GOP Rivals Grasp at SC Straw Poll Glory - McCain 164 Rudy 162 Hunter 158 Brownback 85 Mitt 80

The State (South Carolina) ^ | 3/1/07 | Aaron Gould

[My GOP]

That's your opinion but its certainly not mine.

[My GOP]

"Because he'll pull votes from the Dems? That ought to tell ya something!"

A few, but more so independents. According to the latest Rasmussen poll, Rudy leads Hillary 64%-27% among independents. The base alone can't win the election.

[rjp2005]

FoxNews just showed video AND some soundbites from each of the candidates EXCEPT HUNTER. What the heck?

They gave more screen time to the Hollywood actor Thompson who is exploring jumping in. Ridiculous. Show us some Hunter, you stooges!

[My GOP]

“I've known (Rudy Giuliani) for 26 years and we've talked about this many times," Olson said. "He feels very strongly that people like Justice Scalia, Chief Justice Roberts, Sam Alito, Clarence Thomas, are the type of people that he would put on the court…I'm quite convinced that this is a genuine viewpoint that he has." – Ted Olson

Works for me. I trust Ted Olsen. Do you?

[My GOP]

I don't think Hunter can win the general election.

[meg88]

Hunters on C-SPAN prime time tonight! :)

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

I think the dynamic that is operating here is survival. In the election. In the war.

Some of us consider one presidential election and the Iraq War as just another couple of BATTLES in the perpetual war of Good vs. Evil that has gone on since Satan's revolt against God and subsequent exile from Heaven. I'm sure you understand that paradigm. Whether or not you personally subscribe to that Weltanschaung (worldview), those of us who do--believe that giving slack to evil practices such as abortion means forfeiting a battlefield. When one considers that there are many battlefronts in the war and that the war against evil goes on perpetually, don't expect moral warriors to Chamberlain in order to win a pyrrhic victory.

Meanwhile, there are those who profit supplying the materiel for wars--and there are those who profit or plunder in victory. Any who let go of the Righteousness end of the rope in this deadly serious series of Tug-Of-War battles play into the hands and plans of moral Quislings and the tyrants to whom they pander, human and otherwise. Those who refuse to vote at all are playing ostrich--there is nothing morally courageous about default.

As regards those who vote third party as a moral statement, the obviously most notable example is of course those who say that they morally cannot/ will not vote for a pro-abortion candidate. I fully experience and understand the anguish these persons of conscience deal with.

The decision to vote for third parties in such a personal state is not based on emotions--as you postulated on a thread several days ago. Nor is it based on logic--for logic would say "Never mind the moral torpedoes, let's all move Leftward in our candidate and votes so we can win." The problem then is, exactly WHO wins? Not the Right. Not Life. Probably not Liberty. And without that, what Happiness is there to pursue? A rising tide lifts all ships--and a slippery slope sullies all citizens.

I do not have the answers to those--including myself--who foreseeably could be be hit with with a Double Bind, a Catch-22 situation. BUT--I personally intend to vote straight GOP--with the gauntlet thrown down that I am committed to do everything I can to drag the wayward Elephant back toward the Right curb on the straight and narrow highway that doesn't lead to destruction--so that Conservatives born and unborn don't end up in...moral back alleys with third party coat hangers.

Meanwhile, although Hillary is being thrown up incessantly as a boogeywoman -- there will be no stampeding many of us Pro-Lifers into a false Hobson's Choice in fear of her shadow. We (most of us, that is!) are using logic, reason and appropriate emotion to evaluate and vet possible candidates. I would postulate that nobody who is Pro-Abortion is functioning from a purely logical standpoint either, BTW.

Cheers.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

I have a high regard for Ted Olson--BUT I trust my own viewing of Rudy's moral trajectory to date and my own discernment over Ted's honest beliefs. What is being postulated by Ted about Rudy is antithetical to Rudy's long-term pro-NARAL stance and public endorsement. Can you honestly disagree with me on that?

The best indicator of future performance is past performance. I do not believe that Rudy's past performance will suddenly be countermanded.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

ping

[Austin Willard Wright]

Voted YES on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. (Nov 2003)

Limited?????? The budget cost overruns show otherwise. This is easily the most significant expansion of the welfare state since the 1960s and Hunter voted FOR it.

Fortunately, my guy, Ron Paul, wouldn't have even considered voting for such a measure. Interestingly, a majority of the Republicans voted alongside Paul and against Hunter on this. I want a candidate who supports limited government and obviously Hunter doesn't qualify.

[reasonisfaith]

He can win it in a landslide, given the correct sequence of events.

[reasonisfaith]

Duncan Hunter can be our next President.

[My GOP]

LOL!!!!!!!!

[reasonisfaith]

How well known was Clinton in early 1991?

[Corin Stormhands]

He can win it in a landslide, given the correct sequence of events.

Yes, and on some planets the Left Behind series is fine literature.

[pissant]

Wow. That's a mouthful.

[reasonisfaith]

That doesn’t make sense. There’s no life on other planets.

[reasonisfaith]

Duncan Hunter gets my $$$.

[Corin Stormhands]

There’s no life on other planets.

Not that you've met anyway.

[reasonisfaith]

How can you possibly know that?