imageJanuary 3rd is fast approaching, and Iowans are trying to figure out which candidate they will caucus for, if they haven’t already (much of that is still pretty soft support).    I’m no different; I’m currently undecided.  This has been mostly intentional, because I feel like I endorsed too quickly in 2008.  I wanted to be a neutral observer for most of the caucus race, free to point out the good and bad with each campaign.

It’s getting close, and I want to get behind a candidate as much as I can in the remaining weeks.  I’ve determined that November 7th will be my self-imposed deadline after I take time to look further at the candidates, interview those on my short list, and prayerfully consider who I will back.

I’m sure the 10s of you who care about my opinion may be interested in who failed to make my list, these are those candidates that I am no longer considering caucusing for.

1.  Mitt Romney – Shocker, I know!  I didn’t believe him when said he was a conservative in 2008, and he hasn’t given me any reason to believe him now.  I find it amusing that anybody would try to apply that label to him.  You can look at his website to see his true colors.  He’s rebranded himself. Feigning to be a social conservative didn’t work last time, so now he focuses on fiscal issues instead.  Is his jobs plan better than Obama’s?  Sure.  He governed as a liberal, and he pushed RomneyCare.  Evidently we’re supposed to ignore his record.  His record stinks.  Anyone looking at Romney with any shred of objectivity would have to consider him a moderate at best.  We nominated one of those in 2008, how did that work out for us?  Beyond that he has done nothing, nothing to try to win over my vote.  Avoiding my state will not endear me to his campaign, it actually makes me think he is a coward.

I’m shocked that any Iowan would vote for him after he has disrespected our state so badly through avoidance and manipulation of the primary calendar in order to make us irrelevant.  While he does have some worthwhile ideas regarding the economy, all one has to do is look at his record as Governor of Massachusetts to get a glimpse of how he’ll govern our nation.  He may not be as big government as Obama, but I don’t want big government-lite.  I’m looking for the anti-Obama, and Mitt Romney doesn’t fit the bill.  He is all over the place with is positions and even liberals notice the flip flopping.

His opponents have certainly noticed, as we can see in a Rick Perry ad:

2. Jon Huntsman – Do I even need to give any reasons.  I mean seriously?  Let’s see there’s the child-like manner that he addressed one particular pastor, to Iowa ignoring, to his love affair with global warming and evolution, to his smug arrogance during the debates and then there is his endorsement of civil unions.  It would be easier to list what I like about Huntsman.

3. Herman Cain – I’m am officially never getting on the “Cain Train.”  He was close to making my short list.  I’ve met him, and I liked him.  I however believe that I can’t trust him.  He’s been all over the place with his positions.  I was leery of his 9-9-9 plan because I don’t believe it is a good idea to implement any sales tax without eliminating the income tax first.  That is the only way I’d go for that.  I actually like the idea of the Fair Tax, but I believe his approach doesn’t take into consideration what happens if the Fair Tax is never implemented.  Then there’s the fact that it will raise taxes on 84% of all American households.

Here’s the thing – he doesn’t have a record so all we have to go on is what he say, and that has been coherent at best.  As I pointed out the other day:

Cain has taken a well-deserved beating this week, and while the Phoenix has risen once I highly doubt he can do so again.  He has been caught saying one thing to one group and the opposite thing to anotherHe “misspoke” regarding negotiating with terrorists.  He said he was both anti-abortion and pro-choice.  Since he doesn’t have a record what are we supposed to believe?

He’s been all over the map, and when he gets ahead of his talking points he’s in trouble and displays how much he really doesn’t know.  We really need to some discernment with Herman Cain.  He’s a great communicator, but we need to look past that.  We already have a “great communicator” in the White House (albeit with teleprompters).  How’s that working out for us?

4.  Ron Paul – Compared to the previous three, Congressman Paul is the most palatable to me.  I say that because I never have to wonder where he stands.  He’s pretty consistent, but that being said in some cases he’s consistently wrong.  I wholeheartedly agree with Congressman Paul on monetary policy, debt reduction, taxes, etc.  Even though I don’t agree with all the nuances of his position on abortion I see him as generally being positive on the issue from the Federal level.

I think the ad he’s been running recently is particularly masterful.


He said, “Until we understand that life is precious and that we must protect life; we can’t protect liberty.”  Amen.  he made a similar remark in his speech during the Ames Straw Poll.

Where I diverge from Congressman Paul is his position on marriage.  I have to agree with Senator Rick Santorum here, “states don’t have the right to do wrong.”  Also when you have federal judges striking down state constitutional amendments it becomes a federal issue.  Even with this particular position since the President doesn’t sign Constitutional Amendments I don’t seem him being particularly harmful on the issue.  I like his “We The People Act.”

The issue that absolutely disqualifies him in my mind is his foreign policy.  I believe that one of the primary roles of the President is that of Commander-in-Chief.  When he blames 9/11 on us that scares me.  His answers on Iran obtaining an nuclear weapon was just asinine.  I believe that he is hopelessly naïve in his foreign policy.  A nuclear Iran is a harm to us because that weapon then becomes shield.  It will embolden them in their state-sponsored terrorism.  While I agree that much of our foreign aid can and should be cut and wasteful spending within the military I am concerned about what a Paul Administration would do to our military.

So these are the four that didn’t make the cut.  Up next my short list.

Subscribe For Latest Updates

Sign up to receive stimulating conservative Christian commentary in your inbox.

Invalid email address
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Thanks for subscribing!
      1. Thanks for taking the time to post all of this.  So interesting and well established points. I particularly would never consider the first two candidates you listed.  #1 and #2….they both gotta go – waste.  I just wish I could decide who I will caucus for.  Are you going to make a similar list of those you are considering?

  1. My thinking is that Perry has to make to the top of your short list as he is the only candidate with real executive leadership experience left on your list. But please, lets not nominate another John McCain type legislator and think that they will do any better than the leadership-challenged Barack Obama. America needs a person with leadership experience not another senator or congressman with limited leadership experience. 

  2. I’m still considering Cain, otherwise I more or less agree with you. I’m not uncritical of him (after all, I wrote a post bashing his 9-9-9 plan), but I still like him.

  3. Shane wrote regarding Huntsman: ” …to his love affair with global warming and evolution…”

    In other words, reality.

      1. Exactly, Shane.  Microevolution is provable, but macroevolution is impossible to prove, yet so many bizarrely call it fact.  Actually, it’s their religion IMO, which explains why they’re so defensive whenever you try to question it.  And there’s also “global” warming on Mars–so man caused that too?  LOL.  Basically, we don’t have enough years of data to know whether we are in a period that’s above average in terms of warmth–you would needs thousands of years’ worth, at the very minimum. (Incidentally, I’m one of those folks who don’t believe that the Bible says the earth is a few thousand years old. I believe the “days” mentioned in Genesis are best interpreted as periods, which could be very long in duration. I think scientist Hugh Ross explains it well.)   Nevertheless, it wouldn’t necessarily mean that man was the cause anyway.  The earth goes in cycles, as you said.  I personally believe that man’s activities may affect climate in certain ways, but not to any huge degree.  In fact, some of man’s activities might even bring cooling.

        As for Jon Huntsman’s love affair with those two cuties mentioned above, did his wife ever find out???  🙂 LOL.

  4. You’re at least one short, in my opinion (Perry is similar to Cain and Romney in many ways), but I agree fully on your evaluation of those that you listed. Thanks!

Comments are closed.

You May Also Like

Matt Schultz Announces Congressional Campaign Offices

(Des Moines, IA) Iowa’s Secretary of State and former Council Bluffs City…

Trump Doesn’t Understand What Collusion Means

Donald Trump is a master propagandist, but he does not have a grasp on the meaning of certain words. Ted Cruz and John Kasich’s agreement is not collusion.

New Grassley Ad Highlights Judge’s Failure to Lead

U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley’s campaign released a new ad, entitled “Cut”, which details the failed leadership of former Iowa Lt. Governor Patty Judge.

Herman Cain Explodes at Audience Member (Updated, old news)

A new video surfaced today showing Herman Cain exploding at an audience…