Mr. Gilchrist's opposition to the Iraq War and then saying he supports the troops is the LIBERAL stance. You can't oppose the war, but support the troops. Troops are for fighting! Mr. Gilchrist thus maintains a liberal stance which is in regards to my initial post!
Also, a liberal from a minor party will NOT win in the majority conservative 48th District.
Why do you seem so concerned with my running?
Your running as a write-in candidate concerns me not in the least.
The way you signed up to FR just to promote a phony campaign, and then use this site's good graces to try and bring down a great American like Jim Gilchrist, concerns me greatly.
The most you can do, if you ever do actually run (which I seriously doubt) is to take 50 or so votes from John Campbell.
Have at it.
Lots of conservatives opposed going into Iraq.
The test for those who did came after we went in.
Jim Gilchrist passed that test with flying colors.
You really don't know much about politics, do you.
That's not his position, as you well know. It's been explained to you numerous times. As unwilling as you are to listen to the facts, I think you're probably a liberal. Also, a liberal from a minor party will NOT win in the majority conservative 48th District.
The leading Republican candidate is an open-borders RINO. he's the kinkd of guy you ought to be going after. Gilchrist has high name ID and there are a bunch of Republicans (2 Dimmycraps, I think, a Green, a Libertarian, and Gilchrist on the AIP make 5 -- the rest are from the GOP.) In that kind of field, Gilchrist has a shot.
I don't buy that. I support the war in Iraq. I did not however, support the United States taking sides in the Kosovo-Serbian conflict, especially since we were taking the side of Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists. Are you saying I was against the troops, because I didn't agree with the U.S. getting involved in this war, and, in essence, helping terrorists?