Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/27/2007 6:03:00 AM PST by connell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last
To: connell
Big mistake by the Constitution Party since GOP has not yet made a decision.
30 posted on 12/27/2007 6:11:24 AM PST by Jane Austen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

Mrs. Clinton is certainly hoping for this, or better still for her, John McCain.


31 posted on 12/27/2007 6:12:47 AM PST by libertylover (Liberals: Trying to convert the U.S. into a country the Founding Father's wouldn't recognize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell
I have had a disdain for the CP ever since I got sucked into supporting them and then when I realized that they are nothing but a bunch of political opportunists who prey on suckers, like me, who part with their hard-earned money and dump it down a black hole.

Their ads here in Iowa during the 2000 and 2004 elections were aimed at defeating Bush--not Gore and Kerrey. They were trying to convince me (and other gullible voters) that Bush was more dangerous than Gore and Kerry. They're nuts.

They have never won an election and they will never win an election. It's very easy to stand there beating your breast and asking the nation to believe that you are morally superior, knowing full well, you will never have to prove anything because you're never going to have to deliver on your promises.

The CP can go take a flying leap and the only people they can help are the Democrats. Suckers!!!

36 posted on 12/27/2007 6:15:40 AM PST by Conservativegreatgrandma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

No clinton has ever been elected president by a majority of votes cast.


38 posted on 12/27/2007 6:16:30 AM PST by Nomorjer Kinov (If the opposite of "pro" is "con" , what is the opposite of progress?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

This is how Clintons get elected. What a jerk.


40 posted on 12/27/2007 6:19:02 AM PST by gramho12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell
My bet is that Ronnie will draw more votes away from the Demagogue candidate than the GOP's candidate.
43 posted on 12/27/2007 6:21:45 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (Islam is a religion of peace, and Muslims reserve the right to kill anyone who says otherwise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell
Damn, this day is just full of "good" news.

Excuse me while I hurl.

49 posted on 12/27/2007 6:24:26 AM PST by steveegg (I am John Doe, and a monthly donor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

It’ll hurt the dem’s more than us. Paul’s getting his support from the looney fringes. Not the kind of people who would vote for a GOP candidate anyway. Let him run. I hope Bloomberg runs too.


50 posted on 12/27/2007 6:24:37 AM PST by pgkdan (Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions - G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

Election shattering... riiiiight.


53 posted on 12/27/2007 6:25:48 AM PST by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

Ron Paul has stated he wouldn’t run on a third party ticket. This may be driven by his supporters, however, if true what’s in it for him? What would be his motivation?

He can’t seriously believe he could win, so why do it?


59 posted on 12/27/2007 6:29:59 AM PST by umgud (no more subprime politicians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell
At one time in the past I seriously considered supporting the Constitution Party.

If this is true(concerning LRon), they just fell off of my map.

64 posted on 12/27/2007 6:33:37 AM PST by Preachin' (Enoch's testimony was that he pleased God: Why are we still here?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Revelation 911; traviskicks; Extremely Extreme Extremist; George W. Bush; billbears

Ya’ll might want to take a look at this.


70 posted on 12/27/2007 6:35:16 AM PST by Ultra Sonic 007 (Look at all the candidates. Choose who you think is best. Choose wisely in 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell
He will suck up more lefty Dem votes than Republican.

Ralph Nader Reduex.

72 posted on 12/27/2007 6:35:47 AM PST by #1CTYankee (That's right, I have no proof. So what of it??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

I don’t see it having much of an effect on the Republicans, Libertarians hardly ever get around to voting for Republicans. That is just a ruse they use so that their candidates can masquerade as Republicans. When Rupual loses the nomination they will more than likely sit at home or vote dummycrat.


74 posted on 12/27/2007 6:37:32 AM PST by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

You know if we united behind one Republican we could still win... oh perish the thought... RINOs need to be taught a lesson otherwise they’ll take over the party... I will not vote for (insert RINO name here) no matter what! I didn’t leave the party the party left me. Bwahahahaha! She’s playing us like a fiddle. So who will Hillary’s Secretary of State be? Will she create a new cabinet position? How about her first and maybe second Supreme Court nominee?


78 posted on 12/27/2007 6:39:06 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

Another Perot?


81 posted on 12/27/2007 6:40:49 AM PST by varina davis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All; PhilDragoo; potlatch; devolve

86 posted on 12/27/2007 6:47:25 AM PST by Grampa Dave ("Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!"- Jim Robinson, Sept, 30, 2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

I won’t be surprised if he goes third-party. He was probably sincere about not wanting to do it originally, but he’s been raising crazy money, getting rock-star adulation, and become the darling of the drive-by media because he bashes President Bush and he’s always good for a kooky out-of-context sound bite.

Why wouldn’t he want to keep the ball rolling? He looks out there right now and sees what looks like pretty solid support, better than anything he saw when running on the LP ticket many years ago. He can’t win, but he can sure get out there and push his agenda—and now, he’s probably got money that any other third-party candidate would only dream of.

The question is, who’s he going to have the bigger impact on? Will he pull the radical anti-war vote away from Hillary! or Osama, or will he pull the paleo/libertarian vote away from the Republican nominee? Or both?

}:-)4


88 posted on 12/27/2007 6:47:48 AM PST by Moose4 (Wasting away again in Michaelnifongville.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

Ron/Dennis ‘08!!


92 posted on 12/27/2007 6:54:10 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 . Moveon is not us...... Moveon is the enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: connell

Ron Paul (third party)=President Hillary Rodman (socialist)


94 posted on 12/27/2007 6:56:41 AM PST by dmw (Aren't you glad you use common sense? Don't you wish everybody did?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson