Replies

He's explained why he voted for McCain-Feingold, and why it has not worked out like he expected that it would.

In addition, he supported McCain in 2000.

Well, the other front runner at the time was Bush, and Bush wasn't that well known, and didn't do the best of jobs in selling himself with his public speaking. I think that Bush turned out far better than McCain would have, but Bush still has his own flaws as well.

Those Senators who supported McCain such as Hagel and Limpey Graham have proven untrustworthy.

He has has his own voting record, and with the exception of McCain-Feingold, it is far more conservative and consistent than Hagel or Graham.

He has also shown more recently a willingness to speak out on tough issues, and an ability and willingness to take on the press.

This is an essential skill for a Republican presidential candidate in today's political environment. Bush has let the liberal press dictate their own view of the world and he seems unwilling to boldly contest it.

We need a President that is not only conservative, but one that can sell those conservative values to the people.

He's explained why he voted for McCain-Feingold, and why it has not worked out like he expected that it would.

Hillary voted for that war thing and it isn't working out like she expected it would.

So, you give Thompson a pass, but I doubt you would give Hillary one.

I fail to see the distinction.

Let's be consistent. If we skewer one pol for flipflopping and changing his mind, let's do it for all that flipflop for change their minds.

Thompson, to be a serious candidate, needs to be held accountable for his involvment in writing, voting for, and passing CFR. And he needs to give a fuller explanation of why he thinks it failed and what needs to be done to correct it.

[I'm not giving him a pass on this. I want a full explanation. This bill, CFR, is a direct infringement on the First Amendment. Thompson owes the voters a better explanation than 'oh sorry, it's not working the way we intended'.]

In the same respect, Rudy owns a full explanation of his position on abortion and on gun contol and his infringment on the Second Amendment.

Let's hold ALL their feet to the fire. We don't have to settle for---and end up with second-rate politicians.

“Well, the other front runner at the time was Bush, and Bush wasn’t that well known, and didn’t do the best of jobs in selling himself with his public speaking. I think that Bush turned out far better than McCain would have, but Bush still has his own flaws as well.”

Bush was correctly seen by many limited government conservatives as someone who would lead the GOP further down the path of big government conservatism. McCain was seen, correctly so at the time, as more conservative than Bush from the stand point of limiting government. McCain has moved leftward sense. I did not support either in the 2000 GOP primaries, but can understand why someone would of picked McCain over Bush.