It Was Huck's Night

Shocka! Huck was right. It's a two man race .......... and he's in it. When he said it I wanted to vomit . But it seems to be closer to the truth than not. It's a fight for second place.

Big night for McCain. Huge.

Comments

[USpace]

May God help us help ourselves...

Hey there Ms. Infidel, CONGRATULATIONS! I'm tagging you with the award of 'Bloggers Of The World'.
Joy of joys I know, but I couldn't resist, your blog is just too excellent.
I've enjoyed it many times so I felt I should recommend it.

But don't worry, any further participation on your part is of course optional;
you have the award whether or not you wish to recommend and/or award anyone else.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/25ajdq

Please keep up the good work and stay safe.

:)

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
blog memes are Sharia plot

keep the bloggers distracted
tagging and being tagged

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
ALL bloggers must get tagged

then start at least one meme
some may go on forever

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
don't explore the blogosphere

don't expand your reading list
never challenge your views

http://absurdthoughtsaboutgod.blogspot.com/

:)
.

[lilredbird]

The Huckabeans have robbed us of the one candidate who thoroughly understood and resolutely intended to put combatting Global Jihad at the top of his To-Do list, and that was Romney. And we lose him because Huckabee's He-Haw bible-thumping backers are more concerned about what, gay marriage? So we are going to be faced with the possibility of a McCain-Huckabee ticket against Clinton and/or Obama? I was in there at 7:10 am voting for Mitt but I won't lift a finger for McCain-Huckabee unless I absolutely cannot see a way out.

What a nightmare.

[epaminondas]

Huckabee on the repub ticket = Pres Clinton by 5-10% in the popular vote.

It's that simple.

Can you imagine the commercials?

A ship glides to shore on the Galapagos....
Hillary with scientists.....

It's too ridiculous.

[Harcourt Fenton]

Huckabee may have robbed from McCain as well as Romney.

In any event, I am completely perplexed by lilredbird's comment above insinuating that the combat of Global Jihad is not at the top of McCain's list. That, "my friends", is what his campaign has been all about. He was losing when he was the only one supporting the surge (and Romney was hedging - saying that it was "apparently" working) and he won largely because he stuck to his guns throughout on the importance of fighting Islamofascist terror.

So, liredbird, to put your question back to you, are we going to lose the general election because you are more concerned about all of the newly learned platitudes that Romney is saying about security than McCain's actual hard work in this area?

Are you going to vote for Hillary like Rush, Pamela and Ann Coulter just out of spite and in blind rage that the one candidate who "got you" didn't work out in our non-Taliban democratic system where other people vote,

[jjmurphy]

Harcourt,

I will not be voting for McCain, but not out of rage. (I will also NEVER vote for a democrat.) I will not support McCain because, aside from his support of the war on islamic terrorists, there is almost nothing I agree with him on.

I will chose a third party that more closely resembles MY beliefs. I will no longer vote out of "fear" that someone worse will be elected if I don't vote for McCain. I will take my precious vote and cast it for someone who matches my beliefs. Given that McCain/Huckabee have won so many votes, it is apparent the republican party is no longer my party.

[Esquier]

"I will no longer vote out of "fear" that someone worse will be elected if I don't vote for McCain." - Rohan 02/06/08

This quote should be made into a banner. I agree with you 100%!

[jjmurphy]

Esquier - Thank you for the compliment!

[heroyalwhyness]

Having voted in yesterday's primary in NY, I have to say that the process was less than impressive. Stuffed into a small corner room with space for only one desk and one voting booth, it was apparent the locals were not expecting much of a turn out. There was no line. I walked in, noticed two people sitting behind the table and spotted a note taped to the right end of the table labelled "Democrat".

I asked if this was the room for the democrat primary and they both said no, and pointed me to the left side of the table (unlabled) set aside for registered republicans.

I signed in, and stepped into the booth, pulled the lever to close the curtain and noticed that I had access to vote for both party's candidates. Being in a hurry, I voted for Mitt and left.

In retrospect, I should have paid more attention to confirm that there was someone working the booth to regulate the votes to the respective party. If there wasn't, it seems all too easy to manipulate the numbers.

[heroyalwhyness]

The blogger at Kesher Talk has similar stories about vote shenanigans . . .
http://www.keshertalk.com/archives/2008/02/votingrepnyc.php

[JewishOdysseus]

Didja notice how the netwoks kept Romney stuck at one state (Mass.) until the Calif. polls closed, even though he had huge leads in 4-5 states (~85% in Utah)..."No, comrades, let's not jump the gun and call those states for Romney yet...Can't let the West Coast voters think he's got some traction..."

If Atlas readers wd like a little pick-me-up today, check out this:
http://jewishodysseus.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-hard-was-romneys-task.html

[Harcourt Fenton]

Hey Rohan - You are now in the good company of the Ralph Nader voters. Like it or not, we really only have a two party system in this country. If we had a parliamentary system - I'd say go for it. But we don't. So, any vote for a conservative third party, takes away from the Republican win and, given the 50/50 nature of our democracy, that means a win by the Democrats.

Don't pretend otherwise. The primaries are the time to make these choices unless you want to amend the Constitution to change the way our system really works.

Finally, if we have the a Republican split off party which draws a large percentage of votes, then that creates incentive for a Democrat split off party, because it could mean that you only have to get 26% of the popular vote to win the election. Then you are not dealing with Hillary, but maybe with a populist Kucinich clone. That would be bad strategery.

[Jeremiah]

This is Romney's chance - to burnish his conservative credentials by leading a kind of "conservative revival" or a counter-weight to the McCain moderates. It may not get him the nomination this time around, but it could be to the benefit of the GOP, and possibly his presidential chances in '12.

[jjmurphy]

Harcourt,

I understand completely the ramifications of my decision. I am not pretending. I simply refuse to be played like a pawn on someone else's chess board. I have "been played" long enough and it has led us to the sorry state we are in now.

I am not a republican, conservative, libertarian, democrat or socialist. I am a free American. I will vote for the candidate that most closely agrees with MY principles.

It really is that simple.

[pythagoras]

What "Schmuckabee" doesn't or won't understand is that by taking votes away from Romney he is aiding McCain and "Hitlery"--and playing right into the Islamo-Socialist-George Soros strategy to subvert the USA.

Huck,if he had the Christian integrity he claims to have, would step aside and assist Romney in defeating McCain, winning the presidency, and saving our homeland from subversion (and George Soros and his cronies in Islam,the Socialist movement, and the new US Democratic Party).