Posted on 12/04/2006 10:01:36 AM PST by NapkinUser
As Hillary Clinton begins her own preparations to run for the presidency, the deciding factor of who will be the next commander in chief may have less to do with whomever is chosen as the Democrat or Republican nominee, and more to do with the choice of the Constitution Party.
This weekend at a national committee meeting in Manchester, N.H., Howard Phillips and the Constitution Party he founded set in motion the plans to launch its own third party candidate for president.
"The time has never been better for a third party dark horse candidate to grab the White House," Phillips told WND.
He affirmed that by next July, his party intends to nominate a presidential candidate, with possibilities for the ticket including Minuteman Project co-founder Jim Gilchrist, former Republican presidential candidate Alan Keyes, Baptist pastor Chuck Baldwin, and author and WND columnist Jerome Corsi.
The Constitution Party is also strongly supportive of Republican Congressmen Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul, but there is no decision yet that either would leave their home in the Republican Party to pursue a Constitution Party nomination. Tancredo has said numerous times he is considering a run for the presidency.
"The American public are angry at both the Democratic and Republican Party," Phillips said. "If neither major party wants to listen to the American middle class, the Constitution Party is ready to enter center stage and get back to the basics that have made the republic established by our founding fathers work for over 230 years."
The meeting was highlighted by a lineup of well-known conservative speakers, including those who may end up running.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Rangel doesn't want to bring back the draft. Rangel just happens to have a paddle and likes to stir s@@t!
I don't know, Arnold is shaping up to make me re-think that with all his environmental and global warming stuff and bending over for the dems with regularity. I fear McCain would be too similar to Arnie.
If any party had a chance of really cutting into the GOP it's the libertarian, not the CP. According to a poll read on the air by Neal Boortz (a proud Libertarian) a week ago there is 9% conservatives and 32% Libertarians with 15% of the popularion being extreme liberals and the balance is ????? (confused).
Instead of whining, how about working for change? You accomplish absolutely nothing by sitting on the sidelines. It's also a good idea to take what you can get when you can get it.
I don't like McCain. I won't vote for him in the primary. He's an egomaniac, only cares about himself, but he is far from a RINO. He has a lifetime ACU rating of 83. He's got a "progressive score" of 14.15 from ProgressivePunch. These are far from perfect, but they're also far from RINO.
http://progressivepunch.org/members.jsp?search=selectName&member=AZIII&chamber=Senate&zip=&x=80&y=14
I predict, in less than two years you will look back in fondness at the GOP just voted out of office.
Too bad then that they can't see the forest for the trees.
I think Hillary will pick Richardson to seal the Hispanic vote.
Shes got the blacks already well under her wing.
he likes to stir himself?
I did everything I could to defeat his liberal father. His aides tried to get me thrown out of a local factory parking lot because I was passing out literature for his opponent. Will be more than happy to work defeating his liberal son.
richardson doesn't have the hype that obama has. if she doesn't pick obama, she might lose the black vote. don't forget that a lot of blacks are turning republican, and have been for some time. the dems are hemmhoraging black votes, and obama will bring them all back to the plantation.
Why did the reps loose last month, they abandoned conservative principles. If Rino Rudy is nominated is that not an abandonment of conservatives?
Be very vigigilent as any of these third partiers come forward because something none of us knew at the time was Perot is/was a good friend of Clinton and had a huge dislike for "41".... IMO he was a trojan horse. Clinton's are a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them and they are counting on the stupidity of the voting public to repeat history.
The easy truth is that there has never (in modern history) been a good time for a third party candidate to do anything but UNDERNMINE the party from whom most votes are stolen.
I suspect that this has been a part of Hillary's planning all along (in fact I predicted this over a year ago.)
.
Now, you have the right idea.
However, most won't get involved in the Primary elections and then when someone else picks their candidate for them they whine and gripe. The only way one can get the candidate they want for the General election is to get involved.
Many of us have been working, and working hard for many years. Time, money & energy have been spent all for a bunch of broken promises and an ever increasing federal government. Eventually, you get to a point where you say enough is enough and one focuses their efforts elsewhere.
But the conservative base is only 9% of the overall voting public, ergo, they will carry a lot more votes than someone most people haven't heard of who are true blue conservatives. IF the GOP is guilty of anything lately it's been neglecting the States and grooming candidates on a local level to move up to the national level... look at the growing list of Dem Governors as an example. Most Presidents have come from Governors and yet we are not even grooming a stable of good, conservative, governors.
I think they don't have what it takes to thwart a medium-sized weekend barbecue.
"Why did the reps loose last month, they abandoned conservative principles"
That's retarded. We lost Ehrlich, Hayworth, Santorum, Talent, Allen, and a lot of other solid people, frequently on our own turf.
We need to get back on message about Islamofascism and the economy. Otherwise, we leave the floor to the Democrats, who will talk about how awful the sizzling hot economy is, along with how Islamofascists raking up bodycounts in the millions will love us if we let Iran have the bomb, allow Iraq to become a terrorist state, end terrorist surveillance, end the Patriot Act, and so forth.
The stakes are high this time, and I'm not going to self-destruct over two or three issues that will work themselves out in our favor through judicial appointments in anycase.
If you can point to a single post of mine anywhere in this forum wherein I have made such a comment you would have a point. If not you're blowing hot air, which is what your type usually do.
You can't have it both ways.
I don't recall saying I could.
Either the paleo-conservatives make up more than 0.5% of the U.S. population or they did not cost the GOP the 2006 midterms.
Such mindless rhetoric; so typical of you Ronald Reagan or nothing types. Guess what, Sparky. The perfect conservative candidate won't be running. If you think so name him/her and predict what chance he has of winning.
Pick one lie and stick with it.
Either point out wherein I have lied or be proven a liar yourself.
Thanks for proving me right, again.
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.