Posted by
Glen Albrethsen on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:10:15 PM
Introduction
The process by which I think we can whittle down the Republican field follows. It is the process which I took, more or less, to arrive at my own personal opinions of this race, and who would best represent the conservative base, and thus the Republican party, as its presidential nominee.
My intent is to be objective. I know (if anyone actually reads this) that there will be people who disagree with some of the conclusions. Comments to the process are welcome. I hope they are based on substance, rather than style. This is not meant to be comprehensive, but a summary of the candidates' positions for the purposes of establishing a ranking system. I would refer readers to each of the candidates' websites for more details in their own words, as well as searching for articles on news sites and blogs found at places such as Townhall.com, National Review Online, Politico, Atlantic Monthly, etc.
First, we need to look at where these candidates stand on the issues. Their record, where one exists, gives us an idea of where they've been--and their current stances during their individual presidential campaigns gives us an idea of where they are now. The comparisons I make will be drawn based on the most widely held perception of these candidates to date. This is the starting place, by which I think we can start whittling down.
I start with the candidates perceived as the most conservative, and work towards the most moderate. I will put an asterisk (*) next to a claim if there has been significant doubt as to authenticity of their current stance. After that, we'll take a look at other factors, such as the knowledge and understanding of the issues, as well as experience. Then, we will take a look at viability. This may require another blog entry to finish.
Candidate Social conservative Fiscal conservative Defense conservative
Fred Thompson X X X
Duncan Hunter X X X
Mitt Romney X* X X
Rudy Giuliani X X
Ron Paul X X
X*
Mike Huckabee X X* X*
John McCain X* X* X
Now to the asterisks (*).
Mitt Romney--social conservative category
He is currently running as a social conservative, though he originally ran for the US Senate and governor of Massachusetts as effectively pro-choice. To explain this change, he says he has always been personally pro-life, but the question in his mind was what the role of government should play. He has also said that because abortion is legal thanks to Roe v. Wade, that his responsibility as governor was to uphold the law. That did not mean he had to expand the law, however. He says when issues regarding abortion or stem cell research or cloning or embryo farming came up, he vetoed them. He did so after considering the ramifications of such legislation and decided he should come down on the side of life. He said he is in favor of seeing Roe v. Wade overturned and the issue being returned to individual states to decide. He would facilitate this through the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court.
He is also in favor of an amendment to the US Constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman. When he ran for both the US Senate and governor, he did so saying he supported homosexual rights. Statements he made regarding this have been particularly condemning, as the support he pledged went beyond normal upholding of civil rights. He now says he has always been against discrimination against any one, but that the traditional definition of marriage needs to be protected from activist courts, like in Massachusetts, which would make decisions on this issue rather than the people. This took place in his own state.
He has also been considered soft on gun issues. He is now a member of the NRA and says he upholds second amendment rights.
Ron Paul--Defense conservative
Paul espouses a strong defense, but he comes under fire for being opposed to the Iraq War and his demands that the troops be brought back home. He feels that global Jihad is as much a result of us being in the Middle East then anything else, and that we would be safer if we weren't there. He believes foreign policy is best served through friendlier ties and free trade and has said we should trade with nations like Cuba and others.
Mike Huckabee--Fiscal conservative, Defense conservative
Huckabee takes hits on his record as the Governor of Arkansas, where he oversaw a $500 million net increase in taxes, and on comments he has made regarding government's role in helping people. This affects fiscal policy in expanding government with social programs. He has sounded similar to George W. Bush in the "compassionate conservative" vein. He has also been softer on the issue of immigration, which affects social programs, as well as security. He has come under fire from conservative circles for being more of a populist than a conservative.
Regarding defense policy, Huckabee is considered to be weakest in this area. He has been accused of not being as informed on foreign affairs, such as not knowing about the NIE and its assessment of Iran, as well as apologizing for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. Until recently, he had a softer policy on immigration, but has since called for securing the border and combating illegal immigration. There are still questions about what he would want to do with the children of the undocumented, though he has taken harder stances on that than he did as governor, including suggesting that citizenship not be extended to children born in the United States to the undocumented, which would require an amendment to the Constitution.
While he is considered an ardent pro-life and pro-family supporter, the number of criminals given commuted sentences during his 10.5 years as governor has also been scrutinized.
John McCain--Social conservative, Fiscal conservative
McCain has earned the reputation as a maverick, as he has acted independent of party on many issues. McCain-Feingold, dealing with campaign finance, McCain-Kennedy, the immigration reform bill, the gang of 14, and other legislation has met the ire of conservatives. On the campaign trail he has been talking up global warming--preferring to call it climate change--and is against drilling in ANWR. In 2000, as well as this primary season, he has courted and depended on Independents to vote for him in places like New Hampshire and Michigan, where Independents are allowed to vote in either the Republican or Democrat primary.
McCain says he has consistently voted on the side of life, which is generally held up by his record. He has also been against earmarks, and says he has never asked for one for Arizona. However, he has voted against the Bush tax cuts twice, though he says he would vote to extend them now.
Note: Rudy Giuliani does not receive an X or asterisk (*) as a social conservative as he has stuck to a pro-life, pro-homosexual, anti-gun stance.
Analysis
Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter are considered the most consistently conservative candidates still in the race. Hunter, however, has all but disappeared from the media, has been polling in the single digits and has been locked out of the last three Republican presidential debates. Thompson, on the hand, is still in play, making a stand in South Carolina, and with a top two finish, particularly if it's close, will still be viable going into Florida. If he finishes third or worse, particularly if there is a disparity in the vote, he is probably finished. He has all but had South Carolina by himself since New Hampshire.
Romney and Ron Paul are next, though disputed. Ron Paul has been fund raising well and has an amazingly mobile and committed base. However, he has not polled well, and has consistently received less than 10% of the vote in the first four states (Iowa, Wyoming, New Hampshire and Michigan). Paul doesn't show any sign of falling out of the race, despite the numbers, and has money and the grass roots to continue going if he wants to. While anything is possible, he does have to do better--he has to have a break out primary somewhere, to have any legitimate chance at the nomination.
Romney, on the other hand, currently leads in delegates and votes, thanks in good measure to a first place showing in Michigan. His first place in Wyoming is largely overlooked, even though it provides the same amount of delegates as New Hampshire. He has two second place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire. The Romney campaign has not released their fund raising totals for the fourth quarter, and probably won't, preferring to wait until after Florida, since they have until January 31 to divulge numbers. This most likely means he has been accessing his own pocketbook more than he has fund raised, though the latest national calling day conducted by the campaign brought in close to $5 million. Only $1.5 million, however, was committed to the primary as many of the recent donors have already maxed out.
Giuliani would seem to be the next conservative, and is arguably very conservative when it comes to defense. He could be very conservative fiscally, as well, though there is plenty to look at during his tenure as mayor of New York City, one of the more liberal places to live in the United States.
The least conservative would seem to be Huckabee and McCain, in that order. Both are still very much in the running, thanks to their finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire, respectively. McCain has shown he has the will to bring his campaign back from nowhere, while Huckabee has been able to organize and orchestrate decent to good showings despite lacking funding and name recognition.
To be continued....