Skip to comments.
Six candidates to participate in historic 2008 S.C. GOP Presidential Candidates Debate (No Hunter)
SC GOP ^
| 1/9/08
| Staff
Posted on 01/09/2008 11:47:11 AM PST by pissant
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160, 161-180, 181-200 ... 281-298 next last
To: Marak
"It surely is coming. One way to ensure a Democrat victory in the Presidential election is to promote the most liberal of primary candidates on the Republican side. This will drive the conservatives away from the ballot boxes in November. That is exactly what the press has been doing, and the comments on FreeRepublic show that it is indeed working. There are so many people on this forum willing to shed their beliefs for the god of electability, but theirs is a false hope. Come November there will be angry debates here on FreeRepublic over why conservatives won't vote for the liberal Republican candidate. The people screaming the loudest will the very same people who are now pushing those liberal candidates down our throats. As is often said here, "elections have consequences", and that includes primaries. Promote a liberal in the primaries today, and we will elect a liberal in November. What will make them angry is that it won't be 'their' liberal who gets elected."
You nailed it.
161
posted on
01/09/2008 1:34:28 PM PST
by
AuntB
(" DON'T LET THE PRESS PICK YOUR CANDIDATE!" Mrs. Duncan Hunter 1/5/08)
To: Little_GTO
Post the rest of the paragraph:
I was addressing the sole,"Fox strikes again." comment that appeared to 'wax over' the major part of the responsibility of the South Carolina Republican Party.
"Candidates who received invitations to participate in the debate have announced formal campaigns for president; filed the necessary paperwork with the Federal Election Commission and the South Carolina Republican Party to run for president; paid all candidate filing fees associated with their candidacy; met all U. S. constitutional requirements; and garnered at least 5% of the national electorate as determined by an average of the most recent national telephone polls of registered voters conducted by non-partisan public opinion polling organizations leading up to the registration deadline as determined by the South Carolina Republican Party and FOX News Channel; or, place in the top five in the New Hampshire Republican Presidential Primary on January 8, 2008."
Point specifically, to what part FOX News Channel played in that.
162
posted on
01/09/2008 1:35:58 PM PST
by
loboinok
(Gun control is hitting what you aim at!)
To: jwparkerjr
Anyone who has qualified to be on the ballot should be included in the debate. Period. Why should it make difference if theyve polled a certain percentage in a phone poll?
So you’d like to see all 11 qualified to be in the SC ballot in the circus?.... We are past time for a candidate to garner support in the public and establish himself as a viable contender.
163
posted on
01/09/2008 1:37:25 PM PST
by
deport
(29 days Super Tuesday -- [ Meanwhile:-- Cue Spooky Music--])
To: Little_GTO
They signed petitions to get these folk on the ballot:
Hugh Cort
John Cox
Cap Fendig
Rudy Giuliani
Mike Huckabee
Duncan Hunter
John McCain
Ron Paul
Mitt Romney
Tom Tancredo
Fred Thompson
164
posted on
01/09/2008 1:38:30 PM PST
by
CJ Wolf
To: Marak
As is often said here, "elections have consequences", and that includes primaries. Promote a liberal in the primaries today, and we will elect a liberal in November. What will make them angry is that it won't be 'their' liberal who gets elected.
Have no fear, it will never be their fault. Just like democrats they'll need a scapegoat and frankly I don't care if it's me or not. Their own lust for power at any cost will lose the election for the RINOs and I won't feel guilt for their lack of principles.
165
posted on
01/09/2008 1:40:01 PM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Only one consistent conservative in this race and his name is Hunter.)
To: deport
Oops, my mistake. I spoke about that of which I had insufficient knowledge. I’m good at that. Thanks to both of you for setting me straight.
166
posted on
01/09/2008 1:41:42 PM PST
by
jwparkerjr
(Sigh . . .)
To: pissant
167
posted on
01/09/2008 1:45:04 PM PST
by
Fred
(McCain..'HIS EGO IS WRITING CHECKS HIS BODY CAN'T CASH')
To: Man50D
Eventually the POND SCUM find ways to cheat. They’s got it down to a science now.
168
posted on
01/09/2008 1:45:08 PM PST
by
Picklezz
(HUNTER: SOLID - A Conservative's Conservative. He's the man for the job.)
To: CJ Wolf
You found a more complete list than I did..... You can’t allow all on the circus floor now. The time for that was back in the straw poll days......... You’ll see straw poll results touted but in reality they didn’t translate into people/funding support for all the candidates.
Thanks for posting the complete list.
169
posted on
01/09/2008 1:45:40 PM PST
by
deport
(29 days Super Tuesday -- [ Meanwhile:-- Cue Spooky Music--])
To: Fred
LOL. Mitt is making his stand in the blue states, apparently.
170
posted on
01/09/2008 1:46:44 PM PST
by
pissant
(Duncan Hunter: Warrior, Statesman, Conservative)
To: Jokelahoma
At the time Congressman Hunter paid his $35,000 were the rules for participation in any SC Republican Party sponsored debate disclosed?
To: Little_GTO
No. they just came up with it recently.
172
posted on
01/09/2008 1:50:24 PM PST
by
pissant
(Duncan Hunter: Warrior, Statesman, Conservative)
To: CJ Wolf
Yes, I see Duncan Hunters name there.
What’s your point?
To: iowamark
I don’t know who said Hunter wasn’t trying in NH. I was privy to a conference call where he specifically said he was pounding NH. He had radio and TV ads ready to go. He needed money to buy time. For heaven sake, donate to his campaign so he can at least compete a little bit. He doesn’t have the millions like the Clintoons and McPain and Romney, and Obama with his Oprah money. He needs financial support, big time. If you think Duncan Hunter should be the next President, GIVE to his campaign. Don’t just sit there and SAY, “I support Duncan Hunter ‘08.” Really do it with funds.
174
posted on
01/09/2008 1:54:46 PM PST
by
Picklezz
(HUNTER: SOLID - A Conservative's Conservative. He's the man for the job.)
To: Little_GTO
I have no idea. Was the debate even scheduled at that time? If so, does that mean $35K will buy anyone into the debate? Anyone? If not anyone who pays $35K, then what criteria do you use to pare the field?
175
posted on
01/09/2008 1:55:46 PM PST
by
Jokelahoma
(Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
To: loboinok
>
as determined by the South Carolina Republican Party and FOX News Channel "and" would indicate a joint decision.
To: gidget7
That’s good to know. Encourage everyone who shows interest to do likewise - which I suspect you do.
Go Hunter
177
posted on
01/09/2008 1:58:03 PM PST
by
Picklezz
(HUNTER: SOLID - A Conservative's Conservative. He's the man for the job.)
To: jwparkerjr
Hunter may should have been included but I blame him more for his failure to garner support than I do the promoters for setting qualifications that exclude him. He’s been in this thing for a year or more and the public has basically told him no dice. They did the same with Tancredo who was polling better than Hunter and had enough smarts to get out. If Thompson doesn’t produce in SC he’ll be in the same fix and should be out the door.
Politics is a rough and tumble affair. A few winners and a lot of losers.
178
posted on
01/09/2008 2:02:04 PM PST
by
deport
(29 days Super Tuesday -- [ Meanwhile:-- Cue Spooky Music--])
To: Jokelahoma
I have no idea. Was the debate even scheduled at that time? If so, does that mean $35K will buy anyone into the debate? Anyone? If not anyone who pays $35K, then what criteria do you use to pare the field? What does schedule have to do with debate participation criteria?
I'm sure a person of your intelligence could come up with better criteria then what they used. I have a few criteria in mind, but you go first.
To: Coldwater Creek
Well, we now know that he’d let us all be blown to hell before he’d have water poured up his nose for a few seconds don’t we? The question was not ambiguous and his answer was not ambiguous.
Add that to his record of fighting the Bush Adm on military tribunals, surveillance of terrorists, and “due process” of terrorists. Few Republicans in congress fought the Bush Adm, but he was one of them. Reaching across the aisle to the other side again. I wish he’d reach back across the aisle to conservatives every now and then but that’s not the direction he is used to.
180
posted on
01/09/2008 2:15:32 PM PST
by
LaurenD
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160, 161-180, 181-200 ... 281-298 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson