Pre-Ignition in Mich'gan

The proverbial key is soon to turn in the Motor City, and here's my pre-race analysis:

~ The polls aren't looking that good for Mike Huckabee in Michigan. It appears that McCain is receiving a momentous boost in support resulting from New Hampshire, and that, coupled with Mitt Romney's Michigan roots and stacks of money, looks like it could culminate in a disappointing third-place showing for Huckabee.

~It's hard to say now who Huckabee supporters should be rooting to win the Wolverine State, besides Huckabee himself, of course. Practically speaking, a loss for Romney could hammer the final nail in the coffin of his presidential hopes. However, the resultant McCain victory would likely launch McCain into a big win in South Carolina and, thereafter, another one in Florida. Although McCain isn't officially "not supported" on this site, I would not want to see him win the nomination (Read my "Ranking Their Positions" series on abortion, the sanctity of marriage, and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms; also, research his other positions)

~That being said, we saw in New Hampshire, on the Democratic side, that polls can't be trusted. Although there are numerous explanations for how the polls could have predicted so wrongly, one possibility is that the polls somehow reflected a false "momentum" that Obama supposedly carried out of Iowa. If that is true, and the polls have overblown McCain's momentum out of New Hampshire, Huckabee could still have a shot.

~By some quirk of the election process, Hillary Clinton is the only candidate on the Democratic Michigan ballot, and, in Michigan, Democrats, as well as independents, can choose to vote in the Republican primary. It's difficult to determine how that will affect the race. Huckabee's "populist" message may appeal to Democrats, and his social conservatism may appeal to some Michigan Catholics who may vote Democratically based upon their economic philosophies (I don't know with certainty that any of those exist, but I suppose that they do.). On the other hand, social moderates and liberals who are for a strong defense may lean towards Rudy Giulani or John McCain. In addition, with no competition from Barack Obama, John McCain has a clear shot at most of Michigan's independents.
So, the summation of that paragraph is that we will just have to wait and see.

~As I pointed out in a previous post, Fred Thompson has stated that he is "making his stand" in South Carolina. After a debate performance that was perceived by some (not me) as brilliant, Thompson looks like he is in decent shape. However, Michigan polls suggest that he will bring up the rear of all the candidates still invited to debates (Giulani, Huckabee, McCain, Paul, Romney, Thompson). Whereas McCain, Romney, or Huckabee could get a monumental kick in the pants coming into South Carolina after Michigan, Thompson won't.

~ Rudy Giulani will once again be an "also-ran," set to only come in ahead of Thompson. His performance in South Carolina could be even worse. I've got to give Rudy credit: for his own good or ill, he's making presidential electoral history with this strategy of putting all his eggs in the basket of Florida and some of the socially moderate Super Tuesday states.

~ Giulani's strategy has proven the lunacy of early national polls. Just days ago, he was maintaining his status as the Republican "national frontrunner." Now, he's down to third, even though the results so far were all accounted for in his plans.

Please pray, as always, for God's will to be done tomorrow in Michigan.

Article VI of the Constitution

...The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, Shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States...
--from Article VI of the Constitution of the United States of America



During this election cycle, I've heard and seen some people invoke Article VI of the Constitution, as if by doing so they are striking down people like myself with a fatal condemnation. But I would propose that Article VI is just one more reason why we need to elect a Christian President.

What do I mean by that? Well, it's quite simple, really. If we do not elect a Christian President, the Constitution is not going to fix our error. The law will not save us from our mistake. If we choose a non-Christian, we will get our just desserts. The Constitution is designed so that no candidate will be prevented, by a precept of law (literally a "Test"), from attaining political office, presumably after he or she has already been elected by the people. The only test to be given is by the people, when they cast their ballots.

The reality is, the Constitution doesn't begin to decree to the citizenry on what bases we are permitted to embrace or shun a candidate. In fact, it would be a violation of the First Amendment for it to do so. If my faith tells me to cast my vote a certain way, I am allowed to act accordingly.

Consider what the naysayers, claiming constitutional superiority, really are implying when they proclaim that we can't "discriminate" against Romney because of his Mormonism. They are, in effect, saying, "You can vote against Romney because you dislike his ideology, record, wealth, speaking style, hair, fashion, campaign theme song, or the weird feeling you get when you see him, but you can't vote against him because of his religion." That's nonsense! Religion is the foundation upon which all else is built! If nothing else, one's religion installs oneself as god, or the State as god.

In all legality, I could vote against Barack Obama (which I will) merely because of the color of his skin (which, fortunately, happens to not be one of my reasons). That rationale would be despicable, deplorable, disgusting, diabolical, and just about any other negative adjective starting with "d," but that does not make it unlawful. Anyone can freely attempt to take that same tact about the rationality of considering faith in selecting a candidate to support, but no one can honestly make the argument that it is a case of constitutionality.

Post-Primary Postulations

New Hampshire Republican Primary Results:

John McCain: 37%
Mitt Romney: 32 %
Mike Huckabee: 11%
Rudy Giulani: 9%
Ron Paul: 8%
Fred Thompson: 1%
Duncan Hunter: <1%
Alan Keyes: <1%

~No major miracle (a total victory) or minor miracle (second place) occurred for Huckabee last night. Yet, his third-place finish, ahead of Rudy Giulani, was still a solid one. He now has moved onto campaigning in Michigan and South Carolina, possessing a good shot at winning both of those states.

~Ironically, Huckabee's third-place finish will likely be viewed more positively than Romney's second-place performance. If he's not careful, Romney will be characterized as the "rich bridesmaid," who just can't buy a husband despite all her riches. Unless, of course, you want to classify Wyoming as a suitable "husband." It's not suitably sufficient for a legitimate presidential candidate--I'll tell you that much.

~The predictions I made after the Iowa Caucus are largely contingent upon the boost McCain gets as he rockets out of New Hampshire. He's currently polling third in Michigan behind Romney and Huckabee, a distant second in South Carolina to Huckabee, and fourth in Florida.

~Thompson came close to flat-lining. Today, as per my request (sort of), he said that he's "making his stand" in South Carolina. According to the Real Clear Politics Average, Fred is a whopping 23.3 points behind Huckabee, 10.7 behind McCain, and 7 behind Romney. Thompson is tied with Giulani at 9 percentage points.
It doesn't seem like such a wise decision for Thompson to pull a General Custer against such overwhelming odds. But, even with South Carolina appearing to be the equivalent of a 2-3 offsuit hand (to use a Texas Hold'Em analogy), it's his best opportunity to seriously compete in a state before February 5th (Super Tuesday). Although he's not in much worse shape in Michigan, Nevada, or Florida, Thompson's southern, folksy appeal is less advantageous in those states than it is in South Carolina, and the media will probably cover the latter more heavily anyway.

~In the most Libertarian state in Union, with a boatload of "Free Staters" and the motto "Live Free or Die," Ron Paul pulled off a rather ordinary performance. If he can't score better than fifth here, then where?

~In my aforementioned predictions, I failed to account for Nevada. There hasn't been any polling there since early December, so it's hard to tell what's happening there.

As John Edwards would say, there's two down. Forty-eight to go.

Interesting Read...

This is an interesting article about the British reaction to our electoral spectacle. It also compares our system to England's. I found it very intriguing...And it made me glad to be an American.

Pre-Primary Ponderings

The "first-in-the-nation" primaries are about to begin in New Hampshire, and here's what I'm thinking about:

~Multiple analysts have suggested that Mike Huckabee might--just might--pass Mitt Romney for second place in New Hampshire (behind a soaring John McCain), even though the polls don't even hint at such a possibility. One suggested that, since Huckabee is bringing out the young vote, the pollsters might not be reaching them.
If that scenario did transpire, it would dramatically increase Huckabee's already significant momentum, and it might just end--in all practicality--Mitt Romney's hopes at the nomination.

~It's more likely, however, that Huckabee will place a solid third, ahead of a stumbling Rudy Giulani. Although this type of finish wouldn't provide the boost that a silver or gold would, I think it would retain Huckabee's current momentum.

~It looks like Fred Thompson is going to place sixth. He's already admitted that they didn't really try in New Hampshire, basically professing contentment and resignation in the wake of a decisive defeat. Where's his campaign going? I personally like the guy--and most of his positions--but I want to see him put up a fight somewhere, or throw in the towel. Don't prolong the inevitable.

~Ron Paul will probably rank fifth. That's not too bad, by his standards, but, with New Hampshire being such an independent, libertarian state, the Libertarian Republican candidate has to be hoping for a better performance than the polls project. Otherwise, where does he plan to do better?

Please keep praying.

Post-Caucus Thoughts

Iowa Republican Caucus Results:

Mike Huckabee: 34%
Mitt Romney: 25%
Fred Thompson: 13%
John McCain: 13%
Ron Paul: 10%
Rudy Giulani: 4%
Duncan Hunter: 1%
Alan Keyes: <1%

Now that Mike Huckabee has handily won the Iowa caucus, I can tell you why I think Iowa was so important.

My predictions:

The momentum from this victory will likely catapult Mike Huckabee ahead of Rudy Giulani into 3rd place in New Hampshire's primary, which takes place January 8th. The Real Clear Politics Average places Giulani just half a point ahead of Huckabee, 10% to 9.5%.

John McCain will likely pull away from Mitt Romney for first place. Then...

Romney, reeling from two debilitating blows in Iowa and New Hampshire, will waver in Michigan, where the primary takes place in 11 days. Currently, Romney leads Huckabee there by only 1 point.

With increasing momentum from three impressive performances, Huckabee will benefit from strong evangelical support in South Carolina (January 19). As of now, he leads Romney there by an average of 6.5%.

Then, with three wins and a victory over Giulani in New Hampshire, Huckabee will overtake Giulani in Florida (1/29), where Mike currently trails by only 2 percentage points, according to Real Clear Politics.

By this point, both Romney and Giulani will be in a bad way, with no momentum, heading into Super-Duper Tuesday.

Admittedly, I'm no psychic, prophet, or political forecaster. After all, I projected 6 months ago that the general election would come down to Mike Gravel and Hugh Cort (JUST KIDDING!). But I feel that these are sincere, logical projections, although I may be overestimating the momentum factor, and I most certainly am not accounting for any unforeseen setbacks for Huckabee.

More thoughts:

~Fred Thompson essentially lengthened his campaign by the skin of his teeth, beating out John McCain for third place by the slimmest of margins. They both had approximately 13% of the vote. The question remains, though, where can Thompson win? His campaign seems to be riding on the hopes of a Huc-collapse. He's set to finish far in back of the rest of the pack (including Paul) in New Hampshire. Several polls have him at a feeble 2% in that state. South Carolina is where he is doing best in the pre-Super-Tuesday states, but, even there, he's presently slated to finish in fourth.

~John McCain's fourth-place finish could temper his recent surge, but Romney's second-place finish in Iowa should help McCain in New Hampshire.

~A fifth-place finish with 10% of the vote would not be good for most serious candidates, but it's good enough for Ron Paul. Considered a non-viable candidate by some because of his stance on foreign policy, Paul proved last night that he can get significant chunks of the voting public to join his so-called "Revolution." In all likelihood, that won't translate into the Republican nomination, but it's worth noting.

~On the Democratic side, Chris Dodd (<1%) and Joe Biden (1%) immediately withdrew themselves from the race when the results came in. On the Republican side, I don't know how much longer Duncan Hunter (1%) can hold out for a miracle. It will be a shame if and when he has to drop out.

~Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, and Alan Keyes might stay in the race just for the fun of it. Bill Richardson, newly established as the only viable "second-tier" candidate on the democratic side, still has something to play for.

~Although you wouldn't know it by watching the media coverage, Wyoming, the least-populated state in the Union, finishes up its Republican caucus process tomorrow. With no public polling done there and little attention from the candidates, no one knows who will win there. Will it even matter? We shall see.

We've only just begun, people. If you haven't yet, go ahead and buckle your seatbelts now. And don't stop praying!

Deep, Independent Thinkers, You Are!

Thanks to everyone for participating in the third WWCP poll--a double edition.

Both parts of the poll pertained to celebrity and high-profile endorsements. The first asked, simply, how do they affect you?

As I suspected, they don't really affect you at all. Out of 30 total votes cast, a whopping 69% (21 votes) said that endorsements have absolutely no impact on them, with 46% (14 votes) saying, "They never affect me. I study the candidates independently and couldn't care less what 'big-name' people think." The other 23% (7 votes) clarified that endorsements don't affect who they support, but they "appreciate them because they can help my [their] candidate[s]."

29% (9 votes) said that endorsements do affect them. 3% (1 vote) pointed out that it depends on the endorser, and 13% (4 votes) further defined that position by stating that only "endorsers with credibility and credentials"--not celebrities--impact them. The remaining 13% (4 votes) noted that some endorsements make them less likely to support a candidate. Not one person said that endorsements "almost always affect" them--that they "put a lot of stock in a celebrity and high-profile endorsements.

The second part of the poll was very intriguing. In this part, I wanted to know people's specific reactions to particular endorsements. Here are the results:

10 people were less likely to support Obama because of Oprah's endorsement. 2 were more likely.

4 people were more likely to support Huckabee because of Chuck Norris' endorsement. 5 were less likely.

3 were more likely to support Mitt Romney after the National Review's endorsement. 8 were less likely.

1 was more likely to support Mike Huckabee after Jim Gilchrist's endorsement. 5 were less likely.

There were a total of 25 votes cast in the second part, yet the most reactions to any endorsement was twelve. How can this be? Well, 13 said that none of the endorsements they didn't check influence them one way or another. That still doesn't seem to be proportionate to the percentage which said, in the poll's first part, that endorsements has no impact on them. However, that seeming contradiction can be explained in two ways:

1) Different people voted in the different parts of the poll.
2) In the second part, you were recording your reactions--whether positive or negative--to an endorsement, rather than how they actually influence you.

Please vote in the new poll.

My "Lemonade Stands"

I just opened two "Lemonade Stands," which I have nicknamed "For on the Campaign Trail 1" and "For on the Campaign Trail 2" , respectively. They are located in the sidebar for quick reference.

Stand 1 contains books and periodicals of interest. I do not, and cannot, recommend or endorse all the content found therein, but I did try to select products which you may very well find useful.

Stand 2 contains some of my favorite movies, including family, Christian, and action-adventure films. It also has some of my favorite music, ranging from contemporary Christian to epic soundtracks to Andrea Bocelli.

By purchasing products directly through the Lemonade links on this site, you thereby support this blog. Please take just a couple of minutes to scroll through my inventory of items. Don't shy away from clicking on an item for more information. Thank you in advance for any purchases you may make.

You can also make your own Lemonade stand.

Pre-Caucus Thoughts

We've just about made it to the Iowa caucuses. The following is a collection of some campaign news sprinkled with my opining.

~The most recent Des Moines Register poll has Mike Huckabee leading Mitt Romney by six percentage points in Iowa, 32% to 26%. However, this poll was taken before what some consider Huckabee's "debacle," when he filmed a negative ad, then decided not to run it, but showed it to the media and thereby garnered it a lot of free air time. Some consider the move devious, while others consider it stupid.
Furthermore, the Real Clear Politics poll average suggests that the race is a dead heat, well within the margin of error, and Fox News correspondent Karl Cameron reported that some within the campaigns think that the race will be decided by less than a percentage point.

~Outspending Huckabee in Iowa 20-1, Romney, who is reportedly a great businessman, has to admit that Huckabee's campaign has been far more productive and efficient than his own. Or, Romney has to concede that boatloads of money can only buy so many votes. Maybe it's a little of both. He has spent over $6 million in Iowa.

~According to the latest Des Moines Register poll, Fred Thompson is dangerously close to losing fourth place to Ron Paul. Yes, I speak of the same Ron Paul who everybody either loves or wants to have committed. (Okay, so there are some who fall in between--like me.) If this unthinkable does occur, Thompson's bid for the presidency could be just about over. Even if he holds onto fourth place, he will be in bad shape. He just doesn't seem to have an "identity" to develop a voting bloc, and a fourth-place finish or worse can't be spun positively to supporters.
However, a third-place finish, ahead of a surging John McCain, would be a boost, and that is not entirely out out of the question.

~If Romney loses Iowa, that defeat would likely propel him to two more defeats: one in New Hampshire at the hands of John McCain and another in South Carolina. Those two losses would likely make him lose Michigan. Clearly, Iowa is exceedingly important for Romney, although much the same applies to Huckabee, who would likely lose the steam to win South Carolina and Michigan following a loss in Iowa.

It's time to be praying, people.

WWCP Linked from Duncan Hunter's Website

Check it out here.

In other news, WWCP now has an official e-mail contact address: WeWantaChristianPresident@gmail.com

If you have questions or comments about any of my posts, please comment on the relevant one(s). But if you have more generic inquiries or would like to correspond privately by e-mail, feel free to e-mail me.