate webform to send comments:
http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.c ... ontactForm

Lieberman’s senate webform to send comments:
http://lieberman.senate.gov/contact/ind ... ding=issue

As an aid for you in composing your message, I have included the definitions of amnesty below:

AMNESTY is legislation to forgive the breaking of immigration laws and to make it possible for illegal aliens to live permanently in the United States. Amnesty represents a system of federal rewards and assistance for illegal aliens, and they entice an even greater number of foreign nationals to invade a country.

AMNESTY:
1. A general pardon for offenses against a government
2. An act of forgiveness for past offenses, esp. to a class of persons as whole
3. Forgetting or overlooking any past offense

Let’s set these two LIARS straight, ALIPAC!!!

Futures markets see McCain, Obama wins
With N.H. bump, Arizona senator odds-on favorite for GOP nomination
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 4, 2008
7:16 p.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com

Bets in the political futures markets strongly suggest the momentum Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain gained in the Iowa caucuses will carry them both to strong victories in the upcoming New Hampshire primary.

Pollster Scott Rasmussen, who relied on the markets to predict accurately Iowa wins for Obama and Gov. Mike Huckabee, told WND McCain gained the most nationally after a virtual tie for third in the Hawkeye state. Anticipating a New Hampshire victory, the markets now project the Arizona senator as the favorite to win the GOP nomination.

The Rasmussen market predictions now give Obama a 65 percent chance of winning the Democratic primary in New Hampshire and McCain a 74 percent chance in the state's Republican contest.

Intrade.com, a predictions market run out of Ireland, shows almost exactly the same results, giving Obama a 67 percent chance of winning New Hampshire and McCain a 74.9 percent chance.

"Our prediction market for Iowa turned out to be very accurate," Rasmussen said.

As WND reported Wednesday, futures contracts gave both Huckabee and Obama a 60 percent chance of winning Iowa.

In political futures markets, candidates are "bought and sold" much like commodities or stock futures.

"We did an update to our predictions market at about 10:45 p.m. last night," Rasmussen told WND, "and already the markets had shifted based on the Iowa results and were re-assessing New Hampshire and the race nationally."

Today, the Rasmussen market gives Clinton a 54 percent chance of winning the Democratic Party presidential nomination and Barack Obama a 41 percent chance.

"On the Democratic side, Hillary had been up around 65 percent likely to win the nomination," Rasmussen said. "Now, after Iowa, she lost about 11 points and is down to just a little better than a 50-50 chance to win the nomination."

The prediction market numbers went in the other direction for Obama.

"Before Iowa, Obama had about a 29 percent chance to win the nomination," said Rasmussen. "After Iowa, he gained about 12 points, so now his chance of winning the nomination is up to 41 percent in our market analysis."

Now Clinton will have to beat the odds in New Hampshire to prevent the combined effect of losses in Iowa and New Hampshire from removing her perhaps permanently from front-runner status in the Democratic race.

On the Republican side, Huckabee and McCain got a bounce from Iowa.

"Even though he came in third in the Iowa caucus, McCain was the real winner in Iowa," Rasmussen concluded. "Right now McCain is the leader in the national election, with a 32.5 percent chance of winning the Republican Party nomination."

"On the Republican side, the real loser in Iowa was Romney," he said. "On the national side, Romney lost 12 points in Iowa, so that now he is rated to have only a 14 percent chance to win the Republican nomination, when he had been at 26 percent before Iowa."

Even though Huckabee won in Iowa, the Rasmussen market puts the former Arkansas governor's chance of winning the Republican nomination at only 17 percent, behind both McCain and Giuliani, at 26 percent.

Intrade.com agrees McCain has the best chance currently to win the Republican Party presidential nomination, at 33 percent, followed by Giuliani at 28 percent, Romney at 14.9 percent and Huckabee at 15.7 percent.

On the Democratic side, Intrade.com still lists Clinton as the leader, with a 51.7 percent chance of winning the party's presidential nomination, followed by Obama with a 46.4 percent chance and Edwards a distant third, at 2.7 percent.

The McCain surge appears attributable in part to the increased focus on international politics and terrorism since the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan.

Huckabee benefited from the organization and huge turnout of evangelical Christians in Iowa. In more secular New Hampshire, Intrade.com rates Huckabee's chances of winning at less than 1 percent.

The Rasmussen market prediction is more forgiving, rating Huckabee's chances in New Hampshire at 6.2 percent.

Romney's failure to win in Iowa is likely to be repeated in New Hampshire. Intrade.com rates the former Massachusetts governor's chances at 24.5 percent, while Rasmussen predicts 22 percent.

Going into New Hampshire, Clinton is also suffering from a lack of momentum.

Intrade.com predicts she has only a 34 percent chance of winning in New Hampshire, a view shared by Rasmussen, whose market prediction puts Hillary's chances of winning at an almost identical 35 percent.

While former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards narrowly edged Clinton for second place in Iowa, the futures markets are betting he will fall to a distant third in New Hampshire.

Intrade.com and Rasmussen market predictions both give him less than 1 percent chance to win in New Hampshire.

Should Romney end up, as predicted, in a distant second-place finish in New Hampshire, he will face an uphill battle in South Carolina and Florida.

After having spent millions of his own money, the future markets are predicting Romney will fail to convince his former neighbors that his record as Massachusetts governor qualifies him to be the Republican nominee.

The Rasmussen market predictions are open free of charge to any Internet user who cares to register. A Fantasy Politics League permits registered users to create an equivalent system to fantasy sports leagues.

The Intrade.com system involves buying and selling political future contracts for money and requires registered users to place funds on deposit in order to trade.

Odds on the political futures markets change as contracts on various candidates are "bought and sold" in relation to changing dynamics in the presidential race and reported news events.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59540

Of course, this is the NYT but I agree that NH may be tough, but not impossible, for Romney to win. The RCP average of polls at this time shows McCain with a small lead over Romney.

But even if Romney loses NH, I don't think it's over for him. He'll have to regroup fast, take Michigan and go on. Of course, like they have been, the MSM will be hammering Romney along the way. Hopefully conservatives who have been spat at by McCain for years (amnesty, McCain-Feingold, Bush tax cuts etc.) will rise up and say no with either Giuliani (ugh) or Romney the beneficiary. But anything can happen.

That's why I say we get behind Romney.

Look what Mark Steyn has to say about NH and McCain:

"In response to the evangelical tide from the west, New Hampshire primary voters have figured, "Any old crusty, cranky, craggy coot in a storm," and re-embraced John McCain. After all, Granite State conservatism is not known for its religious fervor: it prefers small government, low taxes, minimal regulation, the freedom to be left alone by the state. So they're voting for a guy who opposed the Bush tax cuts, and imposed on the nation the most explicit restriction in political speech in years. Better yet, after a freezing first week of January and the snowiest December in a century, New Hampshire conservatives are goo-goo for a fellow who also believes the scariest of global-warming scenarios and all the big-government solutions necessary to avert them."

Hugh Hewitt on McCain, Huckabee and fundraising:

In my conversation with Michael Barone and Morton Kondracke yesterday (transcript here), we touched on the money disadvantage the GOP has. If the GOP nominee accepts the federal matching funds for the primary season, that candidate's spending will be capped at around $40 million until September 1. The Democratic frontrunners will spend well over $100 million in that time period. To accept the match is viewed by many as tantamount to political surrender.

GOP voters have a right to hear their candidates swear off the idea now so they can evaluate the viability of the candidacy. Senator McCain has filed the necessary paperwork to get the funds and has played an ambiguous game on whether he will take them. (His fundraising is in deep trouble and it is doubtful it will be resurrected much even with his expected win in New Hampshire.) Governor Huckabee translated his Iowa win into a very underwhelming $350,000 in contributions --an indication that he too has an anemic ability to open donors' wallets and thus a likelihood of dependence on matching funds. Giuliani and Romney have robust fund-raising operations as well as personal wealth --in the case of Romney, significant personal wealth. Fred Thompson is in between. Clarity here is necessary.