It's said that Ross Perot divided the Republican party in '92 and cost Bush Sr. re-election. Then in '00 it's said that Ralph Nader divided the Democratic party and cost Al Gore the election.
In '08 it appears that the 2 primary candidates U.S. citizens will have to choose from in November are Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton.
Obama is getting whooped by Hillary and is almost guaranteed not to make a come back. Edwards is being beat in the polls by Gore (who is not even running). Thompson should have never entered the race b/c he's being torn apart in the Republican debates. McCain is considered the least conservative Republican running. Romney is being slammed b/c he's a Mormon. And, Huckabee is an unknown for the most part.
Huckabee appears to be the candidate though that Conservative Christian (CCs) voters (that are responsible for electing Bush in '00 and '04) like the most. But those voters are in a pickle. They like Giuliani b/c he's conservative, tough on terror, is for lowering taxes, tough on the border, and has proven himself as mayor of NY in its toughest time and its rebuilding efforts afterwards. Giuliani has a down-side though that Conservative Christians are well aware of. He's been divorced multiple times and is pro-abortion, two things CCs take very seriously.
How do CCs view Hillary Clinton though? She's weak on terror, weak on the border, for bigger government, for higher taxes, unproven in NY as their senator, pro abortion, and pro universal health care. It's obvious CCs don't want her in the white house.
So CCs have to answer a tough question...
Should Conservative Christians use their vote for someone they think should be President (Hucakbee), even though he doesn't have a chance of winning, at the risk of not voting for the only person (Giuliani) that might keep the most unappealing person (Clinton) out of the office?Labels: Politics
