Posted on 06/03/2007 10:29:44 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Sean had Tancredo on at least once, and Colmes interviewed him after the S.C. debates. ... I missed the interview traveling between a station that carries him starting at 4 p.m. to a station that carries him at 3 p.m.
Certainly you're correct that Tancredo is no Rudy! LOL
But can a conservative win an electorate majority? (just tossing that out there).
If enough people vote for him he is ;-)
In addition, he and Duncan Hunter pretty much cancel each other out.
How? They bring a conservative message to this election that has been wholly lacking.
Thompson has a moderate to liberal background that concerns me. I'm not bashing him, and at this stage I'm more than happy to cast a vote for him if he is the nominee, but he's got quite a bit to distance himself from. McCain-Feingold was the single issue that drove me from ever considering McCain, though certainly he's done plenty else. Thompson was as responsible for McCain-Feingold as McCain was, yet he somehow gets a pass entirely on this issue.
There's other things, too, about Thompson that worry me. He's not a candidate I can get behind in terms of donations or rabid support. If he's the nominee he's got my vote, at least for now.
Yes, I could see that.
Many like to believe they are “conservative” but are not.
So I ask again, what the hell is a "Romney and Hunter whore"?
Imagine how great it would be if the primary was a race between Romney, Hunter, and Thompson.
If the GOP is smart, which is highly questionable at this point, the party would grab the best attribute of each GOP player and find a place of great importance for each one of them as soon as Fred wins, clean house on the libs in the state dept and get on with business.
Ask Reagan or Bush. Bush ran as a conservative (sort of). Anyone paying close attention to what he said knew what "compassionate" meant, but he ran a campaign based on tax cuts (and more-than hinted at substantive tax reform); he ran a campaign of strict constructionists; he ran a campaign of smaller government.
He was elected because people thought he was conservative, not because we knew he was a socialist.
“he’s far and above the others in his ability to communicate, convince, counteract drivel and score points against the socialists”
Bush’s imitation of Mumbles the Clown when it comes to counterpunching against liberal demagoguery has really hurt us.
Ping to #25. Just looking for clarification. Is Hunter not up to par? Elaboration, please.
Duncan Hunter, is my man, the one I back. Ron Paul I have nothing against him and wish him luck, same for Thompson. However I will say ONE THING. Whosoever wins, it is my wish that we do not develop a personality cult him. I hope that we can call him when he is wrong and support him when he is right. If it wasn’t for this kind of questioning, we would have Harriet Miers.
With him* typos ftl
Couldn’t agree more. A two-man Fredhead personality cult seems to have already developed on this thread. I’ve asked for clarification (as a potential Thompson supporter) but they must be off at their cult meeting. Hope they have good dip.
Excellent point.
Hunter is up to par. I just don't like supporters who come on to threads about Fred feigning ignorance in an attempt to make Fred look bad.
Okay, appreciate the clarification. I take back the “cult meeting” and “dip” remark. :-)
sometimes people have to eat.
ROFL! So true. The Hare Krishnas always had decent hor d’oevres, even if they were vegetarians.
It will take someone with the charisma, presence, and communication skills of Reagan to do it.
Tancredo is a far better candidate than just about all of them, and so is Hunter. Don’t count on the media to cut them any slack though as they prefer choosing the candidates for us.
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.