He’s Chris Matthews. Tucker Carlson nailed Matthews to the outhouse door early today while sitting as a guest on “Red Eye w/Greg Gutfeld.

“I actually think that Chris Matthews may be the dumbest person ever to appear on television,” was Carlson’s opening take on Matthews’ accusation that Newt Gingrich’s smack down of Juan Williams was racist.

“Red Eye” is one of the many programs I record and then zip through during my mid-day coffee break. Carlson’s comments had my thumb on “pause” as I took down his remarks verbatim. The ones not already quoted follow:

“I know him, I know him really well. I’ve worked with him and I can say this with total sincerity: He’s truly a moron…and that’s heartfelt. It’s (Matthews’ dumbness) a thing of majesty; it’s not pedestrian. It (Matthews’ racist accusation) speaks to how dumb he is; He’s really, really dumb.”

We need more of this of course. Matthews along with everyone else at MSNBC should have a Ninny Wing at the Smithsonian as a lesson for future generations.

Said wing could include Eugene Robinson’s bunk in the MSNBC Green Room which allowed him to instantly appear on any MSNBC offering any time of day to offer commentary as vapid as his grin.

Joe Scarborough’s famous Four Topics could be easily made into a 60-second video. The points? 1- When I was in Congress… 2- People like my dad would say… 3- Donny? Willie? Mike? Mika?… 4- In 1994…

Some things just write themselves. Thank you Mr. Carlson.

Huntsman!

Jon Huntsman, the man with sterling credentials for the world’s highest office. The candidate whose “baggage”, if any, wouldn’t fill a motorcycle toolkit pack. The 51 year-old who has already enjoyed success enough for four very successful lifetimes: as a husband and father, as a businessman, as an ambassador and not least as an effective and popular two-term governor.

His conservative bona fides are as solid as his love of country. He is proud to be a servant of our republic and is in every way an example of the citizen-politician the Founders had in mind.

There is nothing phony here. Nothing that can’t stand the light of high noon on the equator. If you find him a bit stiff please to remember he quit high school to go full-time rock band member. He delights still in making music. Motorcycles are a passion. His beautiful family of seven includes two adopted kids. His sons both serve in the US Navy and  the three older girls with wife Mary Kaye are real campaign assets.

Here’s what the Obama campaign will face if Gov./Amb Huntsman leads the GOP:

Curriculum Vitae-Jon Meade Huntsman

At 21 Huntsman is a staff assistant in the Reagan administration, two years later he marries then joins the family business as a project manager and secretary. In 1984 he is named Utah state director of the Reagan-Bush re-elect campaign. The next year Jon and his brothers help their dad as Huntsman Corp faces serious financial problems. These are solved and Huntsman Corp experiences solid growth going forward creating many job opportunities. 1987 sees Jon graduate from the University of Pennsylvania with a degree in International Politics. Now an officer of Huntsman he and Mary Kaye take their young family to Taiwan where he helps oversee global expansion for the enterprise.

At age 30 Jon is nominated by President Bush to be deputy assistant secretary of commerce for East Asia and the Pacific and just two years later is named US Ambassador to Singapore, the youngest US ambassador since the 19th century. No doubt his fluency in Mandarin and Hokkien are duly noted.

While President Obama was no doubt honing his community organizing skills Huntsman after returning from Singapore was serving as vice-chairman of the board and member of Huntsman Corp’s executive committee. During this time he became head of the Huntsman Cancer Foundation. He has  served many other charitable efforts including holding  a seat on the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation’s national board.

Jon won an eight-person contest  to represent the GOP in Utah’s 2004 gubernatorial election. He won and was easily re-elected for a second term. After his first inauguration he immediately began a 10-point plan to improve government efficiency as well as the business climate in Utah. During this time the Pew Center on the States named Utah as the best managed state in the nation.

Utah’s taxpayers were well served by their conservative chief executive. The tax code was simplified, government made more efficient and because of a business friendly approach that was especially tailored for small business job creation Utah’s tax base expanded, the classic conservative double play.

Gov Huntsman’s health care approach was also conservative. It’s market based and offers Utah residents broad choices and the ability to negotiate what best suits them. It is miles from Romneycare. More importantly it provides Huntsman with a real-world alternative to Obamacare.  Candidate Huntsman can leverage the unpopularity of Obamacare like no other Republican.

Fact is Huntsman is the best possible candidate to both win the election AND not break conservative hearts once in the White House. You and I know exactly what we’ll get with President Huntsman. He’s a solid conservative who is uniquely qualified to both win moderates and expand the conservative base by actively demonstrating the supremacy of the historic conservative approach; pragmatic governance based on the lessons of history and constitutional restraint.

And Gov Huntsman is solidly pro-life and recognizes and supports second amendment rights.

I recognize and respect the reservations some  have regarding Gov Huntsman. His claim of being a “sane” Republican was needlessly snotty. I would humbly ask him to examine the so-called “science” behind global warming as the left posits it, a grave threat to the planet.

But frankly these points, in my judgment, are a first-class example of the “perfect being the enemy of the good” We are conservatives for heaven’s sake. We are rightly wary of any politician who claims to have it all, any platform claiming to solve it all.

Huntsman’s rhetoric, record and recommendations mark him as a solid conservative. In the general he will not only excite the base he will broaden it.

Another very important advantage Huntsman brings is not quite as apparent: He doesn’t need a continuing bad economy to beat Obama. The US economy is dynamic and in spite of Obamanomics might just be on the upswing in 2012. Here’s where I think Huntsman’s resume and plain talk will carry the day. Fifty-three per cent of voters choose “Hope and Change” in 2008. I believed then and believe now that Hope and Change translated into reform. And  Obama and the Democrats didn’t deliver bringing them the 2010 smack down. Huntsman is uniquely qualified to come before the voters as a credible reformer. Further he can articulate why no matter the improvement that may come in 2012 it is paltry compared to what the US economy can do when given a fair chance.

Jon Huntsman is by far the best candidate the Republican Party can offer in 2012. He has none of the problems which the other hopefuls will have in the general. The breadth of his experience, the coolness of his approach, his record of accomplishment, the fact President Obama picked him for the nation’s number one diplomatic posting, his clean personal life; all of these will bring victory.

Can we all agree that MSNBC is a national embarrassment? The cable outlet no longer even pretends to be a news outlet. It is leftist blather with no journalistic ornaments whatever.

This evening (12/30/11) Chris Matthews pronounced that Texas Gov. Rick Perry “doesn’t have the brains to be president” Further he dismissed Texas with a wave of his pudgy hand. This came during a discussion of the upcoming Iowa GOP caucus. I guess Gov Perry doesn’t send a tingle up Matthew’s leg.

So a successful chief executive of a large prosperous diverse state doesn’t have the brains to be president? This from a man who hasn’t been elected  so much as dog catcher with apologies to animal control folks.

Brother Erickson has raised the question and I repeat it: Why does anyone who has anything to do with the Republican Party appear on any MSNBC offering? MSNBC is stridently hostile to Republicans and conservatives alike. I don’t watch more than a few minutes of its various offerings on any given day. Doesn’t matter. When you tune to MSNBC you are going to see and hear left-wing talking points without the slightest camouflage of journalism.

The enemies of the people according to the neo-Leninist talking heads at MSNBC are the Republican Party, the right wing, conservatives, the Koch brothers and Fox News. These along with whatever the Democrat Party talking points are on a particular day comprise the day to day topics. Yes it is boring and MSNBC’s ratings reflect that.

I think many Republican pols are wising up. On tonight’s “Hardball” Matthews was plainly given the cold shoulder by Mitt Romney (Yay! Mitt!) when Matthews tried to ask  some questions. Chris Christie was a bit less abrupt, but just a bit.

So why not make it official? Republican resolution for 2012: No cooperation with MSNBC. The loss will be entirely on the side of MSNBC. It’s audience is very small and I doubt very much if it is a fertile field for Republican votes.

And if one or more of the current GOP crop wants to call out Matthews and ask for an apology to Gov. Perry; well that sounds like a fine idea. No MSNBC in 2012 sounds even better. And MSNBC can have all the interviews it can schedule with Reid, Pelosi, Schumer et al. Maybe Joe Scarborough could book fellow host Rev Al and ask him to come clean about Tawana Brawley. Now that would be worth watching.

The two sat down Monday at “St A’s” in NH and discussed issues foreign and domestic for about one and a third hours. My overarching impression was both men showed leadership ability by demonstrating a confidence-inspiring combination of describing challenges and offering solutions. Gingrich is right about this format: the difference between this and the sound-bite debates is startling.

<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”http://www.youtube.com/embed/Q54P2djFx8U” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

Make that gifts.  Here they are in no particular order:

First, Republicans can now have some fun rhyming fat cat and Democrat. Corzine’s credentials are indusputable.

Secondly, the 64 year-old  is a perfect counter to the Dem’s Wall St v Main St narrative. He was CEO of Goldman Sachs. He was until very recently the honcho at MF Global.

Third, the Obamanauts asked Corzine for economic advice. His sage counsel helped shape the so-called stimulus package. Best of all from the GOP point of view this isn’t open to any denial, plausible or otherwise. VP Biden is on all sorts of video enthusiastically touting Corzine’s economic wisdom. Here’s a quote, “The reason we called Jon was because we knew he knew about the economy, about world markets, about how we had to respond, unlike anyone we knew…we trusted his judgment.” This was  one occasion, and you know Biden can’t keep his mouth shut. Another You Tube embalmed VP appearance has Biden describing a scene in a “Chicago high-rise” when he and Obama were discussing how to get the economy moving. This is rich in itself of course. Two life-long pols trading ideas on the world’s largest economy! Biden then tells of calling Corzine describing the former NJ official as “the smartest guy I know about the economy, about finance…” Ironically Biden tells his audience this was “no joke…not a joke”

Fourth, Newt gets his baggage down-sized a lot. Next time Gingrich faces a question about the million plus his firm received from Freddie, he parries it along the lines of, “Yes, that’s on the record. I declared it, paid taxes on it and know what I did with it. Now why don’t you ask the Obama administration’s chief economic advisor where is the one and a quarter billion dollars Jon Corzine lost for ordinary Americans?”

Corzine’s testimony Thursday was an unmitigated disaster for Democrats in general and the president in particular. It was a gold-plated gift for the GOP.

Asked what happened to the missing moolah Corzine said he didn’t know. So let’s see. You’re the head man and as your firm plummets toward bankruptcy you tune out. Corzine also claimed that he didn’t watch MF’s accounting that closely. Astonishing. There had to be Dems in the room and watching on TV who privately cursed Corzine’s decision not to take the fifth.

The “Fast and Furious” examination will undoubtedly lead to trouble for the administration.

But details of the downfall of MF Global and Jon Corzine are and will be far more damaging. The MF Global bankruptcy is causing hardship for many citizens particularly in the farm belt. This election will primarily be about the economy and this is an economic story. It also will be a tale of gross negligence, perhaps criminality.

It unmasks so-called experts as ninnies. Biden called who? A man who can’t account for more than a billion dollars of client assets at a firm he ran? Ran into the ground finally. Jon Corzine, the smartest man in the room if the only others in the room are Obama and Biden.

I was on vacation. It was a beautiful summer night. Ronald Reagan was on TV. He was making his acceptance speech. The former actor (The MSM always referred to him that way. His experience as governor of the largest state apparently didn’t count.) was the GOP candidate for president. It was 31 years ago and I remember it well. Happy times make fond and vivid memories.

During one of his early news conferences he called the communist leaders of the USSR “Kremlin Bosses” I was listening as I drove home from the Palo Alto, CA. EF Hutton office and was so psyched by the comment I pulled into a parking lot got out and joyfully whooped. I often thought during Reagan’s first term that I never in my life would have a president I liked as well. Liked? I loved that wonderful man.

When he fired the air controllers and dealt organized labor, a blow that still vibrates, I felt the deep satisfaction of having voted for a candidate who delivered.

Reagan was derided by the MSM and liberals as a pleasant light weight. A popular shibboleth was that he read from the same stack of 3×5 cards each with a talking point. He shuffled them for variety. His opponents explained his many successes by granting that he was “a great communicator”

They were partly right: He was great, a truly great man. Reagan was also a simple man in the sense that he kept the moving parts to a minimum. In golfing terms he had a one-piece swing. A friend of a friend of mine was on the staff. Reagan’s management style, he told us, was a product of his governing philosophy. He was a big-picture executive whose study of history convinced him that a president could only make three or four lasting changes. His were winning the Cold War decisively, reforming taxes, lessening regulatory burdens and reducing federal spending. Three out of four ain’t bad. At cabinet and staff sessions Reagan would ask his subordinates how it was progressing on these big goals. He was criticized outside the White House for not being hands on, not having a grasp of detail. But he accomplished a great deal.

Today of course he is generally conceded to be one of our best chief executives.

It’s a damn shame he wouldn’t pass muster with many conservatives today.

Let’s see. He was divorced. In between marriages he was one of Tinsel Town’s gossip column regulars. Ronnie liked pretty girls and no surprise they liked him back.

Reagan was a Democrat. A proud supporter of FDR and the New Deal. He of course changed his mind as the Democrats moved more and more left. They left him he was fond of saying.

Conservative Ronald Reagan was a staunch union man. He was head of The Screen Actors Guild.

His record as governor of California was for the most part middle of the road. He was right of center; a moderate. He liberalized the Golden State’s abortion law. He felt boxed in because the legislature was going to broaden abortion rights and he felt the bill he signed would be less harmful to the unborn than other options. None the less legal abortions in California went from about 500 his first year as governor to about 100,000 yearly after he signed the bill. This was one of the first instances of “health of the mother” being used to vastly increase legal abortions. And this was before Roe v Wade. Reagan did learn a hard lesson and was staunchly pro-life as president. None the less that history would destroy any chance he could be nominated today.

California state spending grew apace while Reagan was in Sacramento. This is mostly explained by the population growth in those years, but government did notably grow during his two terms. It’s also noteworthy that California still often voted Republican in national elections.

So there you have it. Brief to be sure, but I for one remind myself that the Ronald Reagan of 1980 with his personal and political history wouldn’t be a viable GOP primary candidate in 2012.

And his 11th commandment? Something about not speaking ill of a fellow Republican in public. Uh. Forget about it. Public discourse has notably coarsened in three decades. Of course St Harry Truman actually compared Republicans with Nazis starting what William F Buckley noted was increasing vilification of political opponents that continues to this very second.

So let’s win one for The Gipper even though we couldn’t run The Gipper.

Of all GOP contenders to give a cogent and detailed diagnosis of what ails the federal government. His proposed remedies deserve respectful attention. He has the perspective of an historian. He has the cool analytical approach one expects from a learned man. And best of all he has practical experience at the highest levels. This is one heck of a resume. Add to it his ability to fluently describe the manifold problems facing the republic and neatly outline his prescriptions to alleviate them. Very impressive.

Yet I am not impressed that the former Speaker would make a good president. I believe he rightly can be faulted for lacking the single most important quality necessary for an able Chief Executive and that quality is judgment.

That lack of judgment would, in my view, make Mr. Gingrich an absolute conservative heart breaker if he became number 45. Newt’s personal and public life demonstrate near non-stop poor and even inexplicable decisions. No need and really there’s not enough space in a short essay to list the lousy choices dotting Gingrich’s adult life. A few examples will serve to explain my misgivings.

We all know about the “park bench” moment with Nancy Pelosi. Gingrich himself admits the ad was a blunder. Confession is good for the soul but blunders especially an unforced error like this are not good for anything. It is, I believe, an example of a particular hubris Gingrich shares with many politicians: the desire to be popular if not loved. Any successful office seeker desires to be popular enough to win elections. Perfectly reasonable and understandable. It becomes a problem, a big problem, when the desire to win votes overwhelms a serious approach to various issues. Newt has a history of bowing before zeitgeist. That is not conservative. It is the very opposite.

Newt, as has been pointed out in another diary, teamed up with Al Sharpton on education. Al Sharpton is disreputable. No self-respecting conservative or liberal, for that matter, ought to do any thing but condemn the sordid Rev Al. Read “Outrage”, a narrative of the whole Tawana Brawley affair, for just a few examples of Sharpton’s no account behavior. Incidentally, “Outrage” is the work of New York Times reporters so presumably any accusations that it is a racist right-wing hit piece will fall flat. Among the outrages cataloged is Sharpton’s charge that the NYS Attorney General masturbated while viewing a video of Ms Brawley’s medical exam. Despicably mendacious. Would President Gingrich display a similar lack of judgment choosing policy allies?

Mitt Romney is decried as a flip-flopper, but even a brief perusal of the many books  authored by the former Speaker provides ample evidence that he is not just a flip-flopper but a world class policy contortionist. If it was cool at the date of a particular tome’s publication Gingrich was probably cool with it. Subject, of course, to change without notice.

Gingrich’s personal life has been messy. I was particularly bothered by the big-bucks Tiffany line of credit. Gingrich has a perfect right to spend his money as he pleases, but again what does it say about the judgment of a man who has the highest political ambitions to be buying mega-baubles during a recession? With apologies to Cardinal Richlieu, it wasn’t wrong but it was stupid.

There is much to like about Gingrich. During my lifetime he has been one of the most effective conservative politicians ever. His Contract with America helped propel the GOP to sweeping congressional victories. Further he and his fellows achieved notable results. Gingrich can credibly maintain that when given the opportunity he delivered. There is that and I certainly could support a Gingrich candidacy because of it.

However, there is the consistent record of poor decisions. There is ample evidence that a President Gingrich would seek favor with those who are no friends of conservatism putting it very mildly. It’s instructive to learn on the Gingrich web site that he is seeking public input between now and the election. Sounds like an open seminar for folks in love with ideas. Intentionally or not it’s an approach that leaves lots of wiggle room. It’s an example of leading from behind.

It might be said that Gingrich not only doesn’t have “the vision thing”, but also and more importantly lacks “the judgment thing”

Addendum 12/1/’11 And the Paul campaign gives us this preview of how the Dems might deal with Newt:

http://youtu.be/CWKTOCP45zY    Owwwch!

Newt Gingrinch is on to something alright. He hasn’t quite gone all the way, but he can prove his love for RS types by doing so. If he does he will demonstrate leadership in the most convincing way: by giving an example, by walking the walk, by struttin’ his stuff and letting his actions speak more loudly than plain words ever can.

Should the Speaker make the smart move I think some of the other GOP worthies just might follow. I hope they do. Perhaps Newt won’t be first even though he has come closest. That would be an opportunity missed and missed by the one who first gave evidence of recognizing it. (Update 12-1, Perhaps Gov Perry might be first. MSNBC as of today is still running a crawler about the governor’s mistake on voting age! That happened two days ago! One good thing though. “Morning Update” ran a clip of Gingrich’s interview with Hannity and blocked out all of the Fox id’s at the bottom of the screen and gave no credit to Hannity or Fox saying only that Gingrich was on TV the preceeding night. They did credit an audio clip from the Hannity radio program.)

Newt gets that we of the vast conspiracy detest the so-called Main Stream Media, the pious pundits of leftist group think, the chablis and brie “serious” journalists who no longer even bother to pretend they are objective.

Gingrich has used the debates to needle the MSM tweedle-dees who ask dumb questions and try to incite candidate infighting. Conservatives watching are no doubt mostly pleased. I have read a carp or two about Newt’s surliness regarding the MSM, but I think the large majority are just fine with it.

The former Speaker surely knows he has absolutely nothing to lose when he pushes back. Goodwill? Are you serious? Whether it’s finally Newt or someone else the lame stream will shamelessly carry Obama’s water in 2012.

So there is nothing at all to lose and much to be gained by treating the MSM “objectively”; that is as an opponent.

Why then stop at occasionally pointing out the obvious? Go all the way and boycott certain reporters, pundits and various outlets entirely. Might MSNBC be an excellant place to start?

This choice would indeed do all the things mentioned in the title including zero cost. The audience at MSNBC is about the same size as the number of folks in metro Santa Monica, and like-minded too. Not too many hearts and minds waiting for conversion at this cable outpost.

From “Morning Joe” to something called “The Ed Show” MSNBC is a boring echo chamber of left-wing talking heads. Palaver is too high-toned for the dull menu served daily. Dull? You talkin’ dull? One of their main staples is discussing Fox! That’s correct. The hosts and guests talk about what goes on at a cable news rival. I tune in once or twice a week. I rotate what I watch. It doesn’t matter. They could run repeats. Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, the Koch brothers and whichever Republican is making news comprises a good deal of what is presented. Morning Joe himself declares the Republican field is mainly “clowns”. You want to subject yourself to this? Really? You’re a clown?

Other hosts include folks like Al Sharpton, a left-wing street agitator with a disreputable past; Chris Matthews, who famously admitted that Obama caused some sort of involuntary “thrill” to course through his leg and Mika Brezenski who admits getting talking points from the WH while on the air!

So why would any reasonable Republican presidential hopeful get within two blocks of wherever MSNBC happens to be? There is no reason except to be so desperate for “face time” that even MSNBC is a live option. If it’s come to that might I suggest quitting the race.

So there it is girl and boys. And other names will quickly come to mind. Kudos to the first candidate who adds a worthwhile addition  to their conservative credentials by actively avoiding the worst of the leftist-media crud. It won’t hurt a bit and it will help a good deal to start the very necessary task of restoring some semblance of truth telling to the 24-7 media machine.

UPDATE: Gov Perry may have dropped a hint about a ticket or perhaps a Secretary of State choice near the end of his visit with Jay Leno. Leno asked Perry to name his preferred candidate if he doesn’t get the nod. The governor hesitated a bit but when Leno pressed named Jon Huntsman. He had good things to say about Huntsman, his wife and kids. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but it has occurred to me that Huntsman would add stellar foreign policy credentials as a veep or S of S.

Other than that my remarks about an earlier appearance on Fox about cover the Leno stint.

Gov Perry was relaxed and alert as he fielded a variety of questions. He smartly used his answers to remind conservatives why they should consider him.

This is a man who is a quick study and a formidable politician. Instead of just Texas this and Texas that he pointed out that the Lone Star state all by its lonesome is the 13th largest economy in the world. A nice way to pivot into what will be the big issue in 2012 without sounding provincial.

Zero-based foreign aid will not only warm conservative innards, it will play well as part of the spending argument. And he noted the UN can expect a zero-budget starting point. Long overdue and just hearing it made me smile. Asked about Pakistan’s aid Perry demonstrated…gasp..nuance. He noted Pakistan is a difficult problem not the least because it has nukes. Nice answer.

Perry showed another vote-winning quality when he took ownership of his infamous “no heart” comment regarding those who disagree with in-state tuition for illegals in Texas. That comment, he said, was just wrong; and added that his wife gave him hell for it after the debate. But he didn’t leave it there. He promised the southern border will be closed period a year after he takes office should he be elected. A panel member asked how this would affect the GOP’s Hispanic vote. Perry’s reply was politically astute to say the least. The Hispanics in this country are concerned like the rest of us  with jobs and the economy. Closing the border, he added, will be understood as a matter of national security.

This brief appearance showed Perry as an extremely able politician. He is pleasant. He admits mistakes. (Halleluyah!) He can frame difficult issues to his advantage. He is a quick study. He’s going to get better.

However (always a but lol) I personally think he should quietly ditch his part-time Congress idea. The legislative branch is currently in low regard, but I don’t think the folks are going to buy that one of the checks and balances ought to be part time. Politically it would be rather hairy for good conservative candidates to argue that the present mess requires part-timers rather than properly-focused full time representatives. It’s not a conservative proposal since it would require a sweeping change to a long established way of governing. It’s also not going to happen since Congress would have to make it so. It may be ok in Texas Rick, but leave it there my friend. It’s a clunker nationally.

DO’C's fearless prediction (subject to frequent change of course): Perry does well tonight and starts rising in the polls.

Tis the season after all.

Like the spectre of Scrooge’s late business partner all of the GOP presidential aspirants have some baggage clattering behind them. Thus each of the Republican hopefuls can be fit for the part by an eager media as well as their various opponents.

Herman Cain’s baggage, make that mostly alleged baggage, has been put on display. Now it appears to be current front-runner Newt Gingrich’s turn to play the part. And, like Marley, Newt really does drag around a long length, a ponderous weight of strong chain and policy filing cabinets, books too.

The MSM wants whoever is the current GOP darling to play the part. And each can be cast.

Mitt is freighted with cast-iron flip flops. You can hear them a block away.

Perry seems an unlikely Marley. He is followed by his record, and his record seems no impediment. Oh wait. Did he once suggest Texas might leave the union? Was he once a Democrat? Horrors! Thou are without a heart!

Huntsman certainly can’t play the part. Ah, but you lack imagination. The chains are there. See them? Yes, he has pretty fair conservative credentials, but…what’s that clanking?…global warming and civil unions!

Ron Paul hides under the gown of the The Ghost of Election Present and suggestions of third party send chilly fear.

There are others too who scurry through Iowa. They like Huntsman and Paul are safe for now. But let them become a front runner and the role of Marley’s ghost will need auditioning.