Replies

I vote for Thompson/Hunter '08.

Both candidates are quite conservative, and quite acceptable. Now, I know the Duncanistas will run Fred down (in fact, one already has) by putting up that bogus NumbersUSA list showing that "Fred wants to sell out all us patriotic, God-fearin' Amurikan workers to them that New World Order types and them thar Mescan illegals!" I encourage anybody with the time to actually look the bills and amendments up online through the House of Representatives websites. I did, and found that their list is a lot of hokum that gives absolutely no context to the votes, and is designed solely to misleadingly present Fred as being "soft on immergrayshun".

Duncan is not without his flaws.

The guy's never won a statewide election. The guy's never TRIED TO WIN a statewide election, which suggests that his gumption and fire-in-the-belly are a bit overstated.
He's sat in the House for 26 years (a Duncanista even yelled at me yesterday for saying 21 years!), which smells like "career politician" to me.
Despite the touted credentials of being against unfair free trade deals with substandard third world countries, his record is actually mixed. While he voted against several trade deals with Latin America, he has voted FOR similar trade deals with Muslim Middle Eastern countries.
Hunter's record of fiscal responsibility is mixed, at best. He's been a big porkbarreler while in Congress (and no, it is NOT "all just military spending"). He voted for No Child Left Behind (which, admittedly, so did Fred), and he also voted for the prescription drug bill that Bush pushed through, which to date has been the single largest increase in federal entitlement spending our government has made.

Finally, Hunter supporters attack Fred for being friends with John McCain, some even going so far as to suggest blatantly silly conspiracy theories to the effect that Fred is "a stalking horse" whose REAL plan is to "win it for McCain". If this is so, if Fred's friendship with McCain must mean that Fred's trying to "win it for McCain" or that he's going to angle to get McCain as his Veep, then are the Duncanistas similarly willing to say that Hunter must be hopelessly corrupt because he was good friends with Duke Cunningham? Is Duncan secretly planning to take bribes from defence contractors, evade paying his taxes, and commit wire fraud?

The guy's never won a statewide election. The guy's never TRIED TO WIN a statewide election, which suggests that his gumption and fire-in-the-belly are a bit overstated.

No that is not what it suggests. It suggest that Californians have two of the most liberal Senators in Washington representing them and Hunter is not going to move that far left to get elected.

He's sat in the House for 26 years (a Duncanista even yelled at me yesterday for saying 21 years!), which smells like "career politician" to me.

What should he do? Quit? He represents his district well and his constituents like him. He has been in Congress for 21 years without breaking the law or getting rich by being there. He is a decorated Vet, Army Ranger and has at least one son in Iraq, which smells like "patriot who teaches his children what he preaches to others and practices himself"

Despite the touted credentials of being against unfair free trade deals with substandard third world countries, his record is actually mixed. While he voted against several trade deals with Latin America, he has voted FOR similar trade deals with Muslim Middle Eastern countries.

Are you insinuating something? Sounds like he takes each case on its merits to me.

Hunter's record of fiscal responsibility is mixed, at best. He's been a big porkbarreler while in Congress (and no, it is NOT "all just military spending"). He voted for No Child Left Behind (which, admittedly, so did Fred), and he also voted for the prescription drug bill that Bush pushed through, which to date has been the single largest increase in federal entitlement spending our government has made.

21 years in Congress and voting for the Prescription Drug bill is it? Get real.

I have a serious question for the Hunter supporters... So far, no one has answered this...

Suppose Thompson gets the nomination (Hunter is a fantastic person with a solid record, who stands a ZERO chance of getting nominated- ZERO)... Why would he nominate someone who...

Is further to the right of him? Isn't Thompson sufficiently conservative on his own? Not to FReepers, but to most Americans? I'd say absolutely.

Hunter is an unknown, what value will he add?

Neither Hunter, nor any other candidate will make us competitive in CA... Where is his value added? Fred would be adding another old white guy to the ticket... We need some energy there.

Once again, after getting shellacked 55%-45% last election, why do ANY of you think we should put up the most conservative ticket out there? So we can lose all 50 states, instead of 40? Please get real folks. Hunter is a fringe/protest candidate at best.