Posted on 12/25/2007 5:33:32 PM PST by Mobile Vulgus
Rudy, Mitt, Hunter, Huck, Thompson, McCain, all of them are Republicans.
Only two conservative Republicans are Hunter or Thompson.
That says more about the Republican party itself then it does about the candidates.
No kidding, me too!
I'm with Fred, but will vote to not allow another Clinton to govern!!
And a Merry Christmas to you too. Oh, and pass that on to Mr. McCain as well.
Hillary Clinton fatal flaw is that she is the most unlikable and meanest political candidate to run for President in decades and that is why she is not going to win the Presidency no matter how hard she, her husband and the media try.
Fred Thompson is by far the winner among conservative and republican political junkies, including Rush Limbaugh, because after detailed dissection of all candidates, they found out that from pure ideological point of view he is the most conservative. According to the political junkies he who is the purest must be the nominee. However all this does not matter, as long as Fred Thompson is not connecting with the regular voters, the non political junkies, then he is not going to win the nomination or anything else.
I know that many Fred Thompson followers on FR are not going to like it, some of them are great FReepers and good FRiends, but that is my analysis and I strongly believe it.
The problem is that good candidates like Duncan Hunter
are not even known to the general public.
The MSM/DNC have chosen the RINOs again.
They will send their troops out to fix the polls and maybe
even some of the primaries.
I dont know what Romney is, but he mutates.
One month he praises Hillary, and another months he
gets HER HillaryCARE=RomneyCARE1 installed.
She could not do that.
Romney is, in the world of politicians, a Massachusetts Republican. New England Republican politicians, even “conservative” ones there, are, by the standards of the rest of the country, moderate to liberal Democrats.
Certainly in the South, most local Democrats would be more conservative on most issues than Mitt Romney.
Duncan Hunter fit my earlier analysis even more so the Thompson, he is the most pure ideologically but he did not connect with the non political junkies.
“Certainly in the South, most local Democrats would be more conservative on most issues than Mitt Romney.” You know the South well! And still they elect democrats who say one thing to get elected then do as they are told when they reach DC. It’s the “D” following the name that blinds Southern Democrat voters.
“We’re short of Republicans this year”
Depends on what it means to be a Republican. I know what it used to mean, but it’s been quite a while since that was was relevant.
Of course, this takes this thread into dangerous territory - this is where folks start telling conservatives “a vote for _______ (insert actual conservative GOP candidate name here) is really a vote for Hillary”
Which then degrades to “Do you want to vote on principle, or do you want to win”
Which can lead to: “Well, at least RINO candidate A is not as bad as Dem candidate B”
Which invariably leads to “Because of YOU (finger pointed in chest of conservative voter) the GOP is going to lose....you are a traitor and a socialist - (or worse)”
Republican used to mean you had at least bedrock principles, from which you were loathe to deviate. Now it means big government & big spending, among other things.
I think Romney fits quite well in a GOP headed by the present crop of Republican party leaders, including GWB.
So, it really depends on what the meaning of “Republican” is.....
See the Romney Fairy Tale at www.artlaction.com!
That’s the worst smear of Ronald Reagan I’ve ever seen.
Problem with RINOs in the White House, too many soft-headed Republicans and RINOs in Congress will go along with the RINO Pres. If Hildabeast is Prez, these same Congressmen (the terms includes Representatives and Senators, BTW) would oppose her.
Therefore, it is my contention that a DemocRAT Prez is less hazardous to this country than a RINO Prez.
Fred is likeable. He comes over very well when you watch him. He was a popular actor for the same reason.
The problem is whether he can make himself known to the voters when so many others are getting the headlines and the media is burying him.
If he were running one-on one, I don’t think he’d have any problem having people like or instinctively trust him. But as long as there are whole packs of Dems and Republicans, it’s fairly simple for the media to bury him.
So, we’ll see if he can break through that or not.
You have nothing to distinguish you from democrats in the next election.
that’s what happened in California
says I
I will vote for the GOP nominee.
And, of course, you have documentation for everything you stated...right?
You are utterly wrong in the main particular that Reagan had a REAL and MEASURABLE drift from centrist Democrat to conservative Republican. Romney flips and flops every day of the week and has shown NO drift right but a sudden slam to the right conveniently just before the 2008 elections.
Where Reagan shows a steady ideological movement, Romney is a merely a LIAR.
So, your attempt to smooth the waters for Romney by attacking Reagan makes you uninformed, anti-conservative, and it makes me wonder why you come here!?
No. Some local dems would be more conservative on some issues.
The liberal MSM must be laughing their asses off. LOL
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.