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 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 581-586 next last
To: MEGoody
If Rudy had any class, he'd drop out of the race.

That would be better advice for Ron Paul or one of the other asterixes.


341 posted on 10/04/2007 2:46:54 PM PDT by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC
It's not just the Christian vote. Some of these are also the gun folk.

Enough said. Rudith is a sure loser.

A vote for Rudith is a vote for Hitlery. It's that simple.
342 posted on 10/04/2007 2:47:51 PM PDT by George W. Bush (Apres moi, le deluge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
My vote on principle means that I refuse the accept the quasi-socialist status quo that Rudy-toots is pushing, and the subsequent demise of the GOP.

And what exactly will your vote on principle accomplish? Do you really think Republicans will want anything to do with those that acted like petulant children and allowed Hillary to win? I am one Republican that will have nothing to do with them if it happens.

343 posted on 10/04/2007 2:49:42 PM PDT by scarface367 (The problem is we have yet to find a cure for stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies]

To: Man50D
LOL, I know the difference between Hillary and Bill Clinton and RG, as do most if not all, Republicans and Conservatives.
344 posted on 10/04/2007 2:55:05 PM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

To: scarface367; Extremely Extreme Extremist
Do you really think Republicans will want anything to do with those that acted like petulant children and allowed Hillary to win?

The Republicans haven't wanted anything to do with Conservatives, who you term as petulant children, for many years.

I am one Republican that will have nothing to do with them if it happens.

Then you will have nothing to do with Conservatives. It only illustrates the fact the GOP is becoming increasingly socialist and therefore aligning itself with the socialist Democrats. In the end you will have the very type of person in the White House you oppose.
345 posted on 10/04/2007 2:58:37 PM PDT by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

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

Actually it’s proof of both. Welcome to hell.

346 posted on 10/04/2007 3:01:33 PM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: scarface367
I am one Republican that will have nothing to do with them if it happens.

You will not be deciding things. If the GOP sees that they can't win without the values voters, they will do what they did in 1994, shift their policies to attract the disaffected voters. It is not like they have ny principles to stop them from doing this. If you don't like it, you can go start a new party in 2010.

347 posted on 10/04/2007 3:06:40 PM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla (IF TREASON IS THE QUESTION, THEN MOVEON.ORG IS THE ANSWER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: italianquaker
“As I keep saying the inadequate republican candidates will be the reason hillary can win.”

I disagree. I think almost any of the Republicans could beat Hildabeast if Bush had not done so much to disappoint and demoralize Republicans during the last four years. Now we can’t trust any of the candidates because the GOP has behaved as bad or worse than the Democrats in some cases.

348 posted on 10/04/2007 3:08:20 PM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Man50D
“The GOP should be focusing on putting out the fire by eliminating socialists from the party”

Won’t happen. Like entropy, the size of government will continue to increase. And in turn a greater quest for power. I’d love to see a real conservative in the White House but it’s not likely to happen. So I can wish for what won’t happen or make the best choice of available options.

Government grew under Reagan and I wouldn’t describe him as a socialist...

349 posted on 10/04/2007 3:08:23 PM PDT by joonbug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
The only way to throw a monkey wrench into this plot is to nominate anyone but Rudy.

My biggest problem with Rudy is not that he's pro-abortion. Though I don't like it. I can even buy into his federalism explanation of being a gun grabber and pro-gay marriage. Though I don't like it.

My biggest problem is that he is held out as the only alternative to beat the witch. And he's ducked running against her twice for the relatively low office of New York's junior senator. If he wouldn't take her on when the Republican nomination was his for the asking, why should we take him seriously now?

350 posted on 10/04/2007 3:11:33 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Are there any men left in Washington? Or are there only cowards? Ahmad Shah Massoud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

>>Actually his version of free trade differs from the current Administration and the Xlinton’s rather dramatically. The Bush’s while trying to claim they are merely following in his footsteps, would, if he was still available to commment, condemn hims as merely a fair trader, because he explicitly declared that our being open, while the other side wasn’t, or cheated...was not free trade. He also never believed in an international organization to decide our trade disputes...abdicating our rights to the WTO. This also has become a lynchpin of the last two administrations. Note, we have never formally executed a Treaty to become a part of this. This was merely done by legislation enacting the “Agreement” of NAFTA, appended as an 8-page addendum thereto. Congress cannot by simple legislation elevate something to Treaty status, and usurp our own Constitutionally-structured system so cavalierly. And it cannot also enact excess delegations of authority to the executive branch of functions fundamentally reserved to it alone.<<

I’m old enough to remember the speech that Reagan gave that kicked off his 1980 campaign - he devoted a great deal of time to something he called “a North American accord”, which became the precursor to NAFTA. Whether this means that he would have endorsed NAFTA, etc. in its current form obviously we don’t know, but I suspect that he would have concluded that the benefits of low tariffs are worth the price of having these cumbersome agreements. I agree with Milton Friedman - we don’t need any agreement to lower tariffs, we can do so unilaterally.


351 posted on 10/04/2007 3:11:37 PM PDT by NKStarr (GAN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: Man50D
"The Republicans haven't wanted anything to do with Conservatives, who you term as petulant children, for many years. "

Amen. Voting for Giuliani will only encourage the propagation of more RINOs. Don't waste your principles with a vote for Giuliiani. Vote Third. It's the only way to be stand up and be counted.

352 posted on 10/04/2007 3:12:26 PM PDT by ex-snook ("But above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

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

It was the last time. It ushered in the first truly conservative congress we have had during our lifetimes and created the first budget surplus ever. Republican control since has ruined all that.

353 posted on 10/04/2007 3:14:32 PM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: penowa
Try reading Tony Blankley’s column in yesterday’s Washington TImes. He expresses my sentiments quickly and cogently.
354 posted on 10/04/2007 3:51:52 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
No, He is probably my last choice in the current field.However, I am not a fool.
You will be responsible for the wicked woman from aArkansas as she nominates abortionist hompohile Supreme court judges. You will hand her the pen to sign all of the executive orders that circumvent the American people’s wishes. She will pack every single post here in D.C. You are a fool.
355 posted on 10/04/2007 3:54:56 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
oh, I get it.
Let us have a new, Morally superior party that promotes all of the things I believe in. And then when Hilary takes over talk radio and makes your taxes subsidize the late term abortions that her Supreme court nominees uphold and the “partnership “ benefits for the sodomites you can take full credit for not having voted for Giuliani but for actually effectively voting for HIllary.
No thanks.
356 posted on 10/04/2007 3:58:01 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan
Because one is more strident and had absolutely no limit. The other is less so. That simple.
357 posted on 10/04/2007 3:59:19 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: spyone
I thank you. I apparently struck a nerve. The Righteous 29% are treating me like I am Hillary. It is ironic. I am as hard core as they are - just not so out of touch with reality.
358 posted on 10/04/2007 4:01:08 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
Because one is more strident and had absolutely no limit. The other is less so. That simple.

Your "less strident one" will appoint people to the RNC and it's powerful committees -- liberal country club Republicans. Your "less strident one" will result in the prolife plank being stripped from the party platform -- effectively killing the GOP in future national elections.

359 posted on 10/04/2007 4:03:17 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Take the wheel, Fred.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

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

it’s ‘proof’ that some ‘pro-lifers’ are not pro-life. Else they wouldn’t put Hillary Clinton in charge of the future of the Supreme Court.


360 posted on 10/04/2007 4:03:21 PM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 581-586 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