Please send him a contribution today if you agree, and let's see if we can move him up on the polls.
Posted on 7/29/2007, 4:36:21 PM by PlainOleAmerican
No Candidate is Safe…
Although candidates will be forced to discuss a laundry list of special interest issues throughout the campaign season, abortion, gay rights, campaign reform, health care, social security, just to name a few, the 2008 national election is likely to be decided upon two issues that no candidate has offered a good solution for yet.
No Candidate is Safe
On the Democrat side, the mostly unpopular wife of a once party popular oval office playboy is running and leading in a vacuum void of any serious qualified challenger. But her campaign is far from safe. She has yet to attract even 50% support from her own constituents and she has not yet faced any real campaign opposition. If she survives her party primary with only 50% support from her base, she will be in real trouble in the general election where the other half of the country would rather vote for Satan himself.
On the Republican side, the conservative base is so angry with Bush and his compassionate conservative friends that they have largely stopped sending money to the national committee, rejected all RNC candidates at the starting gate and started drafting their own Republican candidate in hopes of reforming their party to conservative values before November 2008. Two thirds of the Republican candidates can’t get above 2% in the Republican polls and the so-called “top tier” candidates can’t even break above 30% among Republican voters.
(Excerpt) Read more at capitolhillcoffeehouse.com ...
Every candidate committed to negotiating either of these two issues will have trouble even getting their own base on board.
Please send him a contribution today if you agree, and let's see if we can move him up on the polls.
I too hope that Fred is this sort of candidate and leader, and await his formal platform.
If he isn’t the man for ‘08 in this regard, then we (the American people) do not have a man (or woman) for ‘08...
I am definitely for contributing to your favorite candidate rather than contributing to the Establishment RNC.
We conservatives are fed up with the GOP slipping further to the left of us. Re-establish the Contract with America, and we may reconsider. As it stands, none of the Republican big three will do. NO MORE GLOBALISTS NEED APPY.
Until that happens, Conservatives, stick to your guns, and shell out big bucks to your candidate.
We beat Bush’s amnesty bill. We can beat the Soros owned Democrat party!
“conservative base is so angry with Bush and his compassionate conservative friends that they have largely stopped sending money to the national committee,”
I sent Mel Martinez(my senator) a letter protesting his support for the amnesty travesty and he sent me a plea for a donation to the R.N.C.
He and the R.N.C. can go to hell.
I’ll give money to individual candidates who I think are deserving.
Those are just the tip of the iceberg but the most popular among the rhetorical remarks of warmed over would be POTUS. Get behind the really honest candidates and that leaves Hillary out….she can only win because of her impeached husband who is loved by the other crooks and thugs…..she will have to buy the presidency…..do you really want Bill back for a Third Term?
And may it always be so! Ask me if I’m grateful for this?
Before any candidate threw their hat in the ring for ‘08, I studied the potential candidates, especially those with voting records from previous office, including Hunter and Paul.
On this basis alone, I was best aligned with Hunter and hoped against hope to see him mount a serious national campaign. After all, if one can not lead a successful campaign within his own party of voters, he has no chance at all of leading a nation of divided voters.
Hunter has since proven that he is not able to connect with or excite even a small base of his own party much less a broad electorate.
We have seen this before. I still have great respect of Bob Dole, the man and what he stands for. But we knew immediately in 1996, that not even an endless stream of Clinton scandals could make an electable candidate out of Bob Dole. Giving him the party nomination was akin to forfeiting the race at the starting gate. Plus, I never will agree with fencing ourselves in, in a failed effort to fence others out.
We have laws that simply need to be enforced with extreme prejudice.
Ron Paul is a pure constitutionalist, which I very much identify with. However, in his case, he fails to grasp the very real fact that the conditions present when the founders wrote that wondrous document, do not exist today. We no longer have the luxury of simply withdrawing from the world as if what happens in the world can’t reach us. And again, he has proven incapable of connecting with even a small following of his own party.
As a result, the RNC has not yet offered a single viable candidate for “conservative” voters smart enough to ask both what they stand for, and does it matter, can they win?
Both Hunter and Paul are long-term career politicians. As such, they have had many years to “make a difference” and not done so. Few Americans even have any idea who they are.
A true leader will not have any of these problems.
I remain committed to the belief that the peoples draftee, Fred Thompson, is the best hope of the Republican Party for 2008.
If he isn’t the right man, then we don’t have a man for 2008.
Define “globalist”?
Why do you suppose Hunter is not resonating with the people who agree with your statements here?
I know I am...
>Define globalist.<
Globalist: One who sees no value in sovereignty and borders, whose goal is not allegiance to one country, but to the entire world.
That’s my definition of a globalist. It takes the term beyond globalism, or worldwide alliances, which does not describe in full the specific goal of a globalist which is one world government.
I agree that immigration and terrorism are the two issues that will decide the 2008 election.
The problem with the immigration issue is that the interests of the Nation and the American people are not the interests of the politicians. They want to pander to the illegal immigrant crowd because they see that they and their legal immigrant brethern are the key to political power in the future. No politician wants to concede this future voting block to their opponents, and so they pander and ignore their other constituents thinking that they can keep them on the reservation. In this they are wrong, the Republcans have already revolted, and Blue Collar Democrat America will do so as well when they realize that they are going to be the ones that really pay the price for securing politicians careers.
The Republican plan for the war is to withdraw after demonstrating enough progress to be able to declare victory. The Democrat plan is to declare defeat and withdraw to make it so. Never have a plan that takes into account what the enemy intends to do: attack, attack, attack. I do disagree with Williams on his point that should a large scale attack on America occur before the election, the Republicans will get the blame. Why would Americans blame Republicans and support a party whose only plan is to cower in the corner and hope for the best. No, if we are attacked again, the American people will demand that our spineless politicians take the gloves off, and they will correctly conclude that the Democrats will never do this.
Apparently you haven’t had the privilege of hearing Hunter speak. And FYI, Hunter certainly can’t be classified as a “career politician”. (I believe he is in his third term).He has held many positions that had nothing to do with politics. (Read his resume.) He is also a Viet Namn veteran, and his son is presently on his second or third tour of duty in Iraq.
I’m guessing that you don’t live near the border, so the fence isn’t all that important to you. As a Texan, I can tell you that the fence is important to us! We are being inundated will illegals here. If we can make it harder for them to penetrate our borders, that would be a good thing.
I agree with your definition....
Too often, people use the term “globalist” as a smear against anyone who is not an “isolationist”, as if one must be one or the other.
There are at least two kinds of “globalists” as well, maybe three.
There is the post-cold-war “New World Order” type of globalist, that sees a need for only one leading world super-power, that being America.
There is the Marx/Lenin type of “One World Government” globalist, lead by the Clintons, followed by Obama and pretty much all liberals, under the reign of an all-powerful United Nations and NATO alliance.
Both types have members in the controversial Council on Foreign Relations, which is why both liberals and conservatives are found in that organization.
The third type of globalist might be the “Bush Globalist”, which buys into pieces of both opposing forces present in CFR.
In my personal assessment....
Bush, Giuliani, McCain, Brownback, Hagel, Tommy Thompson, Newt Gingrich and many other Republicans are type number three.
The Clinton’s, Obama, Kennedy, Durbin, Reid, Pelosi and pretty much all liberals are type number two.
Men like Hunter and F. Thompson are type number one. They understand that withdrawing from the world is not an option, but that the world depends upon a secure sovereign and strong America to lead the way.
Then men like Ron Paul or Pat Buchanan are simply isolationists. They fail to grasp that our nation no longer enjoys the conditions present when the founders established what was intended to be a very limited federal government.
“Why would Americans blame Republicans and support a party whose only plan is to cower in the corner and hope for the best.”
Why would Americans elect the most corrupt politicians in world history to clean up the “culture of corruption” in Washington DC, lead by their party brethren who have perfected the art of political corruption?
The American electorate is not working in reality. They are working in the fantasy world created for them by liberals in the press and Hollyweird...
I believe Hunter is in his 28th years on a politicians payroll. If that doesn’t make him a career politician, then there is no such thing as career polticians.
I have listened to Hunter and all others. I have looked closely at his as well as the other voting records. I am disturbed, like you, that he is not resonating with even conservative voters much less the broader electorate. But neither of us is responsible for that, nor can either of us change that.
Both belong to Hunter...
I live close enough to the border for my city to be overrun with illegal aliens.
We can make it impossible for them to cross the border any time we want, without building a fence. The problem is, we don’t want... So we’ll build a fence to pretend like we want.
I have great respect for Hunter the veteran and his son the soldier. We have millions of American just like them and I am proud of all of them. But that doesn’t make any of the national leaders...
LOL! Me thinks your macular degeneration has set in, Ole American.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.