I have to say, though I missed the first few minutes, I enjoyed the South Carolina/Foxnews debate last night. I like to see the candidates standing and not crouched at a table shoulder to shoulder with the next guy (really, whoever was responsible for that last set-up should be fired).

Huckabee

What I though was interesting was that almost every candidate got asked what I would call a great “zinger” question. For Mike Huckabee, it was the question about the Baptist newspaper ad which stated the Baptist belief that wives should submit graciously to the servant leadership of their husbands. I really though Huckabee took this one and hit it out of the park. Numerous news accounts, including a widely distributed AP story, state that Huck’s response got the biggest applause of the night. And I’m sure the answer especially resonated with the SC evangelicals.

Romney

Romney got the question about the $50 elective abortions available under his Massachusetts health care plan. He once again stated that he just didn’t have any choice because the Massachusetts courts made him include cheap elective abortions in his plan. First, maybe Mitt wouldn’t have that problem if he hadn’t appointed Democrats or Democratic leaning (and contributing) judges for 23 out of the 36 judicial appointment he made while governor of Massachusetts (only 9 were registered Republicans). Mitt likes to say that, as governor, whenever the life issue came before him, he took the side of life. If that were true, he would have vetoed this mandated healthcare plan that promoted abortion altogether. Apparently the political victory of passing Romneycare was enough to win out over life on that occasion.

McCain

McCain got the immigration/amnesty question and admitted that securing the boarder is now a bigger priority for him. This issue was not raised until the end of the debate when it was pushing 11 p.m. on the east coast, which is probably good for McCain. Overall, he handled it pretty well. He said he still believes the 2 million illegals who have committed crimes should be immediately deported, but the rest should have to pay a fine and get to stay.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul was asked to repudiate his supporters who believe that the U.S. government was someway involved in the 9/11 attacks. Paul said that he didn’t agree with that position and that his supporters being associated with that position hurts him, but he refused to disassociate himself from them, saying he couldn’t control what his supporters though. This will contribute to the whack-job reputation Paul has built for himself, which sadly overshadows some of the issues on which he is right, such as the weakness of the U.S. dollar, inflation, and the mistake of getting rid of the gold standard.

Rudy

Rudy got asked about his infamous quote from 1994 when he said: “If you come here and you work hard and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you're one of the people who we want in this city. You're somebody that we want to protect, and we want you to get out from under what is often a life of being a fugitive, which is really unfair.” Rudy answered by talking about enforcing the boarders and explaining why it was a better idea to have 70,000 illegal kids in school rather than on the streets all day. This was kind of weak for a “zinger” question, but, given certain Fox anchors’ obvious affection for Rudy, this was probably as tough a question as Rudy was ever going to get.

Thompson

That leaves Fred. I have to say that my last post was proven right again in last night’s debate. Fred would rather bash others than offer up something worthwhile himself. What I find interesting is that I don’t recall Foxnews asking Fred a “zinger” question. Everyone knows that Fred is all-in in SC, and that he is planning on attacking Huckabee mercilessly there until the primary. Everyone knows that there are a lot of social conservatives and evangelicals in South Carolina. So, the obvious zinger question in my mind would go something like, “Given that 43 states have enacted either legislation or state constitutional amendments prohibiting same-sex marriage, and given that these laws are being vigorously challenged in the courts, and given the confusion that still exists (despite DOMA) regarding how states that don’t recognize same-sex marriage should deal with same-sex partners that were married in other states, why do you refuse to support a federal amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage?”

Why did Fox give Fred a pass on this (and any other tough question they could have asked him)? My guess is that there may be a bit of subtle anti-Huck bias going on (just listen to Hannity’s radio show if you doubt that exists). What better way to subtly go after Huckabee than to let Thompson do the dirty work, and then not challenge Thompson on any tough issues at all?

I love that Foxnews has given Republicans an outlet, which is a much needed balance to the other liberal leaning media out there. But when it comes to internal Republican politics, I’ve come to the conclusion that Foxnews is the worst at showing biases towards and against certain candidates. It’s gotten so bad, I’ve found myself watching CNN. Who knows how they’ll be in the general election, but for now I think they are doing a better job of being “fair and balanced.”

I know a lot of people are wondering why social conservatives seem to be flocking to Huckabee and not Fred.  There are always the “fire in the belly” arguments… and the laziness arguments… and the fact that he thought he was too good to put on a fireman’s hat and sit on Waverly’s new fire truck while here in Iowa (lucky for him his wife is a better campaigner than him and took on all hat wearing duties).

There’s been something else that’s bothered me about Fred, and I’m surprised it has not been raised more during the whole discussion on negative campaigning that occurred just before Iowa’s caucuses.  Fred’s about as negative a campaigner as you can find. I guess when you don’t have much to offer, negativity is all that’s left.

No, he didn’t do negative TV ads here in Iowa (he couldn’t afford them).  If he had had the money, judging from the rest of the campaign, I’m sure he would have. He was always quick with a negative soundbite against another candidate (usually frontrunner Huckabee rather than flip-flop Rombot).  I don’t think I ever saw him on TV talking about his own credentials to be president. I only saw him bashing others.  And he had some pretty nasty and misleading mail pieces as well. (By the way, when I got this one, by first question was, “When has Huck ever attacked Thompson?”)

What really takes the cake in my mind though is a particular item I found on Fred’s own website.  A lot of candidates have informational pieces, fliers, door hangers, etc. that you can access and print right off of their websites. When I was researching my earlier piece on Fred’s federalism positions on abortion and gay marriage (and why that’s a cop-out), I came across something interesting.

First, it should be noted for all you social conservatives out there who are Fred fans that Fred doesn’t even have an “Issue” page on his website about abortion or gay marriage (his page on “Appointing Judges Faithful to Our Constitution” is the only thing that comes close).  He did have a “side by side comparison” page that you can download and print that purports to compare various candidates’ viewpoints on social issues. The candidates included on this handout are Fred, Mitt, Rudy, and Huck.

Given Rudy’s and Mitt’s less-than-stellar histories on abortion and gay rights, it’s not surprising that Fred found some material to ding them on. What caught my eye was the first thing Fred said about Huck’s position on abortion.  It reads:

Huckabee believed that abortion decision are best made by states.

This is right next to a statement about Giuliani, which reads:

Rudy Giuliani is vocally pro-choice

and a statement about Romney that reads:

Mitt Romney was proudly pro-choice until 2005.

Given this context, it’s obvious that Fred is insinuating that leaving abortion to the states is a bad idea, right?  Hey wait, THAT’S FRED’S POSITION!!!!  Of course, he fails to mention this on his website. What a freaking hypocrite.  And never mind the fact that that’s not even an accurate portrayal of Huck’s position. You can attack Huck on a lot of things (and everyone has) but the life issue just isn’t one of them.

It is painfully obvious that social issues are not a high priority to Fred., hence, his “federalism” stance, which is just a fancy way of him saying he doesn’t want to get involved in abortion or gay marriage.  Fred has just been an utter disappointment. That’s why I was so let down when Steve King and Bill Salier backed him.  I know that was all about immigration and “protecting our nation.”  But here’s my question: If we let the moral fabric of our nation continue to decay, what are we going to have left to protect?

Democrats: Like my good friend Don McDowell, I too cheered on Hillary Clinton last night. Sure it felt a little dirty but I want to see Hillary and Obama go toe to toe. It’s going to get really bloody, I can’t wait.

Republicans: As I wrote yesterday McCain owns New Hampshire. There is no doubt that his campaign will get a boost from the win, but I was really disappointed with his acceptance speech. First and foremost it was way too long; secondly he had to read it. The content was solid, but the image isn’t one that will serve him well in the future, especially if his main opponent is Mike Huckabee.

Let’s take a look at each candidate and see what they do and where they go next.

John McCain

McCain heads west to the other state he won in 2000, Michigan. The state hasn’t been polled since mid December, but I think it’s safe to say that on the Republican side it will be a three man race between McCain, Huckabee, and Romney. Romney’s campaign is on life support but he is still alive. McCain must be able to knock Romney out of the race after Michigan if he is to have any hope in capturing the Republican nomination.

Mike Huckabee

While McCain’s strategy is simple and straight forward, Huckabee is in a tough spot. Huckabee is polling better than McCain in both South Carolina and Michigan. Huckabee with his limited resources will have to either fight a two front war in Michigan and South Carolina, or cede Michigan to McCain and focus on South Carolina and knocking Fred Thompson out of the race.

I think he has to play in each of the states, but a third pace finish in Michigan could prove deadly. We should know shortly if there really is an alliance between the McCain and Huckabee campaigns. If there is an alliance McCain takes care of Romney in Michigan, and Huckabee takes care of Thompson to battle it out for the nomination in Florida on the 29^th. Such deals require a tremendous amount of trust, but I think it really is a possibility.

Mitt Romney

Romney heads to his childhood home of Michigan. For the fist time in the entire campaign I believe we will see the true Mitt Romney, a fiscal conservative who is going to stress economic issues, something that should have been his strength for his campaign. Unfortunately for Romney he is limping into Michigan, and at some point he has to stop pouring his own money into his campaign. Like any good businessman, you have to know when to stop throwing good money after bad.

Rudy Giuliani

After two states Giuliani has finished 6^th and 4^th, not so impressive. While his campaign continues to spin the media, I doubt he has been able to spin the people he is trying to raise money from. So it looks like after the first five contests Giuliani will be 0-5 and broke heading into Florida.

Fred Thompson

I’m going to do my best to put this in perspective. Dennis Kucinich got almost 1000 more votes in New Hampshire than Fred Thompson did. Shocking. Thompson will be a factor in South Carolina but he is financially challenged and still lacks the fire and drive a presidential candidate needs. One would think Fred’s the 71 year old, not McCain.

I was afraid my friend Nathan was not going to post his promised predictions before the polls closed, and I would, once again, be left the be the resident prognosticator on this site. Lucky for us, Nathan came through, but I figure I might as well throw my 2 cents in as well.  I know this site is mostly about Iowa, but who can resist throwing out some wild guesses as to what may happen in New Hampshire.

First, I should say that I really have no personal knowledge of what’s going on in the Granite State. Unlike my Iowa predictions (which were pretty darn good… and thanks to Don over at Cyclone Conservative for noticing), my New Hampshire prediction is based more on media reports and my gut. Both have been known to be unreliable at times (according to the media, wasn’t Rombot supposed to pull out Iowa?) My gut, on the other hand, usually only fails me in the area of acid reflux, so here goes:

McCain 32%

Romney 28%

Huckabee 16%

Giuliani 11%

Paul 10%

Thompson 3%

Maybe Hunter squeaks out a point, but, at this point, what does it really matter?

FYI… I’m putting Huck slightly higher than most of the polls because of the reports of his huge crowds in recent days, and of course, I’m just not confident that pollsters are reaching Huck’s base. Plus, as a loyal Iowan, I have to account for at least a minimal Iowa bounce. Well, there you have it. We’ll have to see how it all shakes out tonight. I, for one, will be eagerly watching!

33% John McCain

John McCain owns New Hampshire. In 2000 he used the state to mount an epic battle against George W. Bush. McCain was successful, but in 2000 Bush was national frontrunner, and rolled over McCain in South Carolina. Much has changed in 8 years, but McCain still owns New Hampshire. This time however there is not a national frontrunner, so a McCain victory in NH makes him the guy to beat. USS McCain sets sail tonight folks, at the waters look calm.

31% Mitt Romney

How does the saying go, always a bridesmaid, never the bride. Romney has had impressive numbers in Iowa and will probably put up a good number tonight. The problem is he needs a victory and I don’t think he’s going to get one. Instead the Romney campaign is going to be put on life support and head to Michigan tonight where it will most likely be read it’s Last Rights in a few days.

15% Mike Huckabee

There is a bounce out of Iowa and this time it will propel Huckabee to a 3^rd place finish, which they should be ecstatic about. It will be interesting to see what the Huckabee campaign does after New Hampshire, do they head south immediately to battle Fred Thompson in South Carolina, and let McCain take on Romney in Michigan? Or do they also head to Michigan and let Thompson roam free in South Carolina? I know what I’d do, head to South Carolina and own it.

10% Ron Paul

While his supporters want a win, I’ve been impressed with the Paul campaign. They continue to kill the once national frontrunner Rudy Giuliani.

7% Rudy Giuliani

The surprising thing here it that Rudy doubled his percentage from Iowa. I’m sure they will be talking about momentum, but it’s still a long way to Florida, which is looking more like a Huckabee vs. McCain battle.

4% Fred Thomson

He will actually be happy with 4% if he gets it. I really think the Thompson campaign didn’t expect to still be alive, they have to bank on South Carolina, but it’s going to be difficult to be anything more than a footnote.

0% Duncan Hunter

Duncan Hunter currently has more delegates than Rudy Giuliani and Ron Paul…