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 1-50 ... 351-400401-450451-500 ... 551-586 next last
To: Designer; TitansAFC
However, if you look at it from a different angle, namely; put pressure on the Republican leadership to dump Rudy and any other pro-death candidate, then everybody wins!

I like the way you put this.

TitansAFC, maybe that should be the "Dump Rudy" ping list. ;-)

401 posted on 10/04/2007 6:56:48 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC
OK, I looked back, it appears you were posting to NKStarr and not me.

But to your dramatic post, I think that since we are at war in two theaters, most Republicans and Conservatives would for sure vote for a candidate that has the temperament, tone, attitude, a certain ruthlessness, and foreign policy ideas to fight our enemies abroad, being that we have boots on the ground right now, at this moment.

And that in no way comes close the Hillary and Bill Clinton, and does reflect whomever of our viable candidates is nominated.

A serious, mature, and rational voter, (which most Conservatives are), will not just ask who they are voting for, but also ask who they will ELECT.

So, obviously I’m sticking with the good guys, lol, and not participating in the election of a antiamerican party member, ie, Dimocrats like Hill and Bill.

402 posted on 10/04/2007 6:58:40 PM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 380 | View Replies]

To: Designer

Bullhockey.

I will vote for the republican nominee no matter who it is. And the tactics that the anti Rudy people are using sicken me. If the alternative weren’t Hillary Clinton I would quit the republican party, quit voting and say to hell with all of you.

I will put no pressure on the republican leadership in the name of you loonies!


403 posted on 10/04/2007 6:58:50 PM PDT by cajungirl (no)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]

To: Designer

Track back to the original question at #133—it was a hypothetical to try to prove a point (one that the intended respondent wouldn’t answer)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1906547/posts?page=133#133


404 posted on 10/04/2007 7:00:01 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: Bob J
Reagan won because Anderson split the dem vote with Carter.

Is it just me or have IQ's on FR dropped precipitously?

Not true, Reagan got over 50% of the vote.....even with Anderson not being in the race Reagan wins.

I remember this and I was just in Jr. high. You might want to go and find a site that has the old numbers.

405 posted on 10/04/2007 7:03:07 PM PDT by Lady Heron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: All

Bottom line is we have to ALL vote for the one who will beat Klinton or else we can kiss this country good by.That’s the whole story for me . As horrible as abortion is even worse will be Klinton in the White House . t will indirectly cause more deaths than one can imagine ( Islamic attacks , Iraq killing fields ect.)PLUS all the abortions will continue.Th esupreme court will decide abortion not the president wo is elected.


406 posted on 10/04/2007 7:03:17 PM PDT by sonic109
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl; stockstrader

Loonies?

People that want a pro-freedom, pro-gun, pro-life, pro-traditional marriage President who doesn’t have a record of abusing the Constitution and appointing liberals to the courts and corrupt cronies to their administration are “Loonies”?


407 posted on 10/04/2007 7:03:17 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
"I like the way you put this."

Thank you!

408 posted on 10/04/2007 7:04:27 PM PDT by Designer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 401 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
"I will put no pressure on the republican leadership.."

O.K., just let them pressure you instead.

409 posted on 10/04/2007 7:08:35 PM PDT by Designer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
...liberalism had advanced more under George W. Bush than it ever did under Bill Clinton...

Who did Bill Clinton nominate to the SC and who did Bush nominate? Are you saying you'd rather have Clinton than Bush if you were able to choose between the two???

410 posted on 10/04/2007 7:09:22 PM PDT by Proudcongal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
"..it was a hypothetical.."

Oh, I see now. Thanks.

411 posted on 10/04/2007 7:10:29 PM PDT by Designer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

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

What an assinine statement. There are a great many of us “moral” conservatives that absolutely will not vote for Rudy the Rumpranger in a general election...even against Senator Clinton....We just don’t see the significant difference.

Bottom line....AND GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD....a vote for Guiliani is a vote for the destruction of the Republican party. The “moral voters” (the party’s base) will not vote for Rudolph...EVER. With the base of the party ready to stay home or vote third party if Rudy is the republican candidate.....he has NO chance of winning in a general election. If one wants to maintain the coalition that is the Republican Party, then Guiliani must go.


412 posted on 10/04/2007 7:16:19 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sonic109
"Th esupreme court will decide abortion not the president wo is elected."

See, now there's another thing. I get so tired of seeing this bogus statement.

FYI: Congress has the power to limit the Court's jurisdiction in this matter as well as any other specific area of the law.

Congress could, if it would, simply remove that hot-button issue from the federal courts. Then of course, it would remain for the state courts to rule on each state's own laws.

Now that we all know were the real responsibility lies, we can all go convince our Congressman and Senators to do the right thing.

No President needed.

No "test case" needed.

No majority on the Supreme court needed.

Just some backbone, guts, and huevos in Congress.

413 posted on 10/04/2007 7:20:08 PM PDT by Designer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | View Replies]

To: ulm1

“PROOF that 27% of Republicans are IDIOTS”

No, it’s proof that 27% of Republicans have taken a principled stand. Those of you that keep backing Guiliani are just plain ole prideful fools.

The fact that Guiliani could have progressed this far indicates that maybe it really is time to start a more trully conservative new party. Personnally, I’m sick to my soul of “Goldwater Republicans.”


414 posted on 10/04/2007 7:23:28 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom

NOW is the time to change that which we can.


415 posted on 10/04/2007 7:26:49 PM PDT by Grunthor (I'd be Catholic but I don't speak latin and don't wanna learn just to go to church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 368 | View Replies]

To: vin-one

“Can you say hello President Clinton. thanks to the 27% of Christians who would rather have a communist dictator, than Rudy.”

How utterly dense can someone be. Rudy is a homophile, a gungrabber, and worse a baby killer. He ran NYC like a dictatorship. So, what is the significant difference between him and Mrs. Clinton? They are both bad news. No lesser evil here at all. Keep hurling insults at principled Christian voters and you just further the rift in the party. IF the party is SO important, then ditch Rudy. Without the base, he cannot win.


416 posted on 10/04/2007 7:28:00 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

Sorry if this has been asked, but who might this third-party candidate be? Any ideas. Otherwise, it’s kind of silly to speculate on all this. It’s unlikely a conservative Republican is going to leave the party just to make a point in the election, assuring a Hillary victory. Of course, Rudy will probably choose a pro-life running mate.


417 posted on 10/04/2007 7:29:24 PM PDT by Proudcongal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

“Rudy will have this nomination locked up by Feb...”

Then Mrs. Clinton will be sure to be elected in November 2008. The Republican party will lose 1/3 of the real stalwarts and it will cease to be viable.


418 posted on 10/04/2007 7:32:09 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: bassmaner

“Think Rudy will be bad? Consider the alternative. I rest my case.”

No dice, I won’t vote for that vile person. His presidency will be no better than a Clinton one.

IF you really cared about the country, you would TELL RUDY NOT TO RUN. Plus, you wouldn’t vote for him either.

The battle lines are drawn and they a getting more set. A vote for Rudy is a vote for Hillary to be president....plain fact.


419 posted on 10/04/2007 7:38:38 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas
No dice, I won’t vote for that vile person. His presidency will be no better than a Clinton one.

You rabidly anti-Rudy types keep spouting this nonsense yet it has no basis with reality. You are so overcome with Rudy Derangement Syndrome that you're showing no better rationality than the far left.

In case you are unable to grasp the difference, just look at Rudy's foreign policy views vs. Hillary's and think about the difference in judicial picks.

420 posted on 10/04/2007 7:46:35 PM PDT by scarface367 (The problem is we have yet to find a cure for stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

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

Do that math. 46 is still greater than 44.


421 posted on 10/04/2007 7:50:04 PM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas
Funny, isn’t it, that nobody ever responds directly to the point that all this argument about whether conservatives should vote for Rudy is beside the point. If Giuliani is the nominee the Republican Party will fracture and defeat is almost guaranteed. Barring a total implosion of the Democrat Party, Rudy = electoral disaster.

Arguing that people who loathe the man should turn out in force and vote for him anyway merely to avoid a Clinton restoration is like standing on the beach and cajoling the tide to refrain from coming in. It is a waste of breath, or in this case bandwidth.

Conservatives need to stop squabbling about how best to deal with the catastrophe of a Guiliani nomination and start working together to avoid that catastrophe.

422 posted on 10/04/2007 7:51:48 PM PDT by fluffdaddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 418 | View Replies]

Comment #423 Removed by Moderator

To: Paul Ross
I think you are really rather pompous. Who do you seriously think has a chance of beating Hillary
Tom Tancredo? Mike Huckaby?
or perhaps Alan Keyes. Do you honestly think that a third party could win? Has it ever done anything other than give us, hmm, let’s see Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton?
No, I will not support a third party candidate./> And by the way I consider it a supreme insult that you sneeringly question whether or not I maintain my beliefs. I have not done that to anyone- I simply disagree with your assessment of the best strategy. But you choose to slander me.Save your effort, I will not reply to you again.
424 posted on 10/04/2007 8:02:09 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
Watch out: you will be accused of being a troll. Or perhaps you have just given up your beliefs so that you could hang with the “ Country club Republicans”. I guess we have a list here of who we can thank if it is a close election between the only 2 real candidates, you know “D” and “R”.
425 posted on 10/04/2007 8:05:00 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom

I have two words for you - WAKE UP! Sorry if I frighten you, but maybe that’s what you need to come out of your deep slumber and see what is going on and where we’re headed.


426 posted on 10/04/2007 8:34:31 PM PDT by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

I no longer listen and take direction from the phony Republican elites like Blankley, Barnes, Krauthammer, etc. If you want to march to their tune instead of thinking for yourself, that’s up to you.


427 posted on 10/04/2007 8:38:26 PM PDT by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 354 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

We played that game out here in California with Arnold and have been sorely disappointed. In hindsight, I wished I’d voted my heart for McClintock and risked the valley that Cruz Bustamante would have given us. Now it’s a slow death and the GOP in California will never survive. I will not vote for Rudy. More babies will be saved in the long term if the people are so sickened by a Hillary presidency that they will never vote Democrat or a RINO again.


428 posted on 10/04/2007 8:38:39 PM PDT by Rockitz (This isn't rocket science- Follow the money and you'll find the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Dr. Paul promised his wife of 50 years that he would not run as a 3rd party or independent candidate

That's touching. Really. He's running anyway.

I'll ping you when it happens.

429 posted on 10/04/2007 8:41:21 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (We didn't "win" the Cold War. We had a half-time lead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies]

To: scarface367

“Rudy Derangement Syndrome” = Voters who Refuse to Vote for Liberals of any Party!


430 posted on 10/04/2007 8:48:01 PM PDT by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 420 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook
Vote Third. It's the only way to be stand up and be counted.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That was funny, you made laugh!

  Presidential
Candidate
Vice Presidential
Candidate
Political
Party
Popular Vote Electoral Vote
B George W. Bush Richard Cheney Republican 62,040,610 50.73% 286 53.16%
R John Kerry John Edwards Democratic 59,028,439 48.27% 251 46.65%
G Ralph Nader Peter Camejo Independent 463,655 0.38% 0 0.00%
Y Michael Badnarik Richard Campagna Libertarian 397,265 0.32% 0 0.00%
Y Michael Peroutka Charles Baldwin Constitution 144,499 0.12% 0 0.00%
Y David Cobb Pat LaMarche Green 119,859 0.10% 0 0.00%
Y Write-ins - - 36,585 0.03% 0 0.00%
Y Leonard Peltier Janice Jordan Peace & Freedom 27,607 0.02% 0 0.00%
Y Walt Brown Mary Alice Herbert Socialist 10,822 0.01% 0 0.00%
Y Roger Calero Arrin Hawkins Socialist Workers 10,795 0.01% 0 0.00%
Y None of these Candidates - - 3,688 0.00% 0 0.00%
Y Thomas Harens Jennifer Ryan Christian Freedom 2,387 0.00% 0 0.00%
Y Gene Amondson Leroy Pletten Concerns of People 1,944 0.00% 0 0.00%
Y Bill Van Auken Jim Lawrence Socialist Equality 1,857 0.00% 0 0.00%
Y John Parker Teresa Gutierrez Workers World 1,646 0.00% 0 0.00%
Y Charles Jay Marilyn Taylor Personal Choice 946 0.00% 0 0.00%
Y Stanford Andress Irene Deasy Independent 804 0.00% 0 0.00%
Y Earl Dodge Howard Lydick Prohibition 140 0.00% 0 0.00%
Seal

431 posted on 10/04/2007 9:03:22 PM PDT by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: Proudcongal
There is no difference in the judges we're going to get from Clinton or Giuliani. Giuliani appointed liberal judges by an 8-1 margins in New York. He would be dealing with a Democratic Senate who would have veto power over any nominee he chooses. Given that, there is no chance Giuliani will do anything but give the Democrats a nominee they find acceptable, which would be a liberal justices

The only way to get conservative judges on the court is to nomination a conservative President that has a desire to appoint conservative justices to the courts.

432 posted on 10/04/2007 9:13:28 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 410 | View Replies]

To: fluffdaddy
These are facts of life. There’s no point in arguing about them.

Are you sure you addressed your reply to the right poster? I didn't intend to argue with anyone, and I thought I made it quite clear where I stand on Rudy being nominated.

If I didn't let me try again. In short, I think it would mean Hillary as our next president, and that would be an unmitigated disaster for both the Republican party and the nation. Furthermore, if by some miracle Rudy were to win the general election it would be a somewhat less complete but still significant disaster for the US, all conservative Americans, and the future viability of the GOP. Is that clear enough?

433 posted on 10/04/2007 9:25:58 PM PDT by epow ("The best we can hope for the people is that they be suitably armed" Alexander Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
And the tactics that the anti Rudy people are using sicken me.

The lack of principle and stupidity of the pro-Rudy people makes me sick.

Liberal Republicans do far more harm then liberal Democrats.

434 posted on 10/04/2007 9:30:41 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: penowa

Well simple reality is the next president will be from one of the two parties. This is the real world, so not voting for either means you end up with the greater of two evils.


435 posted on 10/04/2007 9:44:43 PM PDT by scarface367 (The problem is we have yet to find a cure for stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 430 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

another 50% won’t vote for Giulianni because he wants open borders and doesn’t think an ILLEGAL ALIEN broke the law by crossing the border.


436 posted on 10/04/2007 9:46:57 PM PDT by television is just wrong (deport all illegal aliens NOW. Put all AMERICANS TO WORK FIRST. END Welfare)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
Loonies? A loony is a 'so-called' Republican that is willing to compromise traditional values and principles to support a LIBERAL who epitomizes the EXACT OPPOSITE of the long-held, traditional, core, bedrock values and principles held by conservatives.

Only a 'looney' would toss the traditional conservative base 'under the bus' to support a liberal. Go figure.

437 posted on 10/04/2007 10:48:10 PM PDT by stockstrader (We need a conservative who will ENERGIZE the Party, not a liberal who will DEMORALIZE it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: Man50D
So then how exactly does sitting on my hands and not voting for a less than ideal Republican nominee, thereby helping to elect a radical socialist Democrat, help anything?
438 posted on 10/05/2007 5:54:04 AM PDT by joonbug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 369 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
That would be better advice for Ron Paul or one of the other asterixes.

Actually, I'd like to see both Ronnie and Rudy out of the race.

439 posted on 10/05/2007 6:09:14 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

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

I agree with you. A third party is a waste of money, and a spoiler for the Republican party."

Anyway there is no such thing as a perfect candidate.... I wish Dr. Dobson and other religious conservatives would come to their senses....If not, they'll only help get Hillary elected. And that would certainly be worse than if either Guliani or Thompson is elected.

440 posted on 10/05/2007 6:12:31 AM PDT by Auntie Toots (The GOP is still the best we've got.....AND THAT USED TO BE THE TRUTH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: penowa
So, Let me see if I understand. If I happen to agree with someone who happens to write something down I am taking “marching orders “ from them. Secondly, You yourself actually used to take directions from the sort of people you listed but have since stopped doing so?
How about this: You wrote down that I want to march to the tune of 3 commentators and the implication is that I should not do so.. So perhaps I should agree with and thus taking “marching orders “ from you!
441 posted on 10/05/2007 6:58:21 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies]

To: All
so 27% are so in love with the idea of Hillary appointing supreme court judges, silencing talk radio and imposing her will on the American people that they would cast a meaningless vote for a candidate that would have no chance.

welcome to bizzaro world.

442 posted on 10/05/2007 7:01:52 AM PDT by newnhdad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joonbug
So then how exactly does sitting on my hands and not voting for a less than ideal Republican nominee, thereby helping to elect a radical socialist Democrat, help anything?

Wrong question. The correct question is how would voting for a GOP socialist over a Democrat socialist prevent the country from going further down the path of socialism?
443 posted on 10/05/2007 7:04:54 AM PDT by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 438 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz
I appreciate your civil tone.
I do not like Schwartzeneger and knew he was just a Kennedy with a bit more gumption than some kind of saviour.
However, I do not agree with the “ game “ you are planning to play.
That is right. You too are employing a tactic, logical behavior in politics as it is essentially a bloodless war,
You, however, are counting on something that I do not believe is necesarily true.
You think that by letting the evil show itself the bright light of reality will so horrify, that the result will be a resurgence of the good. I am not so convinced that that will happen. I am more pessimistic about the confluence of markers that indicate we are in wholesale collapse as a moral people. I believe in triage so that we might, that is key here, might be able to someday turn this around.
444 posted on 10/05/2007 7:08:43 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 428 | View Replies]

To: scarface367

“In case you are unable to grasp the difference, just look at Rudy’s foreign policy views vs. Hillary’s and think about the difference in judicial picks.”

NO STUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCE. Rudy WILL NOT appoint judges that will be pro-life, anti-homosexual, or 2nd Ammendment upholding. Rudy doesn’t have the experience to dictate foreign policy.

STOP BEING OBTUSE AND LISTEN.....Preception is everything. Rudy the RumpRanger is perceived (and I believe rightfully) wrong. Your sad adherence to this Damnable Big City Yankee is going to destroy the party. IF you don’t want the RNC to continue to exist...then support G, if you want to see Hillary win in a general election, then support G.

I WILL NOT VOTE FOR THIS MAN....EVER!


445 posted on 10/05/2007 7:20:47 AM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 420 | View Replies]

To: fluffdaddy

“Conservatives need to stop squabbling about how best to deal with the catastrophe of a Guiliani nomination and start working together to avoid that catastrophe.”

I agree, but it is apparent to me that the Republican Party is already fractured. Senator Thompson COULD be a uniting force, but he (although I admire a person of principle) is too mired in being a “federalist” when there our instances where it just won’t work (i.e. homosexual marraige).


446 posted on 10/05/2007 7:24:58 AM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 422 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

Then you must have voted for Lester Maddox for President in 1976, right? He was the American Party nominee.


447 posted on 10/05/2007 7:32:25 AM PDT by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sageb1

That’s right, Laura Welch was a McGovern supporter in 1972. B. Clinton was McGovern’s TX campaighn manager. I get the drift.


448 posted on 10/05/2007 7:34:45 AM PDT by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Proudcongal
-—”Sorry if this has been asked, but who might this third-party candidate be? Any ideas. Otherwise, it’s kind of silly to speculate on all this. It’s unlikely a conservative Republican is going to leave the party just to make a point in the election, assuring a Hillary victory. Of course, Rudy will probably choose a Pro-life running mate.”-—

First, A Pro-Life Veep means little to nothing under an Abortion Rights Activist President. What if Hillary chose a Pro-Life veep? Would she suddenly consolidate the Pro-Life vote behind her?

Second, Alan Keyes has all but said he’d run. Alan Keyes, amid constant ridicule from the left and the GOP “Party folks” garnered almost 1.5 MILLION votes in just the state of Illinois, running against the unbeatable Barrack Obama - who enjoyed a near 90% approval rating after his DNC speech.

And that’s just Alan Keyes - we don’t even know if the Third Party guy would be more popular. IT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Besides, folks like me will give all that we have to make a Third Party run happen if we have to choose between Rudy911 and Hitlery.

Third, as far as nobody wanting to leave to make a point - think Bob Smith, Pat Buchanan, et al. Buchanan took enough votes from Bush that Florida became the recount capital of the world. Every single statistical model showed that without Pat in the race, Bush wouldn’t have needed Florida because of the other states he would have won.

449 posted on 10/05/2007 7:35:53 AM PDT by TitansAFC ("My 80% enemy is not my 20% friend" -- Common Sense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies]

To: newnhdad
American people that they would cast a meaningless vote for a candidate that would have no chance.

There are also people who would vote for a GOP socialist under the misguided impression it is preferable to voting for a Democrat socialist.
450 posted on 10/05/2007 7:37:19 AM PDT by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 442 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 351-400401-450451-500 ... 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