On Sunday I attended a Hillsborough County Republican Barbecue. Hillsborough County is the largest county in New Hampshire. Over one quarter of the state’s population lives in this county, and it includes the two largest cities of Manchester and Nashua. The Manchester suburbs are very Republican, and the county is slightly more Republican than the state as a whole. While New Hampshire went for John Kerry by a margin of 50-49, Hillsborough County stuck with George Bush by a margin of 51-48, identical to the national percentages. Therefore, Hillsborough is the ultimate purple county. Perhaps that’s why our state flower is the lilac and our state bird the purple finch. Okay, bad joke.
It was nice to see some of my Republican friends. US Senator John Sununu spoke as well as State Senator and potential Gubernatorial candidate Joe Kenney, both of whom will likely be on the statewide ballot next year. We also heard from a several Presidential candidates and surrogates for candidates who could not make it.
The first two speakers were third-tier candidate John Cox and fringe candidate Daniel Gilbert. Cox talked about how he is one of “us”. He’s not a career politician. He’s a regular American. He talked about how the party needs to change its ways. Gilbert gave a speech saying how even though he is running for President, he is more concerned with taking back the Congress and will campaign hard for Republican Congressional candidates should he get the nomination. He got some chuckles when he said that he has a website with a poll on it where you can vote for the biggest RINO. He mentioned that Arlen Specter is currently in the lead. The conservatives laughed. The New Hampshire RINOs in the crowd most likely got a little perturbed, and the party hacks shuffled around in their seats in discomfort for fear of offending anybody in the crowd since we need to be a big tent etc.
The next speech was by Governor Huckabee. It was fairly well-received by conservatives and moderates alike. He joked that he will be the President from Hope, Arkansas who did not marry Hillary Clinton but beat Hillary Clinton. His speech consisted of pretty standard Republican fare with a little humor mixed in.
Huckabee is one of the candidates I might endorse, but there is one thing I don’t like about him. He always stresses how poor he was as a child. Bill Clinton did the same thing, and John Edwards does the same thing. While the fact that Huckabee came from a disadvantaged childhood and still rose to become Governor shows a certain fortitude, many people who might have grown up middle-class or rich may have had other obstacles in their life to overcome such as illness or tragedy or things of that nature. The fact that Huckabee grew up poor and Romney grew up rich does not make either of them any better or worse as a person or potential President. Voters will judge them on their personal character, their record in public life, and their issue positions. Huckabee emphasizing his childhood poverty also contains an element of class warfare which has traditionally been the tool of the Democrats. He would be better served by stating how his policies would alleviate poverty in the U.S. rather than talking about his own poverty when he was younger.
Tom Tancredo was next to speak. He had a band of archconservative backers in attendance. Many of them were veterans of previous Buchanan campaigns. The general theme of his speech was nativism. He is anti-amnesty. He even supports a moratorium on legal immigration for a period of time. He wants a wall built on the Mexican border. He is anti-NAFTA. He lacks the charisma of a Pat Buchanan, but the crowd actually responded very well to his views on immigration.
Next on the docket was Ron Paul. He had many supporters in attendance. Many were from out of state. The interesting thing I noticed during his speech was that there would be huge applause from his supporters, but none of the other Republicans in attendance would clap for anything he said, even if it was an issue they would typically agree with, such as reducing the size of government or reducing taxes. In this neo-conservative party of 2007, raising questions about the Iraq War is considered a cardinal sin, and most establishment Republicans have a natural antipathy toward Paul for this reason. I am not suggesting Ron Paul doesn’t have his eccentricities. He even praised a tax evader in New Hampshire recently. He will never be the nominee or President. But the Republicans have to realize that there are many people who might not be with them on the war but may agree with them on taxes, spending, abortion, guns, and other things. If this party has a litmus test that you must support the Iraq War to be a good Republican, it will be very difficult to win the next election.
A surrogate for Duncan Hunter spoke next. I do not remember much of what he said. Former Congressman Chuck Douglas followed as a surrogate for John McCain. He gave a very eloquent speech chastising Congress for the Bridge to Nowhere and their runaway spending. He then acknowledged that McCain satisfies the conservative base on a number of issues. He is pro-second amendment. He is pro-life. I agree that McCain would make a good President, and you cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
A man not formally associated with the Fred Thompson campaign got up and said that most of these candidates agree on 85% of the issues (probably true), so the important thing is to have someone who can communicate the issues well to swing voters. Thompson, as a charismatic actor, would be that man.
The next surrogate to speak was for Brownback. He was an unassuming, well-groomed, preppy-looking young man in a formal black suit and tie. He was in his early 20s and had just graduated from Thomas More College which is a small, conservative, Traditional Catholic, liberal arts college. He started by saying that he is not experienced in public speaking and has never spoken to a group this size, but he would do the best he could. I instantly liked him and hoped his speech would go well. As I expected, his speech pertained to Brownback’s signature issue of abortion. He talked about Roman history which is probably a topic he studied at Thomas More College and related an anecdote from that to the abortion issue. I don’t want to repeat it because I don’t remember the details exactly and don’t want to say anything inaccurate. I could tell he was a very brilliant young man, and as someone who is passionately pro-life, I liked his speech a lot. But I was definitely in the minority on this one. Few people I talked to afterwards liked the speech. Even people who were pro-life thought it was over the top. I still liked the speech though. As an aside, I noticed some of the Romney supporters smirking as this guy got wound up about the pro-life cause.
A local politician who is a Giuliani supporter spoke next. Romney was the only major candidate who neither spoke himself nor had a surrogate speak for him, and he is the frontrunner in New Hampshire. He and most of his campaign were up at Lake Winnepesaukee in central New Hampshire this weekend. He did have some supporters at this Hillsborough Country barbecue who were wearing stickers on his behalf. Anyway, just thought I’d give all of you an update on the goings on in New Hampshire of late. It sure is fun having the first in the nation primary here.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:00 am
[...] post by Clarence Claus and software by Elliott [...]
August 21st, 2007 at 6:21 am
What a bunch of empty suits. Look what was not mentioned: Healthcare, transporation, environment, education, crime, diplomacy, or even the economy. If this is the best that the Republicans have to offer then the Republicans could become irrelevent as fast as 2112.
Can’t one candidate say anything about an issue that does not sound like it was focus group tested and that the candidate has actually thought about the issue?
August 21st, 2007 at 7:11 am
You bring up a good point there superdestroyer. Actually, the only person who really brought up some of the issues you mentioned was Senator Sununu, but I didn’t write about him because he’s not a Presidential candidate or surrogate. Even with him, he largely talked about taxes and spending. He got a big applause when talking about repealing the death tax. There was no mention by anyone of the environment or healthcare. I guess they feel only Democrats should talk about those. State Senator Kenney talked about some state issues, but you do have a good point. The only topics by Presidential candidates were Iraq, immigration, abortion, and in the case of McCain’s surrogate, pork-barrel spending.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:11 am
I enjoyed reading this. Thanks, Clarence!
August 21st, 2007 at 10:18 am
I agree with you on Huckabee and his poor youth stories, He was on Sean Hannity’s show recently and was pushing that same point. It’s an interesting encouraging story, but doesn’t count as any sort of qualification to be POTUS.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:28 am
I agree with you davem and Clarence; just because you grew up poor does not give you anymore “right” for lack of a better word, to the presidency.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:46 am
I was there too and you got it all wrong, or you are slanting it as such because you don’t like Ron Paul and his overwhelming support. You even forgot to mention he had a plane towing a banner outside all done by supporters.
Most of the Buchanan supporters are now with Ron Paul and that’s what scares them because no matter how they tried to stomp on Pat, he won the primary, going into it with 6% in the MSM polls but taking it with 27% of the vote.
Tancredo and Huckabee have NO SUPPORT in NH… they never win polls like Ron did the day before in Strafford County…by a huge margin, and in the non-partisan CNHT poll on July 7th. The UL has a blackout on Ron Paul…shame on them.
Good press here though by the Telegraph
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070821/NEWS08/208210354
Huckabee is trying to steal Ron’s thunder on the internet and in many other ways.
But we all know he’s tied to Tyson Chicken and he’s a RINO who raised taxes just like the rest. He is not grounded in history and is not a scholar of financial issues or foreign policy like Ron has proven to be..
Go read some of Ron’s writings.
Ron Paul is the only one that has the impeccable personal life and the voting record to earn true Republican support. He’s not owned by anyone, no lobbyist will get him.
The rest are the same old same old and we’re ready for a big change.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:02 am
What I think Huckabee is trying to get across is that he thinks people want a man who can connect with them, who they identify with, to become president.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:23 am
Nice post Clarence , I also enjoyed the read..
August 21st, 2007 at 11:36 am
TMerkel,
From the interview that I heard, Huckabee was using it more than just to connect with people. He was bordering on using a little class envy, subtly insinuating that the other guys don’t understand what it’s like to be a regular person with all their money. I really have no problem with Huck, he seems like a good guy to me and I agreed with everything else that he talked about, but this felt really John Edwards-esk to me.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:48 am
NH…I find it amusing that you said I’m slanted because I don’t like Ron Paul and his overwhelming support. I was one of the only people in the room who is not a Ron Paul supporter who clapped for most of what he said. Many of my Republican friends who are a little more “establishment” than me were complaining about all the Ron Paul supporters making a lot of noise. I was defending him to them. If you think I’m slanted against Ron Paul, you ought to here some of the other New Hampshire Republicans.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Huckabee scares me. He seems to be way to “I like governmetn to solve problems” to me. I agree as well that he sounds like John Edwards. Please, lets not elect someone who fits the GW Bush idea of small government. Huckabee would make a great press secretary but not president.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Huckabee uses is growing up poor in many different ways.
1. To let people know that he is like them.
2. That He is not like some others who are trying to buy the election.
3. That money is not the only thing that makes a man.
4. That the American dream is alive and well and he is a good example of that.
I don’t think it is “Edwards-esk”. The major difference is Edwards is a rich guy whose main issue
has been poverty and he talks the talk but doesn’t walk the walk. Huckabee does walk the walk and has for yeras.
He is merely pointing out to people that he knows what it is like to have to worry about how to fill up your car so you can get to work, or how you are going to pay the electric bill, and how the doctor bills can
really scare the daylights out of you. He is merely pointing out that he understands these things
and how legislation by the government can affect everyday citizens on every level. He also uses it to push for the fair tax. if you step back and look at the whole speech in context it does not seem over the top or too much. It makes sense.
August 21st, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Brownback’s gonna win the nomination everyone else can go home now.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:33 pm
Clarence, thanks for the detailed posting. I was unable to attend this event, though I live up the road in Manchester.
One of the numerous problems with Ron Paul is that the tax protesters he praised are violent extremists who refuse to pay the same taxes we all have to pay. They are holed up in a compound here in NH, likely heavily armed. In other words: Nuts. And so are those who support them.
I can probably shed light on the less-than-stellar reaction of the non-Paul people to his speech. What people who work for other campaigns say that his supporters are arrogant, nasty and hateful and are disrespectful towards other campaigns’ volunteers and staffers. That’s usually not the case here in the Granite State, because as you note, we usually recognized that we’re all in this together, ultimately. (Of course, the extremist libertarians are not on our side, and are using the ‘non-partisan†straw polls to make inroads in our party.)
As you deftly noted, most of these people are from out of state. Further, many are liberal anti-war Democrats, who don’t realize they will NOT be allowed to switch to Republican on primary day (Undeclared/independents can, however.)
In short, he and his followers are the GOP versions of Lyndon Larouche and the Larouchites.
As for Huckabee and his use of his poverty as a talking point, it may be that he’s not only pointing out his differences with Romney, but also with the current president, who (like his dad) was born into privilege and has never had to worry about his next meal. I actually admire his story, and realize that we have become the party of the super rich in the eyes of many. Both the perception and the reality will have to change if we’re going to win in 2008. Though, like you, I’m not ready to commit to anyone.
Oh, and John Cox is, self-admittedly, “fourth-tier.†He’s a fringe candidate who’s been to NH 18 times but was soundly beaten in the Hopkinton straw poll by newcomer Dan Gilbert, whose RINO survey is extremely thoughtful and clever, and who knows better than to say he’s going to win the nomination, unlike Cox.
August 22nd, 2007 at 7:25 am
There is no question that Paul was wrong to praise the Browns. They are violent people who think they are above the law as far as paying taxes. Either Paul was ill-informed about them or he has a few screws loose. Having said that, I noticed that you said a lot of his supporters are “liberal anti-war activists”. That is part of the problem. Many Republicans have this litmus test that you must be pro-war and hawkish on foreign policy to be a good conservative. That is not true. The war is unpopular with a lot of the public, and we must attract some anti-war people to win next time. If you want to vote for an anti-war candidate without having to vote for a pro-choice Democrat, Ron Paul is currently the only choice you have, and it makes it a lot harder since he has some kooky qualities to him. If Chuck Hagel were to get in the race, that would give anti-war Republicans the opportunity to vote for someone more mainstream.
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:18 pm
Ill informed vs. a few screws loose? I’ll go for the latter explanation. As far as being anti-war goes, it’s fine to be anti-war, but if you’re a LIBERAL, Democrat anti-war advocate trying to vote in all these GOP straw polls to affect the result, then I have a problem with that.
The war is a huge problem for the GOP, mainly because our president has been very poor in articulating the main reasons for our involvement, though he’s getting better at giving historical context to it, as he did in today’s speech.
Pat Buchanan, were he 20 years younger, would be the frontrunner in NH today, because he could give us 10,000 articulate reasons NOT to support the war, and make us feel patriotic for doing it. Ron Paul and his hoard just make us feel icky because they carry the baggage of nutty conspiracy theories, spout Democrat talking points on social issues, and generally sound like stark raving anarchists the rest of the time. It’s an odd mix of extreme left and extreme right that doesn’t fit easily into the Republican mainstream, and it would be the kiss of death in the General Election and we all know it.
The problem with Chuck Hagel is that he’s even more obscure than many of the other candidates, and is a RINO on many issues, not just the war. That he is a media darling is another problem. McCain tried pandering to the media and ended up alienating (pun intended) the vast majority of the GOP activists, not just the right wingers.
August 22nd, 2007 at 7:33 pm
If a liberal anti-war activist still wants to vote Republican rather voting for Hillary or Obama, I would rather have them in our party than working against us.
August 22nd, 2007 at 7:38 pm
Stephen A., I hate to pick a fight, but I just want to make one more point. You say that Chuck Hagel is a RINO on many issues, not just the war. Let me ask you this. Chuck Hagel has a lifetime rating of 85.2 from the American Conservative Union. Fred Thompson, when he was in the Senate, had a lifetime rating of 86, just barely higher. Would you also classify Fred Thompson as a RINO?