Posted on 02/05/2016 10:04:57 PM PST by Crucial
OK, so Hillary's been a bad little sociopath. She let an ambassador and three other Americans get brutalized and murdered. She feels nothing for them. She just knows what she wants and that is the Presidency. What she deserves is to be prosecuted and jailed.
Enter Jim Gilmore. Gilmore worked as a prosecutor. He also worked in Army counterintelligence. So he knows what he's talking about when it comes to Benghazi. He's a natural born citizen by any definition. He's a veteran. He's got executive experience and is a very solid conservative.
Why are we not considering Jim Gilmore? Do conservative Americans want to limit their choices when this might be the last time they have any real choice?
He seems like a decent man -however, there seems to be no name recognition. My DH keeps asking what this man’s name is when speaking of him, and neither one of us can ever remember his name is Gilmore. Might be Alzheimer or some mental block. I’m not in any way informed on his stands, policies, beliefs. DH much more so than I. Perhaps the two of us should do some research of our own -soon.
I'll take a shot at that one. My support, and my vote in the primaries, will go to the most conservative candidate who has the best chance of beating the Democrat in the general election.
Gilmore might well be the most conservative candidate we have. But I don't see him as having much chance in November. Name recognition means a lot. Reagan had that when he first ran for president. Gilmore does not.
He’s my choice.
He was a guest on Dan Rea’s WBZ talk show tonight.
Why do you keep posting this crap ? You already asked this and it was answered.
For your edification:
Copied and pasted on why Gilmore shouldn’t be Vice-President, let alone President.
That would be a poor choice. Gilmore couldn’t carry his own state. He ran for Senator against Mark Warner in 2008 and had the single worst performance as a first-tier candidate in the modern era, getting 1/3rd of the vote (33.7% to Warner’s 65%), and this was an open seat (note that he won both the Governorship and Attorney General offices with 56%, so that performance for Senator was inexcusably horrid). He hasn’t won office in 19 years.
Saying that, I’m sure he’d make a credible Ambassador or lesser Cabinet or government official.
Could it be that the machine doesn’t want him around?
This is also a REALLY STUPID vanity, posted by a political naif!
Nobody gives a damn about Gilmore, Hillary can beat him in a N.Y. minute, and he's a nothing of a little nobody who has garnered NO following and NO votes and never shall!
>> Why are we not considering Jim Gilmore?
Unfortunately, gardens don’t grow overnight.
Cool handle, but when I see it, I can’t help but think of memory.
Warners negatives weren’t nearly as high as Hillary’s. Hillary Clinton won’t carry one state in the South. What we really need to focus on is not who will be the strongest candidate but the best president possible.
Well, that swiftly rules out Gilmore.
Sorry about posting in breaking news. It’s late. But I don’t apologize for backing a solid conservative when all the other candidates are fatally flawed.
No kidding.
Fatally flawed = First tier ex-Governor getting 33% of the vote in a U.S. Senate general election.
You keep posting this same stupid vanity, IN THE WRONG SECTION, day after day. You're wasting bandwidth and getting nowhere with your crusade for Gilmore here. Let it go!
He’s a good guy but he got like 10 votes in Iowa, way way behind “other”.
You are kidding right?
If not then the answer is because we don’t like him. How’s that?
Delusional
This is a silly crusade. I kept quiet, when I’ve seen this posted before, but now it has become annoying. :-)
I spoke up in an earlier thread, but you’re right, this is getting ridiculous. Total bandwidth waste. Next time this comes up, poster should get the ZOT.
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.