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.
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?
Jim Gilmore is not a serious candidate. He doesn’t even register in the polls. We could as easily find a FReeper to be a candidate. Gilmore is just another politician on an ego trip. He should have left the race a long time ago. The real question is why is he still pretending to be in the race?
Works for me.
Gilmore is not a Hillary Nightmare, gilmore is one of those things that wakes you up while trying to fall asleep that makes you jerk and makes you feel like you are falling that you shrug off and fall back to sleep in 5 mins...
>> Why are we not considering Jim Gilmore?
He’s running... isn’t he?
Therefore we ARE considering him.
He is garnering less than one percent of the vote, though. May I go out on a limb here and say that he is not a popular choice?
I guess you also have to have some kind of personal appeal.
If Gilmore's been campaigning for months -- and this is his second time around -- and nobody knows who he is, it's a good sign that he doesn't have the personal appeal to get elected.
Virginia governors can only serve one term, so a governor with higher ambitions has to make his way into the Senate to get a national resume -- something Warner and Kaine were able to do and Gilmore wasn't.