God, guns & guts - lets keep all three

[Joemailman]

So if Barr is the Libertarian candidate, where would he draw the most votes from? Liberals would like his opposition to the Iraq war/occupation, and his defense of civil/privacy rights. Conservatives would like his stance on low taxes and limited government. I think some liberals would remember that he was one of the first to call for the impeachment of Clinton and hold that against him.

[texaspackerbacker]

Hell No, Harlan (and Joe). Bob Barr is the political reincarnation of Ron Paul.

Thus, there's no way in hell I would ever support him, and the ones he potentially could take votes from would be the anti-war leftists i.e. Obama and Hillary.

Harlan, you talk about "how could Obama lose when all the commentators are for him" (paraphrased), yet you disparage the obvious concept of leftist bias of the media. How are those two positions not contradictory?

[Harlan Huckleby]

So if Barr is the Libertarian candidate, where would he draw the most votes from? Liberals would like his opposition to the Iraq war/occupation, and his defense of civil/privacy rights. Conservatives would like his stance on low taxes and limited government. I think some liberals would remember that he was one of the first to call for the impeachment of Clinton and hold that against him.

Barr isn't going to draw any liberal voters. He is a conservative ideologue by temperment.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Thus, there's no way in hell I would ever support him, and the ones he potentially could take votes from would be the anti-war leftists i.e. Obama and Hillary?

why would the abandon the dems for that curmudgeon? PLENTY of conservatives are anti-war, they are far more likely to break to Barr.

Harlan, you talk about "how could Obama lose when all the commentators are for him" (paraphrased), yet you disparage the obvious concept of leftist bias of the media. How are those two positions not contradictory?

the media is overall biased left, no doubt about it. But there are PLENTY of conservative outlets, FOX is largest news network by far, after all. Plus talk radio, etc.

The conservative view gets out there, the public has a chance to weigh both sides.

Clinton is uniquely screwed because she has virtually NOBODY in media making her case. And the love for Obama is truly unprecedented. Mailman says McCain receives favorable treatment, which is true, he is by far the most admired Republican. But it doesn't compare with what we're seeing with Obama. McCain does't have 90% of the pundits writing editorials defending him. ANY politician besides Obama would have been grilled over several issues: Obama's undemocratic ploys in MI-FL, his playing the race card unfairly over Martin Luther King comments, and the the mass acceptance that his diversionary Race Speech placed him above accountability.

I heard a pundit say this weekend that Obama's caucus popular vote should be extrapolated to the greater voter population. In other words, if 10K voted for him a caucus, and that was 60% of caucus voters, it should count as 300K popular votes if there are 500K registered Dems.
Insane. In the state where there was both a primary & caucus, Texas, Obama cleaned-up in the caucus even the Clinton had solid edge in primary vote! Obviously caucuses are not democratic, if anything his caucus votes should be excluded from popular total.

This weekend, Donna Brazile, a supposedly independent analyst, said Clinton needs a 15 point win in PA to consider it a victory. Ridiculous, that level is impossible in a contested primary, especially with Obama outspending Clinton 3:1.

The "as far as I know" smear job was unreal. It goes on and on. I've never seen such a one-sided media circus.

[texaspackerbacker]

But Harlan, don't you recall Rush Limbaugh telling his followers to vote for Hillary? And after Obama's elitist gaff, don't rule out Hillary winning Pennsylvania by 15 points.

As for Bob Barr, I didn't say unequivocally that he would take a lot of votes from the liberal candidate. Hell, I didn't even bring him up. But just where do you think Ron Paul got all that support from? Right, anti-war loonies--NOT garden variety Libertarians. And with Paul out, where do you think that anti-war loony vote would go if Barr hadn't gotten in? Don't worry, though, leftists. Barr is the antithesis of charisma. Most of the loonies will still support your guy (or gal).

[Harlan Huckleby]

But just where do you think Ron Paul got all that support from? Right, anti-war loonies--NOT garden variety Libertarians.

I got uncomfortable news for you, Tex. Ron Paul got more money and support from military people than any other candidate. I don't know whether a majority of military families want out of Iraq, but certainly a large, passionate group do.

Bob Barr will be dry-eyed if his candidacy is to John McCain what Ralph Nader's was to Al Gore in 2000.

[texaspackerbacker]

You'll have to excuse me if I don't believe that, Harlan.

Bob Barr has practically no relevance at all, and I certainly don't see him as a threat to McCain. Can you HONESTLY say you do?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Bob Barr has practically no relevance at all, and I certainly don't see him as a threat to McCain. Can you HONESTLY say you do?

oh hell ya, he's a threat! if election is close, he could play a role in battleground states. I doubt he will have much appeal, but it doesn't take that much.

[Harlan Huckleby]

the first poll from Pennsylvania since the God & guns flap has Clinton bumped to a 20 point lead.

http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/padem8-705.html

I don't take it too seriously, polls will flop around.