For me, here’s why Fred is the best candidate:
-Philosophy: For the most part (his now-repudiated support of McCain-Feingold excepted), his record and his commentary show that he has by far the most originalist, Constitution-based understanding of the Founding Documents and of federal government’s role. He also appears to understand the threat posed by Islamofascists and the proper strategy toward fighting them (as a war, not a crime). He’s mostly pro-states-rights/federalism, pro-fiscal-conservative/anti-government waste and fraud, pro-military and pro-personal liberty and personal responsibility.
-Communication style: He is an excellent communicator. After seeing some of W.s important ideas (for example, the Bush Doctrine) falter because of his inconsistant ability to communicate them clearly and persuasively, this is a top issue for me.
-Electability: He potentially can unite the sometimes-opposing GOP factions that any candidate needs to win. These factions include social conservatives, small-government/Constitution conservatives and national security conservatives (with some overlap amongst the three).
>For me, here’s why Fred is the best candidate:.....<
Thank you, ellery. That’s a fine, comprehensive answer. I really appreciate it. How about Hunter-Thompson? :o)
Good list. I would add to it that Thompson has considerable
foreign affairs expertise, he is extremely pro-America, and is highly intelligent, as proved by his writings and speeches.