Hucks Army - Faith. Family. Freedom. [Grassroots] JOIN HUCKS ARMY | GET INVOLVED | FUNDRAISING | LINKS | LEADERSHIP | ABOUT
It is currently Sat Dec 14, 2019 2:41 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 3:17 am 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:47 pm
Posts: 4564
Location: Texas
Likes: 554
Liked: 523
Hmm, I may have botched the saint in that story - I have found a version online that attributes it to St. Thomas Aquinas (which gives the story a little more "oomph", since St. John of Cupertino was known to be incredibly pious but definitely not an intellect, whereas Aquinas was nicknamed "The Dumb Ox" by his classmates who assumed he was ignorant because he didn't say much, & he turned out to be one of the most brilliant scholars the world has ever known)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 12:46 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 11:12 am
Posts: 1658
Location: The Occupied Territory of Northern VA
Likes: 257
Liked: 169
I choose to believe that Mike prayed about it LOOONNNGG and hard, and that he only felt God's peace when he decided not to run...for now.

I think two things have bothered him more than anything. One is the unfair attacks by his OWN PARTY. The Republican Fi-Con snobs have no use for anyone with an Arkansas accent and no pedigree. The second thing is the absolute lack of fundraising ability. When you are begging people to donate $3 so you can meet at $25,000 goal, while Sarah Palin can raise millions just by batting her eyelashes, it's deeply discouraging. It takes at least $100 million to run a winning campaign nowadays.

I've been praying that as the GOP sees how weak the remaining field is, they will start to wake up and say, "Hey, we didn't realize the treasure we had." I'm praying that God will change people's minds about Mike.

_________________
Recovering Huck-a-holic



Post by All-in-for-Mike Liked by: justgrace
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 12:52 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
All-in-for-Mike wrote:
I choose to believe that Mike prayed about it LOOONNNGG and hard, and that he only felt God's peace when he decided not to run...for now.

I think two things have bothered him more than anything. One is the unfair attacks by his OWN PARTY. The Republican Fi-Con snobs have no use for anyone with an Arkansas accent and no pedigree. The second thing is the absolute lack of fundraising ability. When you are begging people to donate $3 so you can meet at $25,000 goal, while Sarah Palin can raise millions just by batting her eyelashes, it's deeply discouraging. It takes at least $100 million to run a winning campaign nowadays.

I've been praying that as the GOP sees how weak the remaining field is, they will start to wake up and say, "Hey, we didn't realize the treasure we had." I'm praying that God will change people's minds about Mike.


The Manhattan Latte Conservatives have only themselves to blame if because of them, Mike keeps out of the lineup now.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com



Post by TheValuesVoter Liked by: justgrace
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 4:58 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:19 pm
Posts: 1993
Location: Iowa
Likes: 6
Liked: 13
QuoVadisAnima wrote:
VertiCon wrote:
At the risk of offending some, I think its more likely than not that Huck will enter in late summer or the fall. I think that was always his plan.

VertiCon, I am genuinely surprised at the cynicism you express here.

I look back at Huck's 2008 run - the floating cross, the negative ad mess, the VP pick, etc. The cynics all believed these were calculated, and in my cynicism there were times I was suspicious, but in hindsight, I now genuinely believe that they were: providential, an honest blunder, and simple truth (in that order).

I have no doubt that, if Huckabee ends up running after all, there will be many a pundit who "admires" Huckabee's strategy & cunning, but I honestly believe that IF Huckabee runs, it will only be because he believes God wants him to.

There will be many a person who will accuse Huckabee followers like myself of naivete, but I choose to trust Huckabee until he proves untrustworthy. Cynicism is a worldly trait, & though I admit to being worse than average, it's not one that we should embrace. (It also is a form of negativity that takes years off one's life!)

I've always liked this story about St. John Cupertino:

One day, the brothers, laughing at John's foolish gullibility, decided to play a prank on him. So when they were all out walking later, one shouted, "Look! A flying pig!" and as John searched the sky for it, they were all beside themselves laughing . As they chided him for his credulity, he simply stated, "I would rather believe that pigs can fly than believe that my brothers would lie to me."

And all the brothers were silent.
Perhaps I should have remained silent. :blush:

Nevertheless, I'm generally not cynical. For example, I don't think "all politicians are crooks" (like so many people do nowadays). Nor do I think "all TV preachers are only after money".

Nor do I think that the so-called floating cross was staged. And, even if it were, so what? (I never understood why that bothered people). The ad thing I think reflected a conflicted Huckabee. He didn't want to run it, but thought he had to. So, yes a blunder literally in real time.

My honest thought is he "intended" (intellectually speaking) to enter late summer. I think he intended this since last campaign. He never stopped running. And then he was given a deadline by FOX, and at that point he felt God tell him no. But, only at that point. If he reconsiders, it will probably have to be no later than late summer/early fall. That re-entry will coincide with his original plan, and then this pull out will be a parenthesis in the process.

_________________
'If you drive God out of the world then you create a howling wilderness' --Peter Hitchens


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:48 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:47 pm
Posts: 4564
Location: Texas
Likes: 554
Liked: 523
Do you still think he will enter at this point? Even with his newly announced trip to Israel next Feb?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:25 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 10:58 am
Posts: 3019
Likes: 0
Liked: 190
If Governor Huckabee even had an inkling that he would run, do you honestly believe Sarah would be working for Pawlenty? C'mon now, that just doesn't make sense. I mean, I want to believe it as much as the next person, but, at this point, the writing is clearly on the wall. Now, if Pawlenty should quickly bomb, then possibly Huck could pick up the pieces of his crumbling campaign and run with it...that's not very likely, but at least possible. However, Im thinking that we are the only ones planning Huck's comeback strategy at this point....just wishful thinking.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 1:05 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:19 pm
Posts: 1993
Location: Iowa
Likes: 6
Liked: 13
QuoVadisAnima wrote:
Do you still think he will enter at this point? Even with his newly announced trip to Israel next Feb?
Less and less as the days go by. I also think if he doesn't run this cycle he will never run again. "His time" will have passed (like NEWT).

_________________
'If you drive God out of the world then you create a howling wilderness' --Peter Hitchens



Post by VertiCon Liked by: QuoVadisAnima
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 3:43 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:46 pm
Posts: 1563
Location: Texas
Likes: 178
Liked: 374
VertiCon wrote:
QuoVadisAnima wrote:
Do you still think he will enter at this point? Even with his newly announced trip to Israel next Feb?
Less and less as the days go by. I also think if he doesn't run this cycle he will never run again. "His time" will have passed (like NEWT).


Agreed. It would be challenging to run from the platform of being a TV host once a week fo the last eight years.

If he doesn't get in this time, his only chance at the presidency in the future is if someone taps him for veep.

_________________
THE TIMES are nightfall, look, their light grows less;
The times are winter, watch, a world undone:
They waste, they wither worse; they as they run
Or bring more or more blazon man’s distress.
And I not help. Nor word now of success:
All is from wreck, here, there, to rescue one—
Work which to see scarce so much as begun
Makes welcome death, does dear forgetfulness.
Or what is else? There is your world within.
There rid the dragons, root out there the sin.
Your will is law in that small commonweal…
G.M. Hopkins.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 8:07 pm 
Offline
Major General

Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:01 pm
Posts: 736
Location: Lakewood, CO
Likes: 118
Liked: 147
Here's what I think it will take for Huckabee to run. Several of the conservative candidates would have to call him privately and offer to drop out and endorse him if he will run. That kind of heart change could be what God is looking for before placing His blessing on a Huckabee run. Frankly with the state of the GOP it could be that Huck running would be throwing pearls before swine. If the straw poll results demonstrated that the conservative wing of the party is too split to elect a conservative candidate it could happen but only if the current candidates were willing to set aside their egos for the sake of the country. :pigflying Prayer is the only thing that can make :pigflying so lets all get on our knees!

_________________
Judith Martinez
"It is true poverty for a child to die so that we may live as we wish."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 6:26 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:19 pm
Posts: 1993
Location: Iowa
Likes: 6
Liked: 13
Miserere wrote:
VertiCon wrote:
QuoVadisAnima wrote:
Do you still think he will enter at this point? Even with his newly announced trip to Israel next Feb?
Less and less as the days go by. I also think if he doesn't run this cycle he will never run again. "His time" will have passed (like NEWT).


Agreed. It would be challenging to run from the platform of being a TV host once a week fo the last eight years.

If he doesn't get in this time, his only chance at the presidency in the future is if someone taps him for veep.

Yes, that is how I "feel" about it. And yet, the facts are diverse. Notice:

Quote:
Why Romney can't win
By: Paul Goldman and Mark J. Rozell
August 2, 2011 09:28 PM EDT

Mitt Romney is considered the most electable GOP candidate for the presidency. The former Massachusetts governor’s business background positions him as the pro-jobs GOP version of an “it’s the economy, stupid” presidential hopeful.

He has an image tailor-made for an electorate with economic fears at near-record postwar highs. But to be nominated, much less win the White House, Romney must defy a modern political reality.

There is an urban legend about running for president: Even if you lose your first run for a party nomination, the theory goes, you gain valuable assets of name recognition and a national network to help win the White House four years later.

In 2008, Romney lost the nomination to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). Now the former Bay State governor is back, hoping to lead the GOP to victory in 2012 over incumbent President Barack Obama.

Romney is following the path of many modern candidates. They also lost in their first run for a nomination, either in the primaries or as a candidate who entered later, in hopes of winning at the party convention. Four years later, they all returned to the field, trying to win that elusive nomination and then lead their party to victory in November over an incumbent or his party’s choice for successor.

Their names: Robert Taft, Harold Stassen, Estes Kefauver, Nelson Rockefeller, George McGovern, Scoop Jackson, Gene McCarthy, Terry Sanford, Gary Hart, Richard Gephardt, Jesse Jackson, Pat Buchanan, Steve Forbes and Lamar Alexander. Several were considered early front-runners.

Not one on this list succeeded in that second consecutive quest to become president. The only one to get his party’s nomination was the Democratic former Sen. George McGovern, who lost the 1972 general election in a landslide.

Two candidates in the modern era managed to win their party’s nomination for president the first time, lose the general election and then get nominated again four years later: Republican Thomas Dewey (1944 and 1948) and Democrat Adlai Stevenson (1952 and 1956).

They both also never made it to the White House — losing a second time to an incumbent.

We recently laid out our first law of presidential motion in “Why Palin Has No Shot in 2012.” Losing vice presidential nominees, we showed, never win the presidency the next cycle.

Romney faces our second law of presidential motion: If you don’t win your first campaign for president, you won’t be able to claim the big prize four years later.

This second law explains Romney’s inability to use name identification, deep pockets and campaign skill to surge ahead of a weak GOP field. Four years ago, he barely won 20 percent of the primary vote and a lesser bloc of delegates.

There is an unwelcome element of “I told you so” in coming back four years later and asking voters to admit they made a mistake.

Romney should consider the successful comebacks of several Republican presidents. Richard Nixon, for example, won the GOP presidential nomination on his first try, only to lose the general election to Sen. John F. Kennedy in 1960. Nixon waited until 1968 to try again — winning the nomination against onetime front-runner George Romney, the Bostonian’s father.

Ronald Reagan, the governor of California, ran against Nixon in 1968 for the GOP nomination. He lost, got beat again for the nomination eight years later — but took both the nomination and general election on his third try. George H.W. Bush lost in his first try for the GOP nomination to Reagan in 1980. He had to wait eight years, after which he handily won the GOP nod and then the White House.

Hubert Humphrey lost his first run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1960. But he won eight years later on a second try, only to lose the general. McCain lost in his 2000 GOP primary campaign. Eight years later, he defeated Mitt Romney for the nomination.

History shows that losing candidates need to resist the four-year itch. Truth is, most postwar presidents (seven of 11) were elected in their first campaign for the Oval Office: Harry S. Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama.

Those successful in returning to the arena a second time all waited at least eight years. Romney clearly is talented with many attractive qualities for a presidential candidate. He may yet become president.

But based on the experiences of the 16 men in the modern era who failed in their first try to reach the White House and then couldn’t resist trying again four years later — the Romney for President 2012 campaign looks DOA.

Paul Goldman formerly served as chairman of the Democratic Party of Virginia. Mark J. Rozell is professor of public policy at George Mason University.

© 2011 POLITICO LLC

_________________
'If you drive God out of the world then you create a howling wilderness' --Peter Hitchens


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 6:45 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:47 pm
Posts: 4564
Location: Texas
Likes: 554
Liked: 523
I don't buy the arguments that essentially suggest that statistics determine who can win or who can't. Statistics are data collected AFTER events occur, which makes them a compilation of results, so it seems silly to argue them as if they were causes.

And Romney's going to be even more unattractive in 2016 when we actually have some authentic conservatives to choose from...



Post by QuoVadisAnima Liked by: Huckabeliever
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 7:09 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:19 pm
Posts: 1993
Location: Iowa
Likes: 6
Liked: 13
QuoVadisAnima wrote:
I don't buy the arguments that essentially suggest that statistics determine who can win or who can't. Statistics are data collected AFTER events occur, which makes them a compilation of results, so it seems silly to argue them as if they were causes.

And Romney's going to be even more unattractive in 2016 when we actually have some authentic conservatives to choose from...

Yeah, I'm not so fascinated by the statistical angle, as I am about socio/politico tendencies. I think what this article suggests is not that all who wait eight years can win. But, rather those who jump back in only four years later are jumping in too soon. The reasons that the person was rejected the first time may still possibly be lingering.

But, if you are away eight years then you give the public time to miss you. As they say, 'how can we miss you if you don't go away'. And also, enough time to appreciate their "buyer's remorse". George W. Bush's campaign was in part his father's comeback. And, Dubya gave the public an opportunity to apologize for voting for Clinton over 41.

The fact is, Nixon was toast after the 1960 campaign. He proved that when he tried to run for Governor of Calif. in 1962 (and was beaten by Jerry Brown's dad) -- and then angrily told the press: ' you won't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore'.

But even then, Nixon was plotting a comeback, and he spent the next six years giving speeches, and playing piano at the parties of important political and business movers and shakers. And, he did so with an upbeat carefree demeanor rehabilitating his image.

And, it basically took Reagan from 1964 'til 1980 to win. He had false-start in 1968, then sat out in 1972. Then made his comeback in 1976, which set him up in 1980. With these two examples there are very different details. But, the commonalities (it seems to me) are that they both took the long path giving the public time to want them.

_________________
'If you drive God out of the world then you create a howling wilderness' --Peter Hitchens


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
POWERED_BY