NOT PLEASED WITH THEIR OPTIONS
By Jon Christian Ryter
August 8, 2007
Moderate Democrats—whose voices are drown out by the far left (and who would prefer someone like former US Sen. Zell Miller [D-GA] or even Joe Lieberman [I-CT] instead of either Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton [D-NY] or Muslim-born and raised Barak Obama [D-IL] (who is in tactical denial about his Islamic roots) as the party's standard bearer in 2008)—are as unhappy about Hillary Clinton's attempt to hijack the Democratic nomination a year before the primaries as the Republicans are about the prospect of having only a couple of short-winded "sprinters" but no long distance runners in the race for the White House.
This spells disaster for conservatives in 2008. Unless rank and file right-of-center Christians and social conservatives align behind a Republican candidate and avoid the pitfalls of throwing their vote away on a third party spoiler as they did in 1992 and 1996, the Democrats will not only win the White House in 2008, they will increase their seats in the House and Senate—perhaps to the extent of giving them a veto-proof Congress if GOP Congressmen and Senators continue to back President George W. Bush's illegal alien amnesty program and the North American Union. (A veto proof Congress requires a super-majority of 290 aligned Congressmen and 67 aligned Senators.)
Clearly, the money barons and merchant princes who have carefully orchestrated every national election in the United States since 1912 and preordained the winners like symphonic maestros, appear to have already decided the next president will be a Democrat. Only, it won't be Hillary Clinton who jump-started the primary season a year early in an effort to steal the nomination before the money barons picked their candidate—whom, she wisely surmised, would not be her. Nor will it be the Sheik of Illinois who will not escape his Muslim roots when the winnowing of candidates begins in earnest—particularly if al Qaeda is successful in launching another attack in the United States before the 2008 election.
The Republicans on the other hand can't find a quorum of registered voters who are excited about any of the GOP candidates thus far—least of all the liberal media-ordained and left-promoted GOP frontrunner and former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani who trails California psychologist Dr. Mark Klein and libertarian Congressman Dr. Ron Paul in most of the grassroots straw polls in Iowa. ( Klein does not show up in the "official" Washington Post-ABC News poll which considers only the media-blessed candidates as viable since they know from 1912 that only those candidates who "get press" get elected.) A recent very unscientific Drudge poll showed Ron Paul leading the pack with 35% of the vote. Trailing him were:
The Drudge poll reflects the view of 65% of the respondents. That means, 45% of those polled either voted for someone else, or for "none-of-the-above." In the official Washington Post-ABC News poll, which reflects the opinion of 98% of the respondents, Ron Paul takes 2%. Former US Senator Fred Thompson—who has not officially joined the race—comes in third with 13% of that straw poll.
Surprising, potential GOP voters in Iowa, when asked by the Washington Post-ABC News pollsters which of the Republicans running for post position in the Iowa caucus was most qualified to hold the office of President, 22% of them picked the former mayor whose only political experience was managing one city, while ignoring the full measure of experience of three governors, three US Senators and two congressmen. If job titles were scholastic degrees, a mayor would be construed to be a high school graduate, a US Congressman would be the equivalent of having a bachelor's degree and a US Senator or governor would have a master's degree. A senator who also served as a governor would be equivalent to a doctorate. Rudy Giuliani is not any more qualified for the job of President of the United States than any other working class stiff in America. As President, Rudy will never rise above "America's Mayor." Rudy's a likable guy who was hand-picked by the liberal media as the best "designated loser" for 2008 since whomever he runs against—unless the Democrats find a mayor to run against him—he loses. In other words, put Mike Bloomberg at the top of the Democratic ticket and Giuliani wins.
Conservative Americans flipflop almost weekly on their choice of the person they would most likely vote for President simply because they aren't satisfied with any of them. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who has been campaigning harder in Iowa than any other GOP candidate, is currently the front runner there even though Iowans believe Giuliani would be a stronger and more decisive leader. Most of those who support Giuliani mistakenly believe he played a major decision-making role in safeguarding New York after 9-11. He did not. While he was kept in the loop and profited greatly from the political photo ops, the action taken in New York after 9-11 was federal in nature and originated in Washington, DC or Albany, not New York City. Giuliani was merely the beneficiary, not the originator.
Throw former US Senator Fred Thompson into the mix and he comes out the winner everytime. Head-to-head, his numbers dwarf both Romney and Giuliani. Yet, when you examine the personal views of conservative voters one thing becomes obvious—almost 40% of them are dissatisfied with the "main course" candidates being foisted on them by the president-makers. In June, Giuliani, who has been watching the numbers in Iowa, decided he could not afford to compete in the Iowa Caucus because if he lost there, he will pretty much be out of the 2008 Presidential race.
Thompson's a real person. Perhaps a little gruff around the edges, he's a real life version of Arthur Branch, the role he created on the NBC hit, Law & Order. Dr. Ron Paul, a practicing OB-Gyn, is a real person, too. He doesn't have Thompson's rough edges—or his charisma. He is, however, just as outspoken. But Dr. Paul is speaking out on subjects better left to the far right talk jocks like Aaron Russo, Alex Jones and Michael Savage. The Libertarian Party's candidate for President in 1988, Ron Paul sounds more like a fringe candidate in an aluminum foil cap than a 10-term Republican Congressman from Texas. It is this controversy that has caused Ron Paul's exclusion from televised debates with the other GOP candidates in Iowa. In addition, he has been dropped from all of the mainstream media presidential polls. The question being raised about Paul's standings is: was he dropped from the poll tallies because he dropped below the threshold needed to measure his standing? On the surface, the Drudge poll would seem to refute that argument, since it suggests that Dr. Paul is leading the pack by a healthy margin of 9% over Giuliani, his closest rival. However, a Newsweek poll taken at the same time shows Dr. Paul with only 2% support in the polls—precisely the same position he held in June.
Why the discrepancy? Because the Newsweek poll was a real poll. The Drudge poll was not. Newsweek pollsters sample a database that is representative of views of the nation. The pollsters call the individuals in the sample and elicit their opinion on a subject. The results give a fairly accurate snapshot of what the general public is thinking at that moment. When a Ron Paul fan finds the Drudge poll, he or she immediately emails everyone on his or her email list and tells them to go to Drudge and vote for Ron Paul. It's not a scientific poll and the results do not accurately reflect the view of the voter spectrum—it reflects the views of those committed to the Congressman and it therefore skewers the results—and the integrity—of the "survey." Polls are accurate only when they cannot be manipulated by either the pollster or the respondents.
Most of the initial support going to Thompson came from Sen. John McCain's camp when his campaign staffers began jumping ship in June. McCain [R-AZ] made the mistake of supporting Bush's amnesty plan, open borders and the North American Union. Almost overnight his voter appeal dropped to 8%. Now its at 7% and it's still tanking as McCain scrambles to stay alive by becoming a foe of amnesty and open borders.
Any Republican Congressman or Senator or any Democrat in a border State who supports amnesty for illegal aliens, citizenship for illegals, open borders or anything that smacks of an American version of the European Union will be fired by the voters in 2008. When McCain—who won a 4th term in 2004 with 77% of the vote—runs for reelection in 2010, he will likely be defeated. If J.D. Hayworth (former AZ-5th District) is smart, he will take McCain on in 2010. If he does, he will knock McCain out in the primary.
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a former church pastor, and Sen. Sam Brownback, a Roman Catholic, are both social conservatives. Huckabee and Brownback were leading among evangelical Christians early on, but support from the Christian right has shifted to Romney, who is a Mormon. While Huckabee is polling well in Iowa with all voters, Romney now polls about 25% with Christians. Huckabee trails at 17%, followed by Thompson, a Protestant and Giuliani, a Catholic. Brownback's support has dropped to about 7% along with Tom Tancredo who is also a professing Christian. Brownback should be out of the race by Labor Day. If he folds up his tent and goes home, his supporters will likely flock to Tancredo who will then become a much more viable candidate. A Romney-Tancredo ticket would likely galvanize the right and could win against either Hillary or Al Gore, Jr. who is poised to enter the race when Hillary makes her first major gaffe. Gore would have already entered the fray, but he wants to make sure he's not stuck with Hillary as a running mate.
The unsettled views of conservative voters, and their fickleness towards the Republican candidates indicate that conservatives don't have a candidate they are comfortable with yet. It also explains why Republican donors are hanging on to their money, and why Democrats are out-raising Republicans by 50% or more. The left is satisfied that their candidates have broad enough coattails to not only win the White House, but they will also increase their majorities in both Houses of Congress next year.
A recent CNN poll indicated that roughly a fourth of all registered Republicans—up from 14% in June—have no idea who they will support as the standard bearer of their party. In other words, they vote "none of the above." All of the "undecided" are self-described Christian conservatives. Most of them would likely flock to former Virginia governor Jim Gilmore who dropped out of the race because he could not raise enough money to stay in.
Sadly, as Ron Paul's star fades, his followers—who have skewered the strength of his appeal with grass roots supporters through polls that allow his fans to vote repeatedly—will try to convince the Congressman he can win as a third party candidate. Dr. Paul will likely become a third party spoiler. And, as he peels GOP votes from the right, New York mayor Michael Bloomberg—who has a good chance of becoming the Unity candidate—will drain the Rockefeller Republican votes from the left and, even with a war raging in the Mideast, it will all but guarantee a presidential win for the Democrats—unless the GOP is able to find another Ronald Reagan who can hold the Rockefeller Republicans, the Christian right (which sat out the midterm election in 2006 in protest of Bush's amnesty and open borders), and capture the Blue Dog Democrats who voted Reagan into office twice, Bush-41 once and Bush-43 in 2000.
What are the uncommitted Republicans looking for? An honest man who will keep his word to the voters. They don't want an establishment politician. That bodes well for Fred Thompson. They want a president who will reject any notion of amnesty for illegal aliens, and seal the borders. That bodes well for Tom Tancredo. They want a man who will protect them against another terrorist attack like 9-11 and, although it shouldn't, that bodes well for Rudy Giuliani. They want a man who will peel back the laws that intrude on civil rights and protect the 1st and 2nd Amendments. And, that bodes well for Ron Paul. Put them all together and you have Reagan.
in the stark reality of politics, when the dust settles—if Thompson
is not able to ignite the patriotic firestorm that unites the Christian
conservative right—the 2008 run for the White House will be a race between
two men who are sitting on the sidelines waiting for the other relay
runners to tire themselves out and be forced to pass the baton on to
them: Al Gore, Jr. and Newt Gingrich. In a Gore-Gingrich race, Al Gore
becomes the 44th President of the United States and fulfills his own
2000 prophecy when he said, "I am destined to be the leader of the
© 2007 Jon C. Ryter - All Rights
[Read "Whatever Happened to America?"]
Jon Christian Ryter is the pseudonym of a former newspaper reporter with the Parkersburg, WV Sentinel. He authored a syndicated newspaper column, Answers From The Bible, from the mid-1970s until 1985. Answers From The Bible was read weekly in many suburban markets in the United States.
Today, Jon is an advertising executive with the Washington Times. His website, www.jonchristianryter.com has helped him establish a network of mid-to senior-level Washington insiders who now provide him with a steady stream of material for use both in his books and in the investigative reports that are found on his website.
What are the uncommitted Republicans looking for? An honest man who will keep his word to the voters. They don't want an establishment politician.