Posted on 11/23/2011 6:38:16 AM PST by TheRobb7
Now That We've Crucified Every Candidate, who are we gonna support?
Take a step back and think about it for a moment:
Romney? No, for reasons stated on this site and encoded on our DNA.
Paul? No, unless you're an isolationist.
Perry? Apparently not, since my fellow FReepers appear ready to kill each other at the thought of a Perry nomination.
Santorum or Huntsman? No, because they apparently aren't pure enough either.
Cain? Maybe, but many consider 999 to be 666.
Newt? After last night's debate, FR will lynch the man and serve him on their tables tomorrow...so, no.
That leaves Bachmann, who again isn't pure enough for my fellow FReepers.
So since we insist on nominating a Priest instead of a POTUS, my question to all here is this:
SINCE YOU HAVE CRUCIFIED EVERYONE ON THAT STAGE AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER.....WHO WILL YOU SUPPORT?
(or are we hoping that no one will have enough delegates heading into Tampa, thus giving us a nice little floor fight?)
I’ve asked the same questions. I believe they will support 0bama.
Excellent post. I agree with everything you wrote.
In the pecking order of loyalties:
1) God
2) Family
3) Country
Palin had to do what is best for her family. A Downs Syndrome child needs a lot of TLC, preferably from Mom. Sarah is storing up riches in heaven.
If we totally ignore his butt licking of BHO or his his stance on man made global warming you might be correct.
Huntsman is not who you think he is.
Newt Gingrich is by far and away the most impressive think out of the box candidate we have.
I want a pres that can give you some background and historical perspective on why your 20 year old son has to walk around the rest of his life on a titanium stump because of a war that he sent you off to.
I want a republican president for a change that can answer hard questions from the press and dosen’t look like Mike Tyson on Jeopardy, and an intellectual embarassment.(see Perry,bush,Cain).
Newt gets my money. Newt gets my vote. Not only do I agree and am enlightned by his views he is the best politician out there. The game is still politics and Newt knows how to play the game.
I’m still riding the Cain train, but I would enthusiastically support Santorum or Bachmann. I could support Newt, but his forays off the conservative reservation and some of his character issues dampen my enthusiasm. Perry would be acceptable, but he seems like another George W. Bush. Huntsman is disqualified because he served in the Obama administration and was a big-spending governor. Romney is out of the question.
“Speaker Gingrich is standing even more strongly on my list. Perry and Cain are there too.”
Well, you managed to pick the three that are most pro amnesty. Bravo, well done.
Cain.
While successful foreign policy requires that our President have a firm grasp on the inner workings of other nations, it also requires that these same nations have a clear understanding of where our President stands, and that he stand for the U.S.
The first can be acquired; the second is a matter of character and integrity, and so cannot. With Cain’s executive style and intelligence, any possible shortcomings in the global arena would be quickly overcome, and are thus of limited concern to me.
(Recall, for example, the effectiveness of Reagan: much of his success in this area, I believe, was a direct result of our enemies —and friends— knowing exactly what he believed, and that he was a man of principle; there was no doubt in their minds that he meant what he said.)
If anyone can answer this. What is Newt’s position on the obamacare law? Did he say he would repeal it?
We are going with Newt warts and all. He sees the big picture and that is what is needed. He has a vision for America not just a plan for tax reform. I don’t see a vision for America coming from any of the others even though I love Herman to death. If you watched the debate last night you saw time and time again Newt Gingrich talking about a bigger picture on all the issues. He’s right. I have shaken his hand and he’s not the warmest guy in the world but I don’t want to pal around with the President I just want him to fix the mess.
LLS
""""There is so much hate on this forum for illegals that some of us would vote for a ‘kill on sight’ candidate""""
WELL SAID. I'm not one of those kind and pray I never will be.
When it comes down to push and shove, at this point I’d have to go with Newt.
Perry had a big enough challenge to overcome by being a Texas Governor who sounded like W. By comparision, W is articulate, smooth and clean.
I understand your position but I do not entirely agree with it.
LLS
People keep saying that ‘his stance on immigration.’
It’s totally without merit. He has a plan to control the border and I think it’s workable.
He is absolutely against illegal immigration. Too many people are focusing on the in-state tuition thing which is a flyspeck and not worthy of thinking about. It was a pragmatic decision by the Texas legislature and a well-thought out one. It costs us nothing and could help in the long run.
We cannot reasonably expect to snap fingers and get rid of all the illegals. Newt pointed that out also.
I would deport immediately any illegal who violates the law. I would include any drug possession (at all) and any other offenses except for speeding tickets. On speeding I would have a three times you’re out position. But any DWI, for example, you’re out.
We can’t do this unless we get rid of the current administration. They have shot down every state that’s tried to do things on their own.
I am pretty much where you are my friend.
LLS
Perry’s “stance on immigration” also includes his decision to approve in-state tuition for illegals’ kids.
Anything that creates a magnet effect — as that does — incentivizing illegals to cross our southern border should be a no-go.
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.