Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ol' Sparky; JeanS
So, if Stalin was running as a Republican, promised to protect the nation from terrorism and was a little more conservative than Hitler, who was running as a Democrat, you'd vote for Stalin, too?

A better analogy would be Roosevelt versus Hitler. Or Roosevelt versus, say, someone who would surrender to Hitler. Thats where we are. Roosevelt was a socialist, and in my opinion thoroughly incompetent, and given any decent choice I'd never support him. But had the alternative, half-way through the war, been someone who would surrender and withdraw the troops who were already halfway to Berlin, its an easy choice.

I'm for Hunter. But thats not the poll. If after the primary, the one who has emerged as the front runner is Giuliani, its an easy choice against the Democrat, whoever it is. The Dems are going to withdraw the troops under fire. I don't think Giuliani will do that. On probably any other issue, Giuliani is a Democrat; I call him a Lieberman Republican, he's Clinton on every issue except the war. We'll have to fight him every day of his 4 or 8 years in office about something or other. But he's not going to surrender to the jihadists, and while thats not everything, its pretty basic.

I sympathize with the people who would sit home rather than vote for someone as squishy as Giuliani; I've said over and over I'll sit home before I'll vote for McCain. And twice I've refused to vote for Swartzenegger. I have to admit, though, that I refused knowing full well that he would win. Had it been close, I would have voted for him because bad as he is, he was the better of the two (referring to his Dem opponent). I would like to see McClintock in the governor's mansion, really McClintock should be in national office, he's one of the really good men, decent, principled, he's wasted in California politics. I'll vote for him every time. Its a shame if Swartzenegger is the best you can do. But its California, and Swartzenegger is, apparently, the best you can do. There just aren't enough of us McClintock voters.

161 posted on 03/16/2007 9:32:02 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies ]


To: marron
And twice I've refused to vote for Swartzenegger. I have to admit, though, that I refused knowing full well that he would win. Had it been close, I would have voted for him because bad as he is, he was the better of the two (referring to his Dem opponent).

I totally disagree that eight years of a liberal Republican is better than four years of a Democrat. Voting for the liberal Republican guarantees no conservative candidate for twice as long a period. And, McClintock WOULD have won a head-to-head match up with Bustamante.

But, more importantly, the country as a whole IS NOT a liberal as California. A conservative obviously can be elected President. Thus, it is incredibly poor judgement to vote for someone like Giuliani and assure a liberal is in office for eight years. That is suicidal to the conservative movement.

162 posted on 03/16/2007 10:16:45 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson