When you push "moderate" candidates, there isn't much difference in them or the democrat and that alone drives the base away. When you push for CONSERVATIVE candidates, it isn't even a close race
Posted on 10/23/2007 7:48:38 AM PDT by pissant
I mentioned tapdancing as well. Carry on.
To think the same dopes who call Hunter a “protectionist” and say he has “no chance” have put their support behind pro-amnesty, open-border, MFN Commie-loving RINOs like Rooty, Mitt or one of these clowns:
Voted NO on killing a bill for trade sanctions if China sells weapons.
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam.
Voted YES on permanent normal trade relations with China.
——————————————————————————————
John McCain:
Voted YES to give permanent Normal Trade Relations status to China.
Voted to kill an amendment that would require sanctions against China or other countries if they were found to be selling illicit weapons of mass destruction.
Support the One-China policy, don’t weaken it.
Inaction on spying led to Chinese nuclear improvement.
Voted YES on ending Vietnam embargo.
Admit China to WTO based on their concessions.
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam.
——————————————————————————————
Sam Brownback:
Voted YES on killing a bill for trade sanctions if China sells weapons.
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam.
Voted YES on permanent normal trade relations with China.
******************************************************
Duncan Hunter is the only one not selling us out to our enemies:
“china is cheating on trade and they’re buying ships, planes and missiles with our money, as well as taking millions of jobs.”
Voted YES on deterring foreign arms transfers to China.
Voted NO on Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China.
FRIENDS don’t attack our aircraft and hold our soldiers as hostages:
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/05/01/china.us.plane.04/
Duncan Hunter on Fred Thompson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFOUJ1saOoc
“Free trade” is for our ALLIES, not our communist enemies.
3. I’ll take Duncan Hunter’s no nonsense, clear and to the point speaking over any other candidate any day of the week.
4. The reason we got shellacked in 06 is because our party had NO, or very few, extreme conservative dogs in the fight. That is why we need a proven consistent conservative as our nominee in 08.
5. Rep. Hunter transcends party - goes straight to preserving our sovereignty, rescuing the middle class with the return of good paying jobs, has worked against illegal immigration since before Tom Tancredo was ever in Congress, has served his country during wartime, and on and on and on. He appeals to conservatives in ALL parties.
The Establishment, the Rockefeller Republicans, the Council on Foreign Relations members, the Jorge Boosh globalists are against a true American patriot because they are working feverishly while Boosh is still in office to make the USA a one vote region under the complete control of the UN. Boosh wants it to go down in history that it happened under his watch. That’s why Duncan Hunter has been unable to gain traction, and for NO OTHER reason.
When you push "moderate" candidates, there isn't much difference in them or the democrat and that alone drives the base away. When you push for CONSERVATIVE candidates, it isn't even a close race
AMEN!
Ah yes I have seen some on this thread tap dancing around business ethics and arguing moral relativism.
Those who don’t follow the party platform have no business running for the republican nomination.
Certainly a candidate that does not respect the sanctity of life should not have support among the CONSERVATIVE base of the GOP....nor should anyone who supported Clinton’s AWB. That rules out Rudy & Mitt - they each have many reasons I cannot support them as a GOP nominee - but those are two of the main issues I weigh a candidate by.
While Huckabee is great on life issues (putting aside his tax-n-spend policies from Arkansas), he’s pushing for more nanny-state big-government and also a pro-SHamnesty candidate like McCain.
McCain also wanted Geneva Convention rights to terrorists and whines about how GITMO “looks in the eyes of the world”. Although I value military service in our next President, that’s not an example of a leader that I am looking for. Nor is someone who’s adopted the CUT & RUN, blame-America first policies of the DUmocrats...so I won’t support Ron Paul, plus he’s just too damn whiney.
With WOT issues, it’s as Tom Tancredo said in one of the debates: “the next President needs to be someone that al queda ABSOLUTELY FEARS”....that is why I support Duncan Hunter (and Tancredo as his running mate).
Thompson would be my 3rd choice, but I don’t support his idea of “aspirations of citizenship” for those who have broken the law (also known as FELONS), his stance on McCain-Feingold, or his votes in favor of MOST FAVORED NATION trade status for communist countries (China & Vietnam).
Very few here have thrown in the towel. The folks who have never supported him continue to try to tamp down support, because they know that their candidate (pick one) is very vulnerable from the right. In the meantime, the DH Ping list continues to grow.
Wow, you’re delusional... How do you explain the losses of Santorum (got crushed), Allen, and Talent???
See this thread for his stance on immigration.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1915177/posts
I wish Fred would get behind Hunter. It would be a unstoppable force to deal with.
This man answers the “HOT BUTTON” issue, he is 100% behind US sovereignty and the best interests of the United States.
He also knows what the hell he is talking about.
Hunter would fill the lack of US leadership. Strong on the WOT, strong on immigration, pro life, pro family.
The perfect candidate to make Hillary look like the incompetant OLD WOMAN she is.
Name calling already? Re-read my line 4 in post 163 where I said No, or very few, extreme conservatives. Selective sight is stupid.
Tapping 10 or 12K a year from the house overdraft program to cover expenses versus fleecing the taxpayers for $835,000 for Ben Hooks. You make the call
>I wish Fred would get behind Hunter...<
Fred, Council on Foreign Relations member, globalist, soft on illegal immigration, supported by many in Bush’s administration - you mean THAT Fred? Nah. Never happen.
Funny how the course of a year changes a man:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkN2fYnMTBs
When asked about a REAL fence: “If it would even work”
“Deals for citizenship” doesn’t fly with me, regardless of his “tough talk” now.
So you would agree that “tapping” the House bank was an “undesirable” act then?
I am really worried that if we do not do something soon, we will all end up with the worst. Rooty
If we split our vote between all these people, Rooty will win the nomination.
Some of these guys are going to have to join forces. I am not as worried about Hillary as I am Rooty.
Hillary is beatable, I just DO NOT want Rooty to be the one to beat her. If that happens the conservative cause will be over.
I know there is no shortage of posters who have denigrated Hunter’s candidacy from day one (can you say “self-fulfilling prophecy”?), but it’s apparent that there are those who have pulled for him and simply become disheartened by his continued low showing in polls and the blatant disregard by media figures, even ostensibly conservative ones such as those frequenting Fox News. I understand that. I’m just trying to encourage them to look at the bigger picture, and to remember Clinton’s comeback.
As a hypothetical, what would you say if word got out that Thompson received $5 million through third-party people from Saudi Arabia?
Just a hypothetical
Stop the presses, in your “apples to apples” comparison, you have just criticized the actions of Duncan Hunter. I expect the herd to quickly trample you to death for your heresy.
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.