This is significant. Mike Huckabee's not running. I'm not a fan of Huckabee's fiscal liberalism, but he has a very formidable following. Evangelicals, especially in the South, but also to a lesser extent elsewhere, absolutely love the guy. Libertarian leaning voters, as well as business voters don't care for him. Gun rights groups like him, but other candidates as well.
Huckabee had a longshot chance at the nomination. In terms of his chances verses Obama, I'd have them higher than most of the candidates (including Romney, who's IMO one of the least electable), but behind Pawlenty, Daniels, and Huntsman.
Who does this help? Who does this hurt?
Help:
Pawlenty - Pawlenty's a northern Evangelical. He's not as charismatic as Huckabee is, but is the same type of social conservative, although in a much different style. He's also less apt to blunder in his comments. I think he could be the big winner in this group.
Herman Cain - Businessman and former talk show host. Those who don't like the establishment folks or "politicians" and aren't as libertarian as Ron Paul or Gary Johnson may be supporting Cain as the protest vote favorite of 2012. Cain supposedly did very well in the South Carolina debate. He's never held elected office, although has his following.
Palin - If she runs, she doesn't have to fight Huckabee for the right-populist vote.
Hurt:
Romney - The media is claiming Romney is the frontrunner. He's kind of the McCain of 2012 in a way. Romney avoided some of the "RINO" accusations in 2008 because McCain was the guy always in the camera. That's despite McCain, who wasn't my favorite, being slightly more conservative record-wise than Romney (anti-gun as well as Romneycare). Unlike McCain 08, Romney has a lot of establishment backing. Romney's best chance is the same as McCain 08 - Base vote carved up from others.
Mitch Daniels - Daniels has mixed reviews from social conservatives due to his "truce" comments. Personally I think they have been misinterpreted since his actions on issues hasn't been bad. However he's not "one of them" as much as a Huckabee. Daniels is a number's guy. The only thing that Daniels can take advantage of however is the outsider role after 8 years as Indiana Governor.
Huntsman - He's what George W Bush was in 2000 if he was "George Schultz" instead. "Compassionate Conservative" circa 2012. I'm not AS against him as some are, although I do not like his global warming stance at all. Tough issue for me to get past as I'm from an auto industry family of Michiganders.
Little Effect:
Ron Paul - Different base of supporters.
Gary Johnson - Same reasons as Ron Paul.
I didn't include Gingrich, Bachmann, Trump, Santorum, or Roemer because either I don't think they are running (Bachmann), or because I think they will go nowhere in the races for various reasons (Gingrich).
I'm probably not going to make an endorsement until the fall Mackinac Conference. I'm leaning in a direction, but I'm not quite there yet. There's a couple of issues I still need to find out more information first.
Showing posts with label Mike Huckabee. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mike Huckabee. Show all posts
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Recent 2012 Straw Poll (Family Research Council)
I found this interesting out of Politco
There was a fairly large political conference with the Family Research Council which is a social conservative organization. I didn't hear much about it, but they said it drew 1800 registrants. Their event was called the Values Voter Summit in DC. I ally with them heavily on abortion and the courts, but I do clash with them heavily on censorship/FCC issues with my less government views.
I went to their website and found the official straw poll results. They were interesting to say the least.
While nobody got a majority, Huckabee ran away with it with twice the votes of the nearest competitor. That's not a surprise. He was the favorite in 08 among a large number of social conservatives who voted mostly on those lines. The gripes on him were on economic issues.
It's not surprising to see Gingrich, Jindal, Santorum, and Paul back in the pack. Newt and Jindal's bread and butter are on fiscal issues. Santorum lost bad in 2006. Ron Paul is a libertarian.
What's interesting is numbers 2, 3, 4, and 5.
I thought Palin would have challenged Huckabee. I wonder if her gubernatorial resignation hurt her. I did not support that decision at all if she's running for president. I'd have no problem if she decided not to run in 2010, but if you are planning a 2012 run, finish your term that ends two years earlier. Palin has her die-hard supporters who defend everything she does and her fanatical obsessed detractors that need to check into a mental hospital, but finishing behind Mitt and Pawlenty showed something.
Mitt likes to flood people in to events to win these straw polls, so he usually does well at them. A second place finish at one of these events helps him, but he already had high name recognition and with his organization, should have been able to close the deal back in 08. The nomination was his for the taking, and frankly for whatever reason. He blew it. He lost to McCain in a republican primary (so did Huckabee). That says something, and it's not positive. It wasn't just "democrat crossovers" like many on the right complain about either.
The big winners here were two Midwesterners. Tim Pawlenty and Mike Pence. I'm glad to see these two do well. I'm strongly looking at new blood for 2012. Nobody from 08. No retreads. Pawlenty is Minnesota's governor. I like seeing that name moving up if for no other reason than this. Governors become presidents. Senators rarely do. The last sitting senator to win before Obama was Kennedy (Nixon/LBJ were senators at one time, but also VP's), and Obama beat another senator. Pawlenty has a good shot to make a move on the 08 retreads.
Mike Pence I've talked about about on this blog before. It was good to see Pence do well here as he's more known for the economic issues than social issues. Whoever is the nominee in 08 will have to unite enough of the budget hawks, anti-tax and spenders, social conservatives, libertarians, anti-federalists (often what is called federalism today is really anti-federalism), second amendment supporters, national security conservatives, law and order types, and the rest of the base, and the independents who support some, but oppose other of the base issues.
My comment when Mark Sanford wrecked his career was this. "Damn. Maybe Mike Pence will run." If Pence runs, he'll have my support. Pence fought the bailouts that killed us. When Bush and the congressional leadership destroyed the GOP credibility on economic issues that is taking so long to gain back (more due to democrats than anything else - and it's still not what it was in the mid 90's), it was Pence fighting in the trenches. In 2006, Mike Pence and the Republican Study Committee proposed get this....a balanced budget. What happened to that? It got voted down by both parties, but the GOP was in control then. How many Republicans were tossed in 06 and 08? A lot. Who's still standing, in a district that Obama might have won and a district centered in a county (Delaware County - home of Ball State) that Obama did win? Mike Pence. With 65%.
It's still three years away from 2012, and a lot can change, especially with 2010 around the corner, but it is good to see new names going near the top of these 2012 lists.
Mike Huckabee cruised to an easy victory in a presidential straw poll taken among attendees at a social conservative conference, beating a group of four other Republican contenders by an over two-to-one margin.
Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor and a 2008 presidential candidate, won with just over 28 percent of the 597 votes cast by attendees at the Family Research Council’s Values Voter Summit. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney was the runner-up, narrowly edging out Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former Alaska Gov. and Vice-Presidential nominee Sarah Palin, and House Minority Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-Ind.). The four all received about 12% of the vote.
There was a fairly large political conference with the Family Research Council which is a social conservative organization. I didn't hear much about it, but they said it drew 1800 registrants. Their event was called the Values Voter Summit in DC. I ally with them heavily on abortion and the courts, but I do clash with them heavily on censorship/FCC issues with my less government views.
I went to their website and found the official straw poll results. They were interesting to say the least.
1. Mike Huckabee 170 28.48%
2. Mitt Romney 74 12.40%
3. Tim Pawlenty 73 12.23%
4. Sarah Palin 72 12.06%
5. Mike Pence 71 11.89%
6. Newt Gingrich 40 6.70%
7. Bobby Jindal 28 4.69%
8. Rick Santorum 15 2.51%
9. Ron Paul 13 2.18%
10. Undecided 31 5.19%
11. Other 10 1.68%
While nobody got a majority, Huckabee ran away with it with twice the votes of the nearest competitor. That's not a surprise. He was the favorite in 08 among a large number of social conservatives who voted mostly on those lines. The gripes on him were on economic issues.
It's not surprising to see Gingrich, Jindal, Santorum, and Paul back in the pack. Newt and Jindal's bread and butter are on fiscal issues. Santorum lost bad in 2006. Ron Paul is a libertarian.
What's interesting is numbers 2, 3, 4, and 5.
2. Mitt Romney 74 12.40%
3. Tim Pawlenty 73 12.23%
4. Sarah Palin 72 12.06%
5. Mike Pence 71 11.89%
I thought Palin would have challenged Huckabee. I wonder if her gubernatorial resignation hurt her. I did not support that decision at all if she's running for president. I'd have no problem if she decided not to run in 2010, but if you are planning a 2012 run, finish your term that ends two years earlier. Palin has her die-hard supporters who defend everything she does and her fanatical obsessed detractors that need to check into a mental hospital, but finishing behind Mitt and Pawlenty showed something.
Mitt likes to flood people in to events to win these straw polls, so he usually does well at them. A second place finish at one of these events helps him, but he already had high name recognition and with his organization, should have been able to close the deal back in 08. The nomination was his for the taking, and frankly for whatever reason. He blew it. He lost to McCain in a republican primary (so did Huckabee). That says something, and it's not positive. It wasn't just "democrat crossovers" like many on the right complain about either.
The big winners here were two Midwesterners. Tim Pawlenty and Mike Pence. I'm glad to see these two do well. I'm strongly looking at new blood for 2012. Nobody from 08. No retreads. Pawlenty is Minnesota's governor. I like seeing that name moving up if for no other reason than this. Governors become presidents. Senators rarely do. The last sitting senator to win before Obama was Kennedy (Nixon/LBJ were senators at one time, but also VP's), and Obama beat another senator. Pawlenty has a good shot to make a move on the 08 retreads.
Mike Pence I've talked about about on this blog before. It was good to see Pence do well here as he's more known for the economic issues than social issues. Whoever is the nominee in 08 will have to unite enough of the budget hawks, anti-tax and spenders, social conservatives, libertarians, anti-federalists (often what is called federalism today is really anti-federalism), second amendment supporters, national security conservatives, law and order types, and the rest of the base, and the independents who support some, but oppose other of the base issues.
My comment when Mark Sanford wrecked his career was this. "Damn. Maybe Mike Pence will run." If Pence runs, he'll have my support. Pence fought the bailouts that killed us. When Bush and the congressional leadership destroyed the GOP credibility on economic issues that is taking so long to gain back (more due to democrats than anything else - and it's still not what it was in the mid 90's), it was Pence fighting in the trenches. In 2006, Mike Pence and the Republican Study Committee proposed get this....a balanced budget. What happened to that? It got voted down by both parties, but the GOP was in control then. How many Republicans were tossed in 06 and 08? A lot. Who's still standing, in a district that Obama might have won and a district centered in a county (Delaware County - home of Ball State) that Obama did win? Mike Pence. With 65%.
It's still three years away from 2012, and a lot can change, especially with 2010 around the corner, but it is good to see new names going near the top of these 2012 lists.
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Preview of Michigan 2008 Presidential Primary
Game 4 will be interesting. Besides it being my home state, there is much on the line here. Here's a scouting report.
First off, the democrats outside of Hillary Clinton, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel ought to be kicking themselves for their decision to take their names off the ballot. John Edwards needs the union voters. What state is more unionized than Michigan. Barack Obama needs the college towns and black voters. What better for him than Ann Arbor, Detroit, Southfield, and Flint? Bill Richardson could have taken advantage of the others not campaigning. For them, this is all Fubared. "Fouled" up beyond all recognition. Hillary isn't campaigning here, but her name is on the ballot at least. Unless "uncommitted" beats Hillary, I don't see anything outside of being a win for Hillary on the 15th.
The GOP side will be much more interesting. This race is LIKELY between John McCain and Mitt Romney. Both of them have been working this state extremely hard over the last three years in this state. Numerous visits have been made by both candidates. McCain won here in 2000. Romney was born and raised in Oakland County.
I was looking at the exit polls for New Hampshire and Iowa. A few things stuck out to me.
In Iowa
Gender Gap
Men
Huckabee 29%
Romney 26%
Thompson 16%
Women
Huckabee 40%
Romney 24%
McCain 13%
The gender gap wasn't a big deal in New Hampshire, but Huckabee did get 10% of the votes from men and 13% from women. McCain won both among men and women by fairly similar margins there. Will Michigan be more like Iowa or New Hampshire?
There were no Immigration or gun questions in the Iowa exit poll.
In New Hampshire
Gun Owners:
McCain 42%
Romney 27%
Huckabee 13%
Non Gun owners:
Romney 34%
McCain 32%
Huckabee 12%
Neither McCain or Romney are great on guns. SAFR gave McCain a mixed rating and Romney an unacceptable rating. However, McCain voted bad on gun shows and for McCain/Feingold. Romney signed an ugly gun ban in neighboring Massachusetts. McCain voted against that ban. If the gun owners negative voted AGAINST Romney, then that explains the 15% spread. Will they vote negative, or for someone completely different?
Illegal immigration:
Those who supported a path to citizenship
McCain 54%
Romney 15%
Huckabee 12%
Those who supported guest worker programs
McCain 42%
Romney 32%
Huckabee 10%
Those who support deporting illegals
Romney 40%
McCain 24%
Huckabee 14%
This is another issue to watch in the closing week. McCain is like Bush on the immigration issue, and that is a major factor here, almost like the gun issue is for Romney (and Giuliani). With jobs such a big issue here, that's something to keep an eye on.
The life issue is normally another factor, but it really did not matter between McCain and Romney if the exit polls are to be believed. Huckabee did pick up some votes based on the life issue however in New Hampshire. I didn't see that question in the Iowa poll either, but I think it was a much bigger factor there based on the demographics and turnout.
Now the question is how does this all play in Michigan. I expect a lot of independent voters in this race. With the democrats not having many names out there, that will skew some of the indy turnout, but not as much of the hard core democrat turnout which will go for Hillary, Kucinich, or uncommitted.
I'm predicting a 1-2-3 finish of McCain, Romney, and Huckabee.
McCain wins West Michigan. He's pro-life enough to be accepted there. His spending stances will help him, and he'll get enough independents in Macomb and elsewhere to support him to a win. Those in New Hampsire irked with Bush voted for McCain. The veterans vote in the end wins it. He wins by 5%
Romney takes Oakland County. The business support and organization edges for him, but he loses too many gun owners and others who are not sure where he really stands on the issues. Huckabee takes a lot of votes from him. Immigration helps, but isn't enough.
Huckabee takes the Northlands. The populist center-left economics and center-right social conservatism fits in Up North, near Flint/Saginaw, Downriver, and the thumb area. His drawback is that the business crowd and economic conservatives do not care for him much. If he can get some pro-life leaners and gun owners away from McCain, he has a shot, but he did not spend enough time in his state to win. I'd say about 15%
Ron Paul will likely get his 10-12% of support. I'd predict more, but not after his weak showing in New Hampshire. Thompson and Giuliani aren't catching on here for whatever reason. I think their votes will go to McCain over Romney (Thompson has similarities to McCain, Foreign policy in Rudy's case). Hunter is a good guy, but most do not know who he is.
Whatever the case is, there's a lot on the line here, so expect a lot of TV ads, robocalls, political calls, mailings, and other invasions by politicians on the way.
By the way - some last minute stuff in Livingston County:
McCain is visiting this Sunday. January 13. 2PM at Crystal Gardens in Howell. That's a free event.
The Livingston GOP has a fundraiser and pre-primary party on the 12th. All Presidential candidates invited. Shark Club in Howell on D19, North of I-96. $20 at the door. Duncan Hunter will be there. Other may stop by as well.
Current Delegate Standings:
Current Standings
GOP: (after 3)
Romney 24
Huckabee 18
McCain 10
Thompson 6
Paul 2
Hunter 1
Rest 0
Dems: (after 2)
Obama 25
Clinton 24
Edwards 18
First off, the democrats outside of Hillary Clinton, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel ought to be kicking themselves for their decision to take their names off the ballot. John Edwards needs the union voters. What state is more unionized than Michigan. Barack Obama needs the college towns and black voters. What better for him than Ann Arbor, Detroit, Southfield, and Flint? Bill Richardson could have taken advantage of the others not campaigning. For them, this is all Fubared. "Fouled" up beyond all recognition. Hillary isn't campaigning here, but her name is on the ballot at least. Unless "uncommitted" beats Hillary, I don't see anything outside of being a win for Hillary on the 15th.
The GOP side will be much more interesting. This race is LIKELY between John McCain and Mitt Romney. Both of them have been working this state extremely hard over the last three years in this state. Numerous visits have been made by both candidates. McCain won here in 2000. Romney was born and raised in Oakland County.
I was looking at the exit polls for New Hampshire and Iowa. A few things stuck out to me.
In Iowa
Gender Gap
Men
Huckabee 29%
Romney 26%
Thompson 16%
Women
Huckabee 40%
Romney 24%
McCain 13%
The gender gap wasn't a big deal in New Hampshire, but Huckabee did get 10% of the votes from men and 13% from women. McCain won both among men and women by fairly similar margins there. Will Michigan be more like Iowa or New Hampshire?
There were no Immigration or gun questions in the Iowa exit poll.
In New Hampshire
Gun Owners:
McCain 42%
Romney 27%
Huckabee 13%
Non Gun owners:
Romney 34%
McCain 32%
Huckabee 12%
Neither McCain or Romney are great on guns. SAFR gave McCain a mixed rating and Romney an unacceptable rating. However, McCain voted bad on gun shows and for McCain/Feingold. Romney signed an ugly gun ban in neighboring Massachusetts. McCain voted against that ban. If the gun owners negative voted AGAINST Romney, then that explains the 15% spread. Will they vote negative, or for someone completely different?
Illegal immigration:
Those who supported a path to citizenship
McCain 54%
Romney 15%
Huckabee 12%
Those who supported guest worker programs
McCain 42%
Romney 32%
Huckabee 10%
Those who support deporting illegals
Romney 40%
McCain 24%
Huckabee 14%
This is another issue to watch in the closing week. McCain is like Bush on the immigration issue, and that is a major factor here, almost like the gun issue is for Romney (and Giuliani). With jobs such a big issue here, that's something to keep an eye on.
The life issue is normally another factor, but it really did not matter between McCain and Romney if the exit polls are to be believed. Huckabee did pick up some votes based on the life issue however in New Hampshire. I didn't see that question in the Iowa poll either, but I think it was a much bigger factor there based on the demographics and turnout.
Now the question is how does this all play in Michigan. I expect a lot of independent voters in this race. With the democrats not having many names out there, that will skew some of the indy turnout, but not as much of the hard core democrat turnout which will go for Hillary, Kucinich, or uncommitted.
I'm predicting a 1-2-3 finish of McCain, Romney, and Huckabee.
McCain wins West Michigan. He's pro-life enough to be accepted there. His spending stances will help him, and he'll get enough independents in Macomb and elsewhere to support him to a win. Those in New Hampsire irked with Bush voted for McCain. The veterans vote in the end wins it. He wins by 5%
Romney takes Oakland County. The business support and organization edges for him, but he loses too many gun owners and others who are not sure where he really stands on the issues. Huckabee takes a lot of votes from him. Immigration helps, but isn't enough.
Huckabee takes the Northlands. The populist center-left economics and center-right social conservatism fits in Up North, near Flint/Saginaw, Downriver, and the thumb area. His drawback is that the business crowd and economic conservatives do not care for him much. If he can get some pro-life leaners and gun owners away from McCain, he has a shot, but he did not spend enough time in his state to win. I'd say about 15%
Ron Paul will likely get his 10-12% of support. I'd predict more, but not after his weak showing in New Hampshire. Thompson and Giuliani aren't catching on here for whatever reason. I think their votes will go to McCain over Romney (Thompson has similarities to McCain, Foreign policy in Rudy's case). Hunter is a good guy, but most do not know who he is.
Whatever the case is, there's a lot on the line here, so expect a lot of TV ads, robocalls, political calls, mailings, and other invasions by politicians on the way.
By the way - some last minute stuff in Livingston County:
McCain is visiting this Sunday. January 13. 2PM at Crystal Gardens in Howell. That's a free event.
The Livingston GOP has a fundraiser and pre-primary party on the 12th. All Presidential candidates invited. Shark Club in Howell on D19, North of I-96. $20 at the door. Duncan Hunter will be there. Other may stop by as well.
Current Delegate Standings:
Current Standings
GOP: (after 3)
Romney 24
Huckabee 18
McCain 10
Thompson 6
Paul 2
Hunter 1
Rest 0
Dems: (after 2)
Obama 25
Clinton 24
Edwards 18
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Game 1 over, Huckabee, Obama winners
(All as of 11PM)
I'm really not surprised at this. From CNN 100% isn't in yet, but it's not that close.
These are caucuses, not primaries. I'm not positive on this, but I think the precinct delegates are the voters, at least on the democrat side. I may be wrong on that, but that's how I interpret the results. 910 for the winner seems awful small otherwise, and I have a hard time believing that Kucinich would not get at least one vote in Iowa City or Ames. On the GOP side, it's closer to a closed primary, but not quite as open as that as it is a caucus.
GOP: 78% Reporting
Name Votes %
Huckabee - 35,342 - 34%
Romney - 26,067 - 25%
Thompson - 13,805 - 13%
McCain - 13,509 - 13%
Paul - 10,006 - 10%
Giuliani - 3576 - 4%
Hunter - 454 - 1%
Dem: 96% reporting
Name State Delegates %
Obama - 922 - 38%
Edwards - 732 - 30%
Clinton - 721 - 29%
Richardson - 52 - 2%
Biden - 23 - 1%
Uncommitted - 3 - less than 1%
Dodd - 1 - less than 1%
Kucinich - 0
Gravel - 0
Back to the GOP side, I figured Huckabee would win big. Iowa strikes me as a social moderate to conservative state and an economic moderate to liberal state. Dukakis won here big over the farm troubles in the 80's. Ethanol is a big.
McCain's fighting for 3rd place surprised me as he's not an ethanol fan. It hurt him bad in 2000 here. Giuliani must have conceded the state with his 2nd to last place finish. Romney's 2nd place showing doesn't surprise me in a caucus type of setup where the organization determines much of the vote. Romney's campaign is one of the best organized in the country. Thompson and Paul finished about where I expected in Iowa as well.
But Huckabee won IMO for three reasons. One is the economic populism. In Iowa, that's an advantage. Another is the social issues. There is no doubt to where Huckabee stands on those issues. Northwest Iowa is one of the most conservative areas in the entire country (Dutch area, think Zeeland/Hudsonville MI). In a caucus, all that is magnified. Third is agribusiness. Huckabee is from an agricultural state. In Arkansas, it's chicken production. In Iowa it's corn.
Game 1 is over. The question is now what happens in the rest of the games. Wyoming and New Hampshire are up next.
Standings after 1 (As of 11PM)
GOP: (Projected)
Huckabee 14
Romney 9
Thompson 3
McCain 3
Paul 2
Rest 0
Dem (Projected)
Obama 16
Clinton 15 (Not sure why Clinton is ahead of Edwards)
Edwards 14
Rest none
I'm really not surprised at this. From CNN 100% isn't in yet, but it's not that close.
These are caucuses, not primaries. I'm not positive on this, but I think the precinct delegates are the voters, at least on the democrat side. I may be wrong on that, but that's how I interpret the results. 910 for the winner seems awful small otherwise, and I have a hard time believing that Kucinich would not get at least one vote in Iowa City or Ames. On the GOP side, it's closer to a closed primary, but not quite as open as that as it is a caucus.
GOP: 78% Reporting
Name Votes %
Huckabee - 35,342 - 34%
Romney - 26,067 - 25%
Thompson - 13,805 - 13%
McCain - 13,509 - 13%
Paul - 10,006 - 10%
Giuliani - 3576 - 4%
Hunter - 454 - 1%
Dem: 96% reporting
Name State Delegates %
Obama - 922 - 38%
Edwards - 732 - 30%
Clinton - 721 - 29%
Richardson - 52 - 2%
Biden - 23 - 1%
Uncommitted - 3 - less than 1%
Dodd - 1 - less than 1%
Kucinich - 0
Gravel - 0
Back to the GOP side, I figured Huckabee would win big. Iowa strikes me as a social moderate to conservative state and an economic moderate to liberal state. Dukakis won here big over the farm troubles in the 80's. Ethanol is a big.
McCain's fighting for 3rd place surprised me as he's not an ethanol fan. It hurt him bad in 2000 here. Giuliani must have conceded the state with his 2nd to last place finish. Romney's 2nd place showing doesn't surprise me in a caucus type of setup where the organization determines much of the vote. Romney's campaign is one of the best organized in the country. Thompson and Paul finished about where I expected in Iowa as well.
But Huckabee won IMO for three reasons. One is the economic populism. In Iowa, that's an advantage. Another is the social issues. There is no doubt to where Huckabee stands on those issues. Northwest Iowa is one of the most conservative areas in the entire country (Dutch area, think Zeeland/Hudsonville MI). In a caucus, all that is magnified. Third is agribusiness. Huckabee is from an agricultural state. In Arkansas, it's chicken production. In Iowa it's corn.
Game 1 is over. The question is now what happens in the rest of the games. Wyoming and New Hampshire are up next.
Standings after 1 (As of 11PM)
GOP: (Projected)
Huckabee 14
Romney 9
Thompson 3
McCain 3
Paul 2
Rest 0
Dem (Projected)
Obama 16
Clinton 15 (Not sure why Clinton is ahead of Edwards)
Edwards 14
Rest none
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Romney wins Straw Poll, Huckabee finishes 2nd
Interesting results. Giuliani and McCain skipped. Fred Thompson was on the ballot, but not an official candidate. From the AP/Forbes:
The Results:
1. Mitt Romney - 4516 - 31.5%
2. Mike Huckabee - 2587 - 18.1%
3. Sam Brownback - 2192 - 15.3%
4. Tom Tancredo - 1961
5. Ron Paul - 1305
6. Tommy Thompson - 1039
7. Fred Thompson - 203
8. Rudy Giuliani - 183
9. Duncan Hunter - 174
10. John McCain - 101
11. John Cox - 41
Analysis:
The Winners:
Mitt Romney - He was expected to win. Anything less would be considered a loss. He met expectations and won by over 10% His biggest strength is his organization, and it came through for him.
Mike Huckabee - A strong 2nd. Most have not really heard of him. I thought he may be a darkhorse, but he exceeded my expectations there. He's an excellent speaker from a swing state and IMO won every debate I've seen him in. This is a big win, especially since it is not in the South.
Sam Brownback - He probably needed top 3, and got it. Iowa neighbors Kansas, and a less than top 3 showing may knock him out.
The Losers:
Tommy Thompson - He said if he didn't finish in the top 2, he would probably drop. 6th place is not even close, and that goes double for a Midwesterner.
Duncan Hunter - I like Hunter, but he needed to get momentum. If you just looked at background without taking in name recognition, money, and current office, he'd probably be the best candidate. 9th place finishing behind non candidates is a disaster. That's too bad. I think Tommy Thompson (Who I was considering) and Hunter (where I have been leaning) may be knocked out from this. At best, their campaign is in trouble. That's unfortunate.
John Cox - I don't know anything about him. Last place however is last place.
Too early to tell:
Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul - They showed that they are real candidates. They didn't get top three, but they placed and have something to build on in the next few months. I kind of thought that Ron Paul would finish top three, but internet support is different than ground support. Can he use it to his advantage. As far as Tancredo goes, immigration is a major issue. Can he branch off from that and go to other issues? We'll see.
Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, and John McCain skipped the poll. Whether this hurts or helps remains to be seen. They didn't finish last either, and that's good for their campaign.
The biggest news I think was Huckabee's 2nd place finish. The question is will he build on this and join Romney, Giuliani, McCain, and Fred Thompson in the "Top Tier." South Carolina will be his big test.
AMES, Iowa - Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney won an easy and expected victory in a high-profile Iowa Republican Party Straw Poll on Saturday, claiming nearly twice as many votes as his nearest rival.
Romney had been expected to win the test because he spent millions of dollars and months of effort on an event that was skipped by two of his major rivals.
The Results:
1. Mitt Romney - 4516 - 31.5%
2. Mike Huckabee - 2587 - 18.1%
3. Sam Brownback - 2192 - 15.3%
4. Tom Tancredo - 1961
5. Ron Paul - 1305
6. Tommy Thompson - 1039
7. Fred Thompson - 203
8. Rudy Giuliani - 183
9. Duncan Hunter - 174
10. John McCain - 101
11. John Cox - 41
Analysis:
The Winners:
Mitt Romney - He was expected to win. Anything less would be considered a loss. He met expectations and won by over 10% His biggest strength is his organization, and it came through for him.
Mike Huckabee - A strong 2nd. Most have not really heard of him. I thought he may be a darkhorse, but he exceeded my expectations there. He's an excellent speaker from a swing state and IMO won every debate I've seen him in. This is a big win, especially since it is not in the South.
Sam Brownback - He probably needed top 3, and got it. Iowa neighbors Kansas, and a less than top 3 showing may knock him out.
The Losers:
Tommy Thompson - He said if he didn't finish in the top 2, he would probably drop. 6th place is not even close, and that goes double for a Midwesterner.
Duncan Hunter - I like Hunter, but he needed to get momentum. If you just looked at background without taking in name recognition, money, and current office, he'd probably be the best candidate. 9th place finishing behind non candidates is a disaster. That's too bad. I think Tommy Thompson (Who I was considering) and Hunter (where I have been leaning) may be knocked out from this. At best, their campaign is in trouble. That's unfortunate.
John Cox - I don't know anything about him. Last place however is last place.
Too early to tell:
Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul - They showed that they are real candidates. They didn't get top three, but they placed and have something to build on in the next few months. I kind of thought that Ron Paul would finish top three, but internet support is different than ground support. Can he use it to his advantage. As far as Tancredo goes, immigration is a major issue. Can he branch off from that and go to other issues? We'll see.
Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, and John McCain skipped the poll. Whether this hurts or helps remains to be seen. They didn't finish last either, and that's good for their campaign.
The biggest news I think was Huckabee's 2nd place finish. The question is will he build on this and join Romney, Giuliani, McCain, and Fred Thompson in the "Top Tier." South Carolina will be his big test.
Saturday, May 05, 2007
2008 GOP Candidates - Debate Report
I caught the debate (taped, saw it tonight) on MS-NBC between the 10 presidential candidates on the GOP side. This was in my normal transcript shorthand format when I watch these things and can be difficult to read. Overall, I thought the winner was Mike Huckabee, although I did not care much for the format.
--------------------------------------------
10 candidates
Mitt Romney – Former Mass. Governor
Sam Brownback – Kansas Senator
Jim Gilmore – Former Virginia Governor
Mike Huckabee – Former Arkansas Governor
Duncan Hunter – California Congressman (San Diego area)
Tommy Thompson – Former Wisconsin Governor
John McCain – Arizona Senator
Ron Paul – Texas Congressman (Surfside)
Rudy Giuliani – Former NYC mayor
Tom Tancredo – Colorado Congressman (Littleton)
Debate 90 minutes. Chris Matthews, John Harris – Questions
Some view questions
60 second answers to Matthews/Harris Q’s, 30 seconds for viewer Q’s
Rebuttals – 30 seconds
No open/closing statements or thank yous to hosts for time purposes.
Some Q’s A’s. I skipped most of the fluff. Some of the more interesting answers IMO (Whether I agree or disagree)
Iraq:
McCain – I need to show success in Iraq to people. He takes Congress to task over the Democrat’s bill, Harry Reid specific for his comment. “IF we lost, who won?” The house cheered surrender. We must win in Iraq. If we withdraw, genocide will happen and it will follow us home.
Thompson. First, we must support the troops. 3 things also need to happen.
1. Iraqi Government must vote if they want us there for legitimacy.
2. 18 territories. They need to elect governments there, prevent civil war
3. Split oil. 1/3 fed, 1/3 state, 1/3 every man, woman, child. Investing in their own country.
Duncan Hunter – Key to winning in Iraq is standing up 128 batallions in Iraqi army. They need to be ready and displace American units. Right way to leave Iraq.
Polls say 55% is unwinnable in Iraq:
Romney – If we want polls to win, we let TV run the country. That’s not want America wants. We need president of strength. We want troops home, in right way. If we leave wrong way, we could have more regional conflict. We may have to come back again.
Huckabee on Rumsfeld – “I would have fired him before the election. I certainly would not have said that I wouldn’t fire him, and then do so, but that’s the president’s call” Real error in judgment by listening to civilians in suits and silk ties and not listened to generals with real mud on boots and medals on chests. Those generals told us early on it would take 300,000 troops to stabilize Iraq. We gave limited troops/budget. That was mistake, but we need to finish the job, do it right, and not go back and do it over.
Ron Paul (asked about voting against war) – We need a non-intervention traditional foreign policy. That was Republican foreign policy in 20th Century. Eisenhower got us out of Korea, Nixon out of Nam. In 2000, we ran on no nation building and humble foreign policy. Declare war if we go, not for UN resolutions or political reasons.
Iran
McCain – We need to bring greater pressures to Iran. Diplomacy, economic, etc with Iran, which is very cultural. Greatest fear – Iran getting nuke and giving to terrorist. There are lots of options, but not war right now.
Constitution to allow foreign born candidates to run for president.
Romney – probably not
Brownback – no
Gilmore – no – don’t like to amend constitution
Huckabee – after 8 years, yes
Hunter – no
Thompson – no
McCain – consider it
Ron Paul – No, strong supporter of original intent
Rudy – yes
Tancredo – no
Ron Paul – Phase out IRS?
Absolutely! Immediately. If we want to lower taxes, change policy (Spending)
Okay Abortion first 8 weeks?
Gilmore – Yes. But I have a pro-life record. Waiting period. Partial Birth Abortion
Thompson – Leave abortion up to the states. I have a prolife record. Signed pro-life bills (listed them). States law.
Romney –
Always personally pro-life, but question on government. I changed my mind 2 years ago.
States should make decision
Brownback asked if he can support GOP’er who is prochoice
I can – Reagan commandment. Agree with 80% But life is a central issue of our day.
Rudy – Asked Why support public funding for abortions? “I don’t” I support Hyde Amendment. State decision. I supported it in NY, other places can make decision.
Moral vs Libertarian with purpose
Paul – What is the goal of govt? Promote liberty – brings us together. Police weakens liberty. We’re fretting about 3rd war countries but stood up to Soviets.
Ok for private employee to fire gays
Thompson – Private decision
----
Hunter - We need to win the right way. Build the border fence, let people knock on the door.
Tancredo – Karl Rove wouldn’t be employed in my White House.
Thompson – Biggest problem in our party - We went to change Washington, and it changed us. I started Welfare Reform plan as governor. It would get democrats, independents to support.
McCain – We lost in 2006 – spending got out of control. I will veto a pork bill and make them famous.
What specific cuts:
McCain – Line item veto best tool. Start with defense aqusition. Stop pork spending, then go programs.
Fed funding of embryonic stem cell way.
Romney – None on farming embryos. Fine to be legal, not government. Support AlteredNuclear transfer.
Brownback – no
Gilmore – no Can’t create people to end life
Huckabee – no
Hunter – No, alternatives
Thompson – Not yes/no. A lot of research right now. Adult stem cell research right now.
McCain – We need to fund this.
Ron Paul – Not authorized on constitution. Market/states should deal with it.
Rudy –Yes if not cloning or created to destroy.
Tancredo – Not with tax money.
Flip Flops
McCain – No provisions on Social Security or contingency. Make tax cuts permanent, else it’s a tax increase.
Taxcuts
Romney – 0% Capital Gains tax on middle income
Brownback – Flat tax – choose between current or flat
Gilmore – I kept my word on taxes as governor. Cut Alternative minimum tax.
Huckabee – We need Fairtax! Get rid of IRS and all capital gians, individual/corporate
Hunter – Manufacuters getting killed with dumb trade deals with double tax. Eliminate manufacturing taxes.
Thompson –Vetoed 1990 items, reduced taxes. Alternative min tax – flat tax.
McCain – Line item veto on these. Alt min tax, 3000 tax credit for purchase health insueance. Flatter fair tax.
Ron Paul – Get rid of inflation tax and income tax. Printing too much money. Need sound money.
Rudy – AMT and death tax. Keep tax cuts. 2011 tax increase needs to be stopped.
Tancredo – Support fairtax. Repeal 16th Amendment or we’ll have both. We need to deal with mandatory structural problem.
What Govt does poorly:
Hunter – Secure border. People crossing Mexican border illegally – not just Mexicans. Communist China. Iran.
Romney asked - What cabinent would you keep? A: Entire new team.
Gilmore – I ran as conservative. I governed as conservative. I’m consistent and don’t flip and flop.
Ron Paul – We should NEVER interfere with internet. I always voted against regulating the internet. I trust the Internet a LOT more than mainstream media.
Mike Huckabee (Cronyism) – As president, we need to make it clear that we not going to continute to see jobs shipped overseas, and watch as CEO takes 100 million bonus to take jobs somewhere else and take pensions as well. We don’t stop it, we don’t deserve to win in 2008.
National ID Card
Rudy – support it, with immigration. Database, tamperproof. Foreigners
Romney – Agree with Rudy. Aliens, not citizens
Brownback – Don’t need to go this way. Secure borders and interior – Social Security number must mean something. Don’t need new system.
McCain – Support it if they want to work.
Paul – Absolutely opposed to national ID card. Contridiction to free society. Do not need it.
Tancredo – Do not need one for same reasons Dr Paul said.
Thompson – No national id.
Scooter libby pardon
Romney – don’t make decision until judiciary process. Fitzgerald.
Brownback – Let process go. (undecided) Not law that was violated
Huckabee – I was prosecutor. Law applies to discretion. Go to people and make case. Can’t make case, don’t do it.
Most others - no
Tancredo – Pardon him, and pardon Ramos and Camprien (Border Patrol)
Terri Schiavo Case:
Romney – Usually family decides. Courts decides. Florida did right thing, but Congress needed to stay out.
Brownback – Right decision. Life is sacred, stand for it in all circumstances.
McCain – We acted too hastily.
Rudy – Court decision. Family in dispute. Courts are for that.
On Clinton
Ron Paul - I voted to Impeach him
Overall:
The format sucked. Some of the candidates had a lot more facetime than others. All candidates IMO should have had the same questions. That is my biggest problem with this. The other problem was some of the questions were BS and fluff. Why ask 10 republican candidates about the Clintons? Right now we have a primary. I don’t want to know what Jim Gilmore thinks about Clinton. I want to know what Jim Gilmore thinks about policy.
The candidates were mostly cautious and my opinion of most of them did not change based on this. One thing I DID like about this was the lesser known candidates being allowed to participate. Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Tommy Thompson, Sam Brownback, Jim Gilmore, and Mike Huckabee all bring something to the table and are running as well. It was good to see some of the “choice c” candidates involved to some degree.
If I had to pick a “winner” based on the limited format, I’d have to go with Mike Huckabee. I am more open to his candidacy than I was beforehand. I still have a lot of fiscal concerns with him, particularly on his record on taxes, but I’m more open to supporting him than before.
I liked Tommy Thompson's answer on Iraq, Huckabee's on Rumsfeld and Scooter Libby, Ron Paul on the National ID, Internet, and nationbuilding, Tancredo on Fairtax and Karl Rove, McCain on Pork, Romney on Stem Cell, and Duncan Hunter on trade.
I’m still undecided however, and will be for the foreseeable future.
--------------------------------------------
10 candidates
Mitt Romney – Former Mass. Governor
Sam Brownback – Kansas Senator
Jim Gilmore – Former Virginia Governor
Mike Huckabee – Former Arkansas Governor
Duncan Hunter – California Congressman (San Diego area)
Tommy Thompson – Former Wisconsin Governor
John McCain – Arizona Senator
Ron Paul – Texas Congressman (Surfside)
Rudy Giuliani – Former NYC mayor
Tom Tancredo – Colorado Congressman (Littleton)
Debate 90 minutes. Chris Matthews, John Harris – Questions
Some view questions
60 second answers to Matthews/Harris Q’s, 30 seconds for viewer Q’s
Rebuttals – 30 seconds
No open/closing statements or thank yous to hosts for time purposes.
Some Q’s A’s. I skipped most of the fluff. Some of the more interesting answers IMO (Whether I agree or disagree)
Iraq:
McCain – I need to show success in Iraq to people. He takes Congress to task over the Democrat’s bill, Harry Reid specific for his comment. “IF we lost, who won?” The house cheered surrender. We must win in Iraq. If we withdraw, genocide will happen and it will follow us home.
Thompson. First, we must support the troops. 3 things also need to happen.
1. Iraqi Government must vote if they want us there for legitimacy.
2. 18 territories. They need to elect governments there, prevent civil war
3. Split oil. 1/3 fed, 1/3 state, 1/3 every man, woman, child. Investing in their own country.
Duncan Hunter – Key to winning in Iraq is standing up 128 batallions in Iraqi army. They need to be ready and displace American units. Right way to leave Iraq.
Polls say 55% is unwinnable in Iraq:
Romney – If we want polls to win, we let TV run the country. That’s not want America wants. We need president of strength. We want troops home, in right way. If we leave wrong way, we could have more regional conflict. We may have to come back again.
Huckabee on Rumsfeld – “I would have fired him before the election. I certainly would not have said that I wouldn’t fire him, and then do so, but that’s the president’s call” Real error in judgment by listening to civilians in suits and silk ties and not listened to generals with real mud on boots and medals on chests. Those generals told us early on it would take 300,000 troops to stabilize Iraq. We gave limited troops/budget. That was mistake, but we need to finish the job, do it right, and not go back and do it over.
Ron Paul (asked about voting against war) – We need a non-intervention traditional foreign policy. That was Republican foreign policy in 20th Century. Eisenhower got us out of Korea, Nixon out of Nam. In 2000, we ran on no nation building and humble foreign policy. Declare war if we go, not for UN resolutions or political reasons.
Iran
McCain – We need to bring greater pressures to Iran. Diplomacy, economic, etc with Iran, which is very cultural. Greatest fear – Iran getting nuke and giving to terrorist. There are lots of options, but not war right now.
Constitution to allow foreign born candidates to run for president.
Romney – probably not
Brownback – no
Gilmore – no – don’t like to amend constitution
Huckabee – after 8 years, yes
Hunter – no
Thompson – no
McCain – consider it
Ron Paul – No, strong supporter of original intent
Rudy – yes
Tancredo – no
Ron Paul – Phase out IRS?
Absolutely! Immediately. If we want to lower taxes, change policy (Spending)
Okay Abortion first 8 weeks?
Gilmore – Yes. But I have a pro-life record. Waiting period. Partial Birth Abortion
Thompson – Leave abortion up to the states. I have a prolife record. Signed pro-life bills (listed them). States law.
Romney –
Always personally pro-life, but question on government. I changed my mind 2 years ago.
States should make decision
Brownback asked if he can support GOP’er who is prochoice
I can – Reagan commandment. Agree with 80% But life is a central issue of our day.
Rudy – Asked Why support public funding for abortions? “I don’t” I support Hyde Amendment. State decision. I supported it in NY, other places can make decision.
Moral vs Libertarian with purpose
Paul – What is the goal of govt? Promote liberty – brings us together. Police weakens liberty. We’re fretting about 3rd war countries but stood up to Soviets.
Ok for private employee to fire gays
Thompson – Private decision
----
Hunter - We need to win the right way. Build the border fence, let people knock on the door.
Tancredo – Karl Rove wouldn’t be employed in my White House.
Thompson – Biggest problem in our party - We went to change Washington, and it changed us. I started Welfare Reform plan as governor. It would get democrats, independents to support.
McCain – We lost in 2006 – spending got out of control. I will veto a pork bill and make them famous.
What specific cuts:
McCain – Line item veto best tool. Start with defense aqusition. Stop pork spending, then go programs.
Fed funding of embryonic stem cell way.
Romney – None on farming embryos. Fine to be legal, not government. Support AlteredNuclear transfer.
Brownback – no
Gilmore – no Can’t create people to end life
Huckabee – no
Hunter – No, alternatives
Thompson – Not yes/no. A lot of research right now. Adult stem cell research right now.
McCain – We need to fund this.
Ron Paul – Not authorized on constitution. Market/states should deal with it.
Rudy –Yes if not cloning or created to destroy.
Tancredo – Not with tax money.
Flip Flops
McCain – No provisions on Social Security or contingency. Make tax cuts permanent, else it’s a tax increase.
Taxcuts
Romney – 0% Capital Gains tax on middle income
Brownback – Flat tax – choose between current or flat
Gilmore – I kept my word on taxes as governor. Cut Alternative minimum tax.
Huckabee – We need Fairtax! Get rid of IRS and all capital gians, individual/corporate
Hunter – Manufacuters getting killed with dumb trade deals with double tax. Eliminate manufacturing taxes.
Thompson –Vetoed 1990 items, reduced taxes. Alternative min tax – flat tax.
McCain – Line item veto on these. Alt min tax, 3000 tax credit for purchase health insueance. Flatter fair tax.
Ron Paul – Get rid of inflation tax and income tax. Printing too much money. Need sound money.
Rudy – AMT and death tax. Keep tax cuts. 2011 tax increase needs to be stopped.
Tancredo – Support fairtax. Repeal 16th Amendment or we’ll have both. We need to deal with mandatory structural problem.
What Govt does poorly:
Hunter – Secure border. People crossing Mexican border illegally – not just Mexicans. Communist China. Iran.
Romney asked - What cabinent would you keep? A: Entire new team.
Gilmore – I ran as conservative. I governed as conservative. I’m consistent and don’t flip and flop.
Ron Paul – We should NEVER interfere with internet. I always voted against regulating the internet. I trust the Internet a LOT more than mainstream media.
Mike Huckabee (Cronyism) – As president, we need to make it clear that we not going to continute to see jobs shipped overseas, and watch as CEO takes 100 million bonus to take jobs somewhere else and take pensions as well. We don’t stop it, we don’t deserve to win in 2008.
National ID Card
Rudy – support it, with immigration. Database, tamperproof. Foreigners
Romney – Agree with Rudy. Aliens, not citizens
Brownback – Don’t need to go this way. Secure borders and interior – Social Security number must mean something. Don’t need new system.
McCain – Support it if they want to work.
Paul – Absolutely opposed to national ID card. Contridiction to free society. Do not need it.
Tancredo – Do not need one for same reasons Dr Paul said.
Thompson – No national id.
Scooter libby pardon
Romney – don’t make decision until judiciary process. Fitzgerald.
Brownback – Let process go. (undecided) Not law that was violated
Huckabee – I was prosecutor. Law applies to discretion. Go to people and make case. Can’t make case, don’t do it.
Most others - no
Tancredo – Pardon him, and pardon Ramos and Camprien (Border Patrol)
Terri Schiavo Case:
Romney – Usually family decides. Courts decides. Florida did right thing, but Congress needed to stay out.
Brownback – Right decision. Life is sacred, stand for it in all circumstances.
McCain – We acted too hastily.
Rudy – Court decision. Family in dispute. Courts are for that.
On Clinton
Ron Paul - I voted to Impeach him
Overall:
The format sucked. Some of the candidates had a lot more facetime than others. All candidates IMO should have had the same questions. That is my biggest problem with this. The other problem was some of the questions were BS and fluff. Why ask 10 republican candidates about the Clintons? Right now we have a primary. I don’t want to know what Jim Gilmore thinks about Clinton. I want to know what Jim Gilmore thinks about policy.
The candidates were mostly cautious and my opinion of most of them did not change based on this. One thing I DID like about this was the lesser known candidates being allowed to participate. Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Tommy Thompson, Sam Brownback, Jim Gilmore, and Mike Huckabee all bring something to the table and are running as well. It was good to see some of the “choice c” candidates involved to some degree.
If I had to pick a “winner” based on the limited format, I’d have to go with Mike Huckabee. I am more open to his candidacy than I was beforehand. I still have a lot of fiscal concerns with him, particularly on his record on taxes, but I’m more open to supporting him than before.
I liked Tommy Thompson's answer on Iraq, Huckabee's on Rumsfeld and Scooter Libby, Ron Paul on the National ID, Internet, and nationbuilding, Tancredo on Fairtax and Karl Rove, McCain on Pork, Romney on Stem Cell, and Duncan Hunter on trade.
I’m still undecided however, and will be for the foreseeable future.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Candidate Mike Huckabee - fiscal conservative?
Considering his past support for tax increases, I'm suspicious.
From Forbes Magazine
From Forbes Magazine
Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee is paying a tax penalty - not the kind you get from the IRS.
During his 10 years as Arkansas governor, Huckabee supported numerous tax increases. Now that he's left office and is running for president, the Southern Baptist minister is struggling to convince fiscal conservatives - who wield significant sway in the GOP nomination race - that he can be trusted not to sin again.
Huckabee recently signed a no-tax pledge, but anti-tax activists remain wary of his claim to have reformed his ways.
The Club for Growth, which advocates limited government and lower taxes, has repeatedly criticized Huckabee since his formation in January of a presidential exploratory committee. It notes that as governor, Huckabee increased taxes on sales, gasoline, cigarettes and nursing homes.
"I'm glad to see he signed the pledge, but as a given matter what politicians have done is a better indicator than what they say they're going to do. His record clearly does not indicate a strong commitment to limited government," said Pat Toomey, president of the Club for Growth
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
