[FrankR]

"What would Free Republic do if Fred Thompson is not the Republican Party Nominee?"

Maybe, "Free Republic" is not a "collective".

Maybe, Free Republic is a discussion board of many points of view.

Maybe, "group think" is reserved for the lefty boards.

I'm on the board almost daily, and I seen pros and cons on all the candidates.

I really like Free Republic, but if the day should come that "free republic" dictates my choice of candidate, then I'll drop it like a hot rock.

Why is Fred worrying you so?

[Cymbaline]

I will support the Republican nominee no matter who he is. Any one of them is miles better than She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, Osama Obama or the Breck Girl.

Some on FR, however, will stay home and pout. More power to ya. I hope you like Hillary’s choices for Supreme Court.

[ajay_kumar]

I will vote for the republican nominee whoever he is,
as I have done in every single election since becoming
citizen in 1970.

1972 - Nixon
1976 - Ford
1980 - Reagan
1984 - Reagan
1988 - Bush41
1992 - Bish41
1996 - Dole
2000 - Bush43
2004 - Bush43
2008 - whoever is the nominee

I Don’t waste my vote on 3rd parties or staying home.

[Irish Eyes]

Thank you for the thread. Very interesting. Happy to know that MOST would put their country first.

[SuziQ]

I’ll vote for whoever the Republican nominee is, because I don’t want the Clinton Criminal Machine anywhere NEAR the White House ever again.

[Rastus]

Write in Hunter.

[tophat9000]

Any one but goofball Paul

[MrEdd]

Post copied over from Rudy/Socialism thread - my position remains the same

---

I am a conservative not a Republican. I will vote for Republicans IF they are conservative. If Bush's opponent had not been Hanoi John Kerry, I would not have voted in the last election.

Islam's war against the west will inevitably bring the US a nuclear strike. The persistent open borders are a hot potato that will utterly destroy the party in power when it happens. I prefer that the borders be closed - but barring that, let it be the liberals who are destroyed if we're not going to move to prevent it.

This is as obvious and foreseeable as the earlier attacks on September eleventh. Aside from the loss we all will have of family and friends WHEN not if this happens, I recognize that the party who emerges in power will be able to radically reshape government the United States. Many on the left foresee this as well, and are actively working to keep our defenses weak.

I therefore am willing to sacrifice important pieces to win the game. Winning the white house or congress are less important than closing the borders. A candidate who could win an office, at the cost of placing someone in office that the left could justifiably claim failed to aggressively defend America costs conservatism control of the board.

By the same token I will not move to save a socially liberal republican candidate merely to defeat the democrat. Sometimes control of the board is more important than saving every pawn.

If I get a liberal in office who votes liberal while claiming (unchallenged) to represent the party with a conservative platform, then my voice is even more unheard than if a liberal democrat is in office. It means that conservatives will vote for anyone who claims< /b> conservatism, even if they are to the left of Hillary Clinton. It also means that the Republican party did this eyes wide open, believing that I (and other conservatives) would vote for a yellow dog if it was a republican. Sorry RNC that only works with democrats.

Semper Fidelis

---

In addition let me say that both Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney have to varying degrees supported policies and legislation that gives homosexual adults access to children - Rudy to the greatest degree as an executive member of The Stonewall Veteran's Association and Mitt in opposing the Boy Scout policy of opposing gay adult membership. I would not vote for a ticket that included either of those creatures as VP.

Only Duncan Hunter and Tancredo are sure to close the border. Thompson might I could give him benefit of a doubt. The rest - meh

[napscoordinator]

Many FREEPERS will be jumping out of windows...lol.

[Caipirabob]

I am NOT going to take it well...

[TypeZoNegative]

Support the nominee no matter what, because somebody who is conservative only 50% of the time is more dependable than somebody who is conservative only 0% of the time.

[The Wizard]

Go Rudy, Go

[larryjohnson]

I will not stay home. I will never again vote for anyone but a Republican.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

The two headed snake has finally brought us to the point where there will be no lesser of the two evils we are offered.

So who cares?

[Kozak]

For most of the remaining choices I will vote for em, but thats it. No money, no volunteering. Just can’t get enthusiastic about, Romney, Huckabee, McCain, or Guiliani.

[xzins]

I don’t think Huckabee is disdained by Free Republic. He simply isn’t the first choice. Gov. Huckabee and Capitol Offense, his band, have been lauded on Free Republic in the past.

The truth, though, is that Huck is a too compassionate conservative.

Thompson, Hunter, and Tancredo are more conservative, and that’s the issue.

Thompson didn’t get the Nat’l Right to Life endorsement over Huckabee for nothing.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Vote for Clinton, Inc., of course.

You idiot.

[McGruff]

Why put all this effort into speculation? How about waiting until we actually know who the party candidates are?

I’ll be sad if it’s not Fred but I voted for Ross Perot one time and gave us Bill Clinton. I won’t do that again.

[Constitution Day]

If it's Rudy, I predict much gnashing of teeth, rending of garments, and possible mass suicide.

Of course I'm joking, but given certain people's attitudes here, it might not be too farfetched!

[KC_Conspirator]

I will back anyone that wins the nomination, even if its a loser like Hucksterbee.

The alternatives are worse.