Posted on 10/23/2007 8:06:07 AM PDT by pissant
Republican presidential candidates held a presidential debate last night. Much of the debate centered around criticizing Hilary Clinton, but before they got to Hilary, they spent some time arguing over who is more conservative.
My problem is this: listening to them in the debate, all of the candidates sound good.
I know that Giuliani is too liberal on too many issues to earn my vote.
Romney, as the former governor of the liberal haven of Massachusetts gives me pause if for no other reason than he was elected in Massachusetts. I've heard many things from Romney that make me think he would be a good president - better than Giuliani, anyway (or anyone the Democrats are running).
Thompson looked good...then he actually entered the race, at which point it became hard to tell just what he stands for. He may make a good conservative candidate, but that has yet to be seen for sure.
I've heard some good things from McCain during the campaign that make me wish he were consistent enough to earn my vote. However, he co-sponsored the McCain Feingold Act, as well as the recently defeated immigration bill. I have a lot of respect for John McCain - it takes a lot of courage to go through what he went through in the Vietnam War...but his record just isn't conservative enough to earn my vote.
Duncan Hunter looks like the best candidate to me...the primary problem is that he's largely an unknown: he doesn't generate the type of press that big names like Giuliani, Thompson, and Romney do. Hunter has been consistently conservative on a range of issues, and I believe that he would make an excellent president.
Personally, I have a problem with what has been going on in the conservative camp. The candidates are trying to out-conservative each other, each trying to pass himself off as the most conservative candidate. Basically, they're trying to out-Reagan Reagan (whose name was mentioned multiple times during the debate).
Ronald Reagan was a man who stood for conservative values in the face of harsh criticism. He stood up for his beliefs, unafraid and unashamed to stand up for his beliefs. This is what America needs in a president.
But this election is not just about having a candidate who knows what he believes and will stand up for it. This election is about America's future, and just what course the nation will take. Will we become yet another bastion of socialism, a nanny state destined for failure, or will we stand up for the true value of the individual, knowing that the feel-good option is not always the right one...or will we opt for the status-quo of straddling the fence, halfway between what we need and what feels right?
I think Duncan Hunter is what America needs. He will stand up for conservative values in the face of criticism; he has shown this in the past. In order to successfully move forward, we need to look at the values and the policies that have made the United States the world's superpower. Socialism didn't get us to where we are today. The United States of America got to where it is today through what is known as the American spirit: the willingness to buckle down and work hard, knowing that through hard work and perseverance you can be successful.
Duncan Hunter has always been a Conservative and his past voting record proves it.
All the rest, save RG, rarely if ever fight, and I am in the mood for a fighter this time around.
It still fluid, maybe Hunter can break thru, because I read a poll today that none of our guys beats Clinton or Obama in any polling.
Very scary.
Was a JustaNobody with you?
Duncan, like Henry Clay, is too good to be President.
That may be. But anything we can do to force him onto the GOP psyche is beneficial.
It sure does. Pro-America Reaganite Conservatve, at that.
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.