The departure of Duncan Hunter
January 20, 2008 — wickleMEDIA ALERT
Congressman Duncan Hunter returns to San Diego tonight,
Saturday January 19, 2008
Media Opportunity at 8:00 PM (PST)
Broadway Pier at the end of Broadway St, San Diego
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 19, 2008
San Diego, Calif.
We started this campaign a year ago right here, in San Diego Harbor, against the backdrop of American Naval power. We launched a campaign emphasizing a strong national defense, enforceable borders and restoring the industrial base of America.
Today we end this campaign. The Nevada caucuses reflecting only 2% of the vote for me. I ran the campaign exactly the way I wanted to, and at this point not being able to gain traction in conservative states of Nevada and South Carolina, it’s time to allow our volunteers and supporters to focus on the campaigns that remain viable.
It’s time for me to gear up for 2008’s defense bill that will be put together over the coming weeks. There is work to be done in the areas of troop protection and new capabilities to be deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. And over the horizon, the emergence of Communist China as a military super power will require a new emphasis on U.S. capabilities in undersea warfare, space, and long range air-power.
The best way to maintain a new era of peace is for the U.S. to remain strong. Over the coming year I will endeavor to help craft a defense bill that meets the new security challenges.
Since our campaign began over 200,000 additional manufacturing jobs have been lost. 1.8 million jobs have left the U.S. for China. This fracturing of the U.S. industrial base is a long term threat to America. I hope that the remaining candidates will recognize it and address it. As the senior Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, I will seek to address it.
Only hours ago a border patrolman was killed in the California Desert. This tragedy emphasizes more than ever the compelling case for the completion of the border fence. Since I wrote the bill that mandates 854 miles of double border fence only a few miles have been constructed. Over the next year in Congress I will do everything in my power to get that fence built.
Finally, for Lynn and me, the campaign over the last year has shown us this: America is a wonderful country. Our people have great character and goodness, and the meeting of new friends has enriched our lives.
The failure of our campaign to gain traction is mine and mine alone. But we have driven the issues of national security, the border fence, the emergence of China and the need to reverse bad trade policy. Because of that, this campaign has been very worthwhile, and for the Hunter family, a lot of fun.
To our friends and supporters and volunteers: many thanks. And now it’s time for me to focus on developing a 2008 defense bill that serves our troops and our nation.
Thanks, and God Bless America.
Duncan Hunter
* * *
I like Duncan Hunter tremendously. I won’t get into the reasons why he was my second choice, and never my first, but I do think it’s too bad that he wasn’t able to gain more traction in various states. While he accepts responsibility for it (as he should), I can and will point out that it isn’t entirely his fault.
The press has been allowed to decide who is viable, and has dubbed front-runners far before any votes were cast. It’s also been pretty clear that the press chose badly. In the early days of the campaign, the press had declared that Rudy Giuliani was the leading Republican candidate for President. We were told that Fred Thompson’s arrival on the scene was eagerly awaited by masses.
These headlines were based on celebrity, clearly not on fact. Giuliani might come from New York City, and therefore appeal to New York City journalists, but he clearly does not appeal to a majority of Republican voters. He’s showing single-digit returns when states actually vote, despite all of the time he’s been given. Fred Thompson might be an actor with some novelty behind him, but he clearly doesn’t have the charisma of Ronald Reagan, which is how reporters were trying to cast him.
I said long ago (before I even started this blog) that I would love to see the “top tier” candidates (Giuliani, McCain, Romney) and alleged maybe-candidate (Thompson had not yet declared) leave the field, and run the primary between the ideas-based “second-tier” candidates. Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul, and Tom Tancredo had ideas for the country. Tancredo was a bit of a one-trick pony, but at least I knew where he stood … which makes him different from Romney. (In fairness, I think that McCain is ideas-based, as well, but that’s another story.)
In my “Working the Field” series, Duncan Hunter was next on my list of candidates to profile, and I suppose that I now feel guilty about not getting to him. I had no intention of ignoring him. (Actually, I was tired of profiling candidates I didn’t like, but didn’t want to jump all the way to Mike Huckabee, so I was going to profile Hunter as a pick-me-up.)
In debates, Rep. Hunter was consistently ignored, and the outlets soon started looking for reasons to exclude him — much as was the case with Rep. Paul. This certainly didn’t help him, especially given that many voters don’t make decisions until the last day.
Duncan Hunter was pursuing the traditional conservative coalition in a way that no other candidate in the GOP is. Whereas Mitt Romney has realigned his positions so that he can claim to be one of them, Rep. Hunter is. While Sen. Thompson is ambling around waiting for people to come to him, Rep. Hunter was pursuing them like a leader. If the conservative press had really wanted to back a traditional candidate, they probably should have gotten behind Hunter.
Anyone who saw the Values Voter Debate saw Duncan Hunter do very well in a forum with social conservatives — one that McCain, Thompson, Giuliani, and Romney couldn’t be troubled to attend.
It is my hope that this is nowhere near the end of Duncan Hunter’s aspirations for higher office. I hope to see him in a Republican Cabinet beginning in 2009, and I hope that he makes another run in 2012 or 2016.










January 20, 2008 at 11:46 pm
I think its kind of a chicken/egg thing. The media focuses on the frontrunners, but you don’t become a frontrunner unless you have media attention.
McCain, for example, had been all but written off not very long ago, and press reports focused on his staff shakeups and lack of funding. Now, he’s right up front.
Giuliani, on the other hand, was seemingly crowned as the presumptive frontrunner (and a Fox news fav), and now he’s obviously in real trouble.
Hunter really never had a whole lot of support, IIRC, so it made sense that the media marginalized him. I think if anyone has reason to complain about media blackout, it would be the likes of Thompson and Edwards IMO.
January 21, 2008 at 1:29 am
Maybe … but I don’t approve of things like giving more time to front-runners in debates, or any of that nonsense. Giuliani didn’t earn his press time for his campaign, he just got it because he was mayor of New York City. Maybe you heard … he was mayor during the 9/11 attacks? (Cheap shot, I know … but he deserves it.)
Thompson was hyped tremendously — even on NPR — before he declared his candidacy. I guess I don’t know what coverage has looked like since then that much, since I don’t have cable and NPR is very different from commercial news. (Example: I still don’t know the father of Anna Nicole Smith’s baby.)
In any case … ultimately, if you enter the race knowing that you’re not one of the big celebs, then you have to know that you have to work for your name recognition. Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee did it … Duncan Hunter, John Cox, Alan Keyes, Tom Tancredo, and Sam Brownback didn’t. That’s life.
But I do lay some fault on news networks and reporters who should have given more information. Excluding candidates from debates as early as NH is really irresponsible, methinks.
January 21, 2008 at 1:49 am
On a related note, over at hot air I saw a youtube of Hillary’s appearance on Tyra. Tyra? Did she get squeezed in between the guess-my-age game and the makeovers? lol
January 21, 2008 at 7:42 am
Tyra? Wow … Why don’t we give up the whole election process and choose our President via reality show. Talent competitions, a history/civics/geography quiz, maybe a giant game of that Memory card game, a round of Monopoly (to determine fiscal competence, of course) … but results are really determined by Americans text-messaging their votes.
Sigh … I bet that if Ben Franklin and John Adams came back right now, they’d beat the lot of us with their canes …
January 21, 2008 at 3:19 pm
This is the first time I have ever been so interested in the process this early, and I am surprised by the power given to the media to shape the choosing of our next president, especially with the control they have over the debates. (And what we see they’ve done with them!) We have a government created with checks and balances so that no one branch may become too powerful, yet today’s media wields so much power in influencing the public who will select the government. Something just doesn’t seem right…
January 21, 2008 at 4:58 pm
I think that maybe Duncan Hunter was too boring for the media. Every other leading Republican candidate has something bad and/or interesting and/or unconservative about them.
Giulani:
Mayor of New York City at time of 9/11
Immoral (Divorced twice, married three times, etc.)
Liberal on social issues
McCain:
Vietnam POW
“Maverick”
Heavily involved in controversial, unconservative McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy, and was against Bush tax cuts.
Romney:
Mormon
Mega Wealthy
Flip-Flopper
Thompson:
Actor
Dragged out decision process, gaining hype, and got in race late
States’ rights-ist against constitutional amendments
Huckabee:
Former Baptist Minister
Evangelicals’ “Darling”
Accused of all kinds of things as Arkansas governor: fiscal liberalism, weak on crime, weak on illegal immigration, the whole Wayne Dumont thing, etc.
Even Paul:
A non-interventionist seen as “crazy” by many
Wants to get rid of everything from the Department of Education to the CIA
The media loves that type of drama, that type of intrigue, that type of contradiction and controversy. Hunter was just your plain-jane complete, consistent, fervent conservative on every issue. In the media’s eyes, that’s got to seem boring. Add in the fact that Huckabee did a lot of his work in the debates, and Hunter’s speaking ability pales in comparison to Huckabee’s. Thus, Huck rose in the polls and gained steam and media while Hunter stayed flat at less than two percent.
January 21, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Karen - I can’t agree with you more.
Kingdom Advancer - You’ve got a point there. Hunter didn’t have any great dramas in his life … he was just a responsible, solid candidate. Hunter should have had the interest, support, and coverage that went to Fred Thompson, to be honest. He’s the candidate that Thompson supporters think Thompson is.
I hope that he’s not out for good … and I hope that he’s a part of the next Republican administration in some important way, and a way which boosts his name recognition for a future bid.
January 21, 2008 at 7:55 pm
I agree that there seemed to be a conflict of interest for the media and entertainment ratings and viewership seemed to be the reasons for some decisions. Not only does that create a circus atmosphere for this important decision, and ruin the chances of candidates who cannot entertain us, but I fear for the direction of our nation. Do we have to be constantly entertained to pay attention to anything?
January 21, 2008 at 11:49 pm
As a nation … yes, we have to be entertained.
Thompson supporters will tell you that he was ignored because he wanted to talk about substance, not play games. Maybe … he was certainly doing better while he was generating “buzz” by not declaring.
The same applies to a lot of candidates. We require that substance be given in 30-second doses, but we love theatrics. Accuracy is less interesting than controversy.
This is how the discussion formats work on radio and TV, too. Having people shout at each other isn’t reasonable political discussion, but it’s what passes for news.
January 22, 2008 at 12:40 am
I too would have loved to see the “idea-based 2nd tier ones” as the only candiates (but you left out Tommy Thompson!).
I also dislike how much influence the media has in who is considered a 1st tier candiate.
I am agreeing with everyone on the media comments…
January 22, 2008 at 7:30 am
Sorry about Tommy Thompson … I actually forgot that he was in it when I wrote that comment. You’re right, he belonged in that list. John Cox and Alan Keyes, too.