Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

27% of Republicans Would Vote for Pro-Life Third Party Instead of Giuliani (Proof Rudy CAN'T Win)
Rasmussen Reports ^ | 10-4-07 | Rasmussen Reports

Posted on 10/04/2007 9:38:23 AM PDT by TitansAFC

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 551-586 next last
To: TitansAFC

Its pretty clear Hillary Clinton needs Rudy Guiliani to be the GOP nominee if she’s going to win come 08.

I know I won’t vote for him.


101 posted on 10/04/2007 10:28:26 AM PDT by Badeye (So much for the faux tri athlete)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKStarr
46-44 is a statistical tie, with 10% still outstanding. He very much could win.

Not according to the most current polls I've been seeing. Rudy doesn't have a chance against Hillary.

If he really cared about conservatism, he'd drop out. But of course, he doesn't care, since he is actually a liberal.

102 posted on 10/04/2007 10:29:19 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

Every party picks a candidate, but they also pick a platform at convention. GUARANTEED, stem cell research will be in the Dem’s, but voices like yours could keep it OUT of the GOP platform (which it will, maybe even denouncing stem cell, abortion, etc.).

That compromise brings you to the polls to vote AGAINST the sure-bet.


103 posted on 10/04/2007 10:29:39 AM PDT by davidlachnicht ("IF WE'RE ALL TO BE TARGETS, THEN WE ALL MUST BE SOLDIERS.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
I will hold my nose if I have to and save as many babies as possible. Not turn the government over to the evil left.

If the choice is between two pro abortion candidates for president, why would you make the choice that effectively destroys the prolife movement in the Republican Party? How will that save any babies?

104 posted on 10/04/2007 10:29:57 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Take the wheel, Fred.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
"...she will do much more damage to pro-life efforts, with, for instance, her Supreme Court nominees, than Rudy ever could."

I don't think that argument holds water since Republican presidents are responsible for Justices as bad or worse than Clinton's two choices. That's why many pro-lifers will feel free to vote 3rd party should Giuliani be the Republican nominee - they know it is 6 of one, half a dozen of the other, and Hillary will not lie to them to get their vote like Rudy has.

105 posted on 10/04/2007 10:30:31 AM PDT by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: penowa
It really is not worth all the lamentations, nobody is leaving anybody.

It’s a weird year, with no VP running, with war in two theaters, terrorist dangers at home, a potential 3rd and 4th term for Bill Clinton, universal healthcare, ect.

A very unique time.

106 posted on 10/04/2007 10:30:45 AM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: scarface367
There is a middle class. But there is no "middle ground" between liberty and servitude, between honesty and dishonesty. No gray.

As Rush Limbaugh has often had to explain to folks like you, there are only the Right and the Left, and everything in between are simply confused or cowards. That may well be a lot of folk, but when push comes to shove they don't want more confused or cowards to lead us. They want something only a person of integrity can deliver.

107 posted on 10/04/2007 10:31:06 AM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: penowa
actively promote conservatives starting at the local city council races, and watch them blossom. Except for few exceptions, most national candidates sart where everyone else starts, at the bottom.

However, after primaries and such, you really have only two choices during the general.

So, which way are you going to help carry the ball, right or left? Canot leave the field and also have an effect the the direction of the ball.

I am much happeir moving the ball a few inches to the right than a few yards to the left.

108 posted on 10/04/2007 10:31:35 AM PDT by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: davidlachnicht

Dude, you don’t get it.

If Rudy911 wins the nod, there is no point left to the GOP in 2008, none.

I don’t care about the platform of a party headed by Liberals. It is not relevant to me as a Conservative.


109 posted on 10/04/2007 10:31:51 AM PDT by TitansAFC ("My 80% enemy is not my 20% friend" -- Common Sense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom
Hillary would win in a landslide if that happens. If Christian Conservatives insist on this, they are ensuring 8 more years of the Clintons.

No allowing Hillary to win is the only way to have a chance a conservative President in four years. Giuliani would guarantee a liberal in the White House for eight years.

Worse, a Giuliani Presidency assures a shrinking Republican minority in Congress while a Hillary Presidency sets the stage for Republicans to retake Congress as soon as 2010.

110 posted on 10/04/2007 10:32:09 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: going hot

your post is totaly wrong you should refer to her as her Royal Thighness, shees get it right will ya. everything else is on the money, but some people just cant see past one issue. Say hello to President Hitlery.


111 posted on 10/04/2007 10:32:12 AM PDT by vin-one (REMEMBER the WTC !!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: joonbug

xactly


112 posted on 10/04/2007 10:32:41 AM PDT by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: penowa

So we are agreed: Hillary it is.


113 posted on 10/04/2007 10:32:46 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

I’ll only posting to you because your’s was the last as I waded through all 104 posts.

There sure is going to be a lot of cheering on FreeRepublic when Hillery gets elected.

But not from me. I’ll vote - not for the perfect candidate - but for the one that hits most of my important issues.


114 posted on 10/04/2007 10:34:01 AM PDT by PeteB570 (Guns, what real men want for Christmas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
Since 30 + 14 is only 44, it doesn't appear that Rudy can win even if there's no third party.

46 to 44 means Rudy can't win? 2 points behind over a year before the election means he can't win?

What are you smoking?

115 posted on 10/04/2007 10:34:06 AM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom
"She's banking on the Useful Idiots of the Republican Party to push her over the top. Looks like she outsmarted them again."

So, what you're saying is that someone who stands a PRINCIPLE is a stupid useful idiot? Lets say we hold our noses, and vote for Rudy. Then what do we have? A President that will want our guns, let gay marriages foster, and most importantly appoint liberals to the Supreme Court. Whats the difference????

I dont advocate "losing to win", but when the choices are a liberal for president and a liberal for president, maybe its better to vote your conscience and send a message to the GOP that they CAN NOT win the White House without their core base!!!! If Hillary is the winner of the spoils, so be it..... We seemed to do ok politically with Bill in office (Senate takeover, House expansion, etc), I think the backlash would be even more stark with Hillary in there. The Dems might not win the Senate back for 20 more years after 2010.

The GOP will keep pushing and pushing towards the center until its indistinguishable from the Dems. How does that make us the "winner"? We need to push the GOP the other way, to the right. We do that by showing that we actually have standards and actually have a line that we cant cross (2 or 3 lines in this case).

And we make fun of the blacks when they have a 90% buy in rate with the Dems, but we're being asked to do the same thing.

Sometimes you can lose the battle, but win the war, or win the battle and lose the war!!

116 posted on 10/04/2007 10:34:26 AM PDT by BallparkBoys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky

Your comments are wise and appreciated. However, we can not (or maybe we can) vote for a POTUS on ONE certain special issue. (not a Rudy supporter, just someone who wonders why there are so many ONE ISSUE Repubs)


117 posted on 10/04/2007 10:34:47 AM PDT by Moleman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC
If I were Soros, I would put some money into the pro-life/anti-Rudy campaign.

I would also pay a few professional trolls to post anti-Rudy stuff on FR too.

118 posted on 10/04/2007 10:35:46 AM PDT by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC
Count me in that 27%.

Memo to the GOP. Don't put me in a situation where I'm forced to choose between two anti-life, anti-family, anti-gun socialists.
119 posted on 10/04/2007 10:36:05 AM PDT by Antoninus (Republicans who support Rudy owe Bill Clinton an apology.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC
we should all stick to our core priniples in helping to elect stalwart supporters of conservative causes.

However, sitting out an election because the candidate is insufficiently conservative does nothing, absolutely nothinmg, to advance those same values. Rather, it guarantees just the opposite, further slide to the left. But you know that, or I hope you do. Do you?

120 posted on 10/04/2007 10:36:09 AM PDT by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

When the Third Party is mentioned, they neglect to mention who. Who is this as yet un-named candidate? Put a name on it or it doesn’t exist.


121 posted on 10/04/2007 10:36:35 AM PDT by RightWhale (50 years later we're still sitting on the ground)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom
"Do you honestly think Roe V. Wade will ever be reversed?"

No, I do not believe that Roe v. Wade will ever be reversed and have never said I did. BTW because Rudy is an unabashed baby killer is only one reason why I would never vote for him if he were running unopposed!

122 posted on 10/04/2007 10:38:13 AM PDT by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
It’s proof that a Pro-Life third party would be idiotic, not proof that Rudy can’t win.

I disagree. Even if 1/3rd of the deserting pro-lifers decide to stay home and not vote at all and the others held their nose and voted for Rudy, Rudy still loses.

When you have 46% in the Hillary camp (very believable), the others are carving up 54% of the electorate. That means just a 9% bleedout and the GOP surely loses. Consider some of the 9% will be independents, libertarians, Bloombergers, Green Party and other fringe groups, the GOP has a very small room for error and any candidate who drives away 1/5th of the party base, on ANY issue, is killing any chance of winning the election.

123 posted on 10/04/2007 10:38:13 AM PDT by Tall_Texan (No Third Term For Bill Clinton!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: going hot
Not gonna vote R, because the candidate is not conservative enough

Not going to vote R because R is a liberal and would effectively turn both parties into pro-abortion parties hostile to pro-life legislation.

And, you don't seem to grasp the fact that liberal Republicans are FAR more likely to get liberal legislation passed than a Democrat. Republicans would stop liberal legislation advanced by Hillary Clinton and do nothing to stop it if Giuliani was pushing it.

And, a Hillary Presidency if far more likely to result in a Republican majority in Congress than a Giuliani one, which guarantees Republican will remain in the minority for likely another decade.

From Christie Todd Whitman to Michael Bloomberg to Arnold Schwarzenegger, electing RINOs to office is a proven disaster.

124 posted on 10/04/2007 10:38:17 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
.There is no way that moron could win. If he is nominated the race is over and RATS win!

Exactly right IMHO. It's entirely possible that this next election will be decided in the primaries, and the November election will be just a pro forma exercise.

If any of the top rank GOP candidates other than Thompson is nominated there will be a falling away of some degree by social/religious conservatives that will seriously threaten the Republican nominee. But if Rudy is nominated, no matter who the Democrat nominee may be there will be an open revolt by religious right voters and the Democrat will win. With the electorate as evenly divided as it has been in the last two elections, the loss of even a small part of a significant voting bloc such as the social conservative wing of the GOP would mean losing the election.

I am repulsed by the very thought of Hillary in the White House again, but if the rapidly developing leftward slide of the Republican party is not stopped here and now we will in effect have a one party system within one or two more election cycles. There will still be two competing party labels and two separate organizations of course, but the philosophical dividing line will be so lightly drawn that it will be virtually invisible. I would rather suffer through another 4 long and painful years with a Clinton as president than to see that happen, therefore I will not vote for Rudy if the primary voters are stupid enough to nominate him.

125 posted on 10/04/2007 10:38:21 AM PDT by epow ("The best we can hope for the people is that they be suitably armed" Alexander Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

Now I really gotta call BS. If you’re willing to turn the country over to LIBs because of this issue, then you’re a LIB who is Pro-Life.


126 posted on 10/04/2007 10:38:38 AM PDT by davidlachnicht ("IF WE'RE ALL TO BE TARGETS, THEN WE ALL MUST BE SOLDIERS.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Dudoight
Here we go again. Conservative third party puts another Clinton in the White House. Smart move.

There's an easy way out of this. Make sure Rudy is trampled in the primaries.

Really, any Republican supporting Rudy is at fault for making such a nightmare scenario possible.

It's not like we haven't been warning you about this since last year....
127 posted on 10/04/2007 10:38:42 AM PDT by Antoninus (Republicans who support Rudy owe Bill Clinton an apology.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
there are only the Right and the Left, and everything in between are simply confused or cowards.

You are ignoring the political reality. There are a vast number of people that don't fit neatly into the left or right, for variety of reasons. Like it or not, that is the group that ultimately decides elections. That's not saying a conservative can't win, only that a conservative also needs moderate support to win.

128 posted on 10/04/2007 10:39:32 AM PDT by scarface367 (The problem is we have yet to find a cure for stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: joonbug

>>If Hillary wins, she will push the SCOTUS so far left that conservative social issues will be history for at least a generation. I would much rather take my chances with SCOTUS appointees from Rudy than from Hillary.<<

Of course you would, you’re rational.
If you look at RG’s judicial advisors, they’re all on the Right - Federalist Society types. If he gets two judicial appointments, the odds that at least one will vote to weaken or overturn Roe is very high. If Hillary is in, the odds of course are zero. (And, yes, there are other issues in this race besides abortion).

I’ve made this point over and over until I’m exhausted — what difference does it make what a candidate’s personal views on abortion are unless you just want to feel good?? It all comes down to judicial appointments. With Hillary you are dealing with a known commodity - she will appoint extreme leftists like Ginsburg who are rabidly pro-abortion as well as horrible on everything else. With RG, you are dealing with someone who is likely going to give you at least a moderate conservative, maybe better. In addition, he is pro-defense and pro-free market. How is this a difficult choice??


129 posted on 10/04/2007 10:40:07 AM PDT by NKStarr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Dudoight

“Here we go again. Conservative third party puts another Clinton in the White House.”

When did that happen before? Social conservatives did not vote for Perot, who was pro-abortion.


130 posted on 10/04/2007 10:41:47 AM PDT by upsdriver (DUNCAN HUNTER FOR PRESIDENT!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: HockeyPop
"Rudy will get the Christian right once he agrees to give them veto power over the selection of the next Sup Ct justice."

What planet are you living on? LOL! After he gets the undying affection and votes of the "Christian right" as you call them, he'll be endorsed by the NRA. ROFLOL! Whatever you're smoking, could you send me some?

131 posted on 10/04/2007 10:42:09 AM PDT by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: penowa

“I am a conservative and when the Republican party stops being the conservative party...”

So being “conservative” or a “conservative party” means total subjagation to a single issue? Being conservative means you subscribe to a certain positions on a wide range of issues, even though you may rate them in personal importance.

There are many issues that can make one a conservative, pro life one of them. Just because some, during this specific point in out history, elevate the issue of terrorism to a higher level than before on their radar does not mean your issue is any less important than theirs, but one has to balance competing issues and blend them into a strategy that can win at the ballot box or the enemy slips into positions of power and sets your entire movement back decades.

I understand the abortion issue is the most important to many people, and for good reason. But IMHO elevating it to the point where any and all other issues become funtionally irrelevant does not make one a “conservative”.

Conservatives judge and balance all issues before them and know the strategic importance of any one can vary depending on the realities of the political, social and economic scene at the time. IMO, those that aren’t willing to allow their most important issue to take a secondary position occasionally and for shoret periods of time when the political realities demand it are not conservatives, they are ideologues.


132 posted on 10/04/2007 10:42:26 AM PDT by Bob J (sis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: NKStarr; roses of sharon

So let me just clarify the “One issue” thing:

If, say, a candidate Conservative on 50% of the issues won the GOP nod, then revealed themselves to be rabidly anti-Israel and possibly outright anti-Semetic, you’d be all on board to stop Hitlery, right?


133 posted on 10/04/2007 10:43:55 AM PDT by TitansAFC ("My 80% enemy is not my 20% friend" -- Common Sense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Bob J
-—”There are many issues that can make one a conservative, pro life one of them.”-—

And there are many issues that make Rudy a Liberal, being rabidly Pro-abortion is just one of them.

134 posted on 10/04/2007 10:45:07 AM PDT by TitansAFC ("My 80% enemy is not my 20% friend" -- Common Sense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: upsdriver
Social conservatives did not vote for Perot

So what? So-called fiscal conservatives did.

Same principle.

135 posted on 10/04/2007 10:45:24 AM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

I wouldn’t put much stock into this poll for now. But come June 2008, if the poll shows the same result, then it would be significant. The Rooty Campaign may file lawsuits to boot any 3rd parties off the ballot that detract any potential votes from him.


136 posted on 10/04/2007 10:45:50 AM PDT by Kuksool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool
-—”The Rooty Campaign may file lawsuits to boot any 3rd parties off the ballot that detract any potential votes from him.”-—

I’ve no doubt that Rudy would try to sue his was into the Presidency. He’s sued just about everyone else.

But I’ll die trying to make the Third Party option available, if need be.

137 posted on 10/04/2007 10:47:57 AM PDT by TitansAFC ("My 80% enemy is not my 20% friend" -- Common Sense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
And, a Hillary Presidency if far more likely to result in a Republican majority in Congress than a Giuliani one, which guarantees Republican will remain in the minority for likely another decade.

And you know this to be a fact because...?

The republicans will suddenly grow a spine and fight her appointees?

The sitouts will suddenly sit in on the next election because all the congressional repubs will be forced to retire and new conservatives will take their place in droves??

Hillery will simply bask in the afterglow of her win and do nothing more to further her agenda??

No Judges will be appointed to the supreme court for eight years??

Gun confiscation will be placed on hold??

She will announce a prolife bill, and the congress will vote for it??

Just exactly what will be the motivation and the drive to suddenly change the congress (because after all the voting public will have seen the light that have yet to see)and become part of a colossal change of heart and start voting hard right??

DSo you think pubbies will pull the lever for Rudy, and yet pull the lever for dems further down, as opposed to dems pulling the lever for Hillery and voting R further down?/

Just exactly where is the guarantee?

138 posted on 10/04/2007 10:48:07 AM PDT by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody

>> 46-44 is a statistical tie, with 10% still outstanding. He very much could win.

Not according to the most current polls I’ve been seeing. Rudy doesn’t have a chance against Hillary.

If he really cared about conservatism, he’d drop out. But of course, he doesn’t care, since he is actually a liberal.<<

No, sorry. All polls are showing that he’s the strongest Republican candidate against Hillary. Using your logic, then every Republican would have to drop out.

If you really cared about conservatism, you’d at least be open to supporting the candidate most likely to defeat HC, instead of just ruling someone out who wasn’t perfect. At least let’s agree to support whoever we want in the primary and support whoever wins. My God, don’t consign this country to that woman for 8 years ...


139 posted on 10/04/2007 10:48:15 AM PDT by NKStarr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: myuhaul

If we have no one to get behind, Hillary wins. I fear there is too many on our side falling for the person the media throws down our throat. They tried McCain at the start now it is Rudy.


140 posted on 10/04/2007 10:48:49 AM PDT by bmwcyle (BOMB, BOMB, BOMB,.......BOMB, BOMB IRAN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC
OMG, I missed that one!

Which one has been lying about being pro-Israel?

Do you have a suspicion? Tell me, who?

141 posted on 10/04/2007 10:50:00 AM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Bob J

Sorry Bob, but the next President will get as many as 4 appointments to the S.C. and if it is Rudy or Hillary, the results will be identical: More living Constitution B.S.; making law from the bench; citing foreign law to overturn our Constitution; and Roe v. Wade on steroids set in cement.


142 posted on 10/04/2007 10:50:24 AM PDT by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

Which is why rudy simply cannot be the nominee.


143 posted on 10/04/2007 10:51:05 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: penowa

Does the “Dobson wing” of the Republican party work for you? Its all about the Supreme Court. Period!


144 posted on 10/04/2007 10:53:17 AM PDT by HockeyPop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

I agree with you Bainbridge.


145 posted on 10/04/2007 10:53:38 AM PDT by spyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

This is what many FReepers have been saying since around August, of 2006!

Good thing we can count on conservative Fred winning the GOP nomination.

A vote for Rooty, is a vote for liberalism.

Go Fred08!


146 posted on 10/04/2007 10:54:35 AM PDT by Reagan Man (Go Yankees !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: epow
It should have been clear months ago that the argument to which this thread has been devoted is pointless. The purpose of the post was to point out the strategic lunacy of nominating a candidate who will split the Republican coalition.

If you put your hand into the fire you will be burned. If you immerse yourself for hours with no source of air you will drown. If the Republican Party nominates a liberal candidate it will probably lose and Rudy is a liberal candidate.

These are facts of life. There’s no point in arguing about them. You can raise the specter of Hillary as President and promise an entire parade of horribles. It won’t make any difference. A large number of voters who might vote for a normal Republican won’t vote for Rudy and they are impervious to argument. He is therefore as weak as any candidate the Party is likely to choose. This is reality. You can turn you back on it if you chose, but if you do it will bite you in the butt.

147 posted on 10/04/2007 10:55:16 AM PDT by fluffdaddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
Actually, it’ll be thanks to liberal republicans who insist on imposing their liberalism on the GOP.

RINOist Liberalism has had its day with the Bush's. Time for a CHANGE. The Bush's must not have a single thing to do with our party's choice for the next president. The Bush stamp of approval on the party nominee is a signal for everybody to reject that putative nominee.

From what I have seen, Giuliani, McCain, Romney, Brownback, Huckabee and both F. and T. Thompson have been the Bush-backed favorites. Hence Bush's obvious displeasure with Romney, Giuliani when they distanced themselves from his flagrant Illegal Amnesty policies, and had his lap-dog , Mel Martinez chew them out.

This leaves only the three distinctly American (Non-CFR) candidates among the second-tier to choose from. Are we going to fish, or cut bait?

I echo what Steve Sabin said not long ago:

I am also increasingly feeling as though there is nothing conservative about the RNC in terms of actual practice. What used to be undergirding planks are now merely optional trim packages that can be removed if it will bring in more votes. The goal here is not to win offices “at any price” in terms of constantly middle-seeking ideology. When the party stands for just about everything, it stands for nothing. The fact that Giuliani is a front-runner is all the testimony I need that the party has lost its firm compass. Although it will always be a party to the right of the Democrats, it bothers me that instead of pulling the whole spectrum rightward, the whole spectrum is shifting leftward. Today’s Republican is largely 1960’s Democrat.

148 posted on 10/04/2007 10:55:34 AM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
Actually, it’ll be thanks to liberal republicans who insist on imposing their liberalism on the GOP.

RINOist Liberalism has had its day with the Bush's. Time for a CHANGE. The Bush's must not have a single thing to do with our party's choice for the next president. The Bush stamp of approval on the party nominee is a signal for everybody to reject that putative nominee.

From what I have seen, Giuliani, McCain, Romney, Brownback, Huckabee and both F. and T. Thompson have been the Bush-backed favorites. Hence Bush's obvious displeasure with Romney, Giuliani when they distanced themselves from his flagrant Illegal Amnesty policies, and had his lap-dog , Mel Martinez chew them out.

This leaves only the three distinctly American (Non-CFR) candidates among the second-tier to choose from. Are we going to fish, or cut bait?

I echo what Steve Sabin said not long ago:

I am also increasingly feeling as though there is nothing conservative about the RNC in terms of actual practice. What used to be undergirding planks are now merely optional trim packages that can be removed if it will bring in more votes. The goal here is not to win offices “at any price” in terms of constantly middle-seeking ideology. When the party stands for just about everything, it stands for nothing. The fact that Giuliani is a front-runner is all the testimony I need that the party has lost its firm compass. Although it will always be a party to the right of the Democrats, it bothers me that instead of pulling the whole spectrum rightward, the whole spectrum is shifting leftward. Today’s Republican is largely 1960’s Democrat.

149 posted on 10/04/2007 10:55:40 AM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

then you will get a worse one (HILLARY) by default


150 posted on 10/04/2007 10:56:50 AM PDT by ulm1 (GOPers who will not support the nominee, whoever it may be, GUARANTEE a HILLARY Presidency! Wake up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 551-586 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson