Free Republic's (1/9) poll on Republican candidates' liberal positions that would be deal killers

Free Republic Poll ^ | 1/9/2008 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

(1/9) If the eventual Republican presidential nominee has a record including one or more of the following non-conservative positions, would you vote for him anyway or which item specifically would most likely be a deal killer?

• Abortion/gay rights

• Open borders/amnesty

• Gun grabber

• Tax & Spender

• Nanny stater

• Untrustworthy/flip flopper

• Anti-free speech

• Two or more could kill deal

• Three or more definitely kill deal

• I'll vote "R" regardless

Click on source link above to respond to the poll.

---

Three or more liberal positions on critical issues would definitely kill the deal in my book.

The way I see it:

X = Candidate holds or has record of non-conservative position. W = Weak or mixed positions.

Candidate	Abortion/ Gay Rights	Open Borders/ Amnesty	Gun Control	Tax and Spend	Nanny Stater	Untrustworthy Spinner Flip flopper	Campaign Finance Reform
Giuliani	X	X	X	-	-	X	X
Huckabee	-	X	-	X	X	X	W
Hunter	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
McCain	W	X	W	W	W	X	X
Romney	X	X	W	W	X	X	X
Thompson	-	-	-	-	-	-	X

Thompson and Hunter are most conservative, but I prefer Thompson because Hunter's going to have a tough time making himself known and jumping from the House to the Presidency.

Please correct me where I'm wrong.

[gitmo]

Do you think that we could convince Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter to run on the same ticket?

That would be wonderful. Unfortunately, they've barely pulled off 1% between the two of them in the primaries / cauci so far.

[sneakers]

I work for a Republican elected official but I have to agree. I’m probably out too. The GOP will get none of my money.

I’m voting for Hunter. I’ll stick with him for as long as he’s in the race.

[pillut48]

[raises hand proudly]
Wish I could send more, but with twins on the way the budget doesn’t allow it!

[longtermmemmory]

actually I would have kept just the two or more rather than the three or more. Those two together show that conservatives trend to NOT being one issue voters.

Chart is a great idea.
(though I think Giuliani’s quality of life initiatives make him strong on the being a nanny stater)

[ripnbang]

It’s old school Wash. DC supporting each other. It is time for a change. Even though Fred has been there previously, he is not entrenched. Hunter would be good as well. I love the Thompson/Bolton ticket though...

[GovernmentIsTheProblem]

“Please correct me where I’m wrong.”

You left Paul off the list.

He has his own problems, to be sure, but none of them are negatives you mentioned. According to your scorecard, he is the only one with no checks in any box.

I know you don’t like the guy but he did beat Fred, Hunter and Rudy in primaries...

[longtermmemmory]

combine the two or more and the three or more categories.

gives a different picture.

[Uri’el-2012]

I am a Reconstructed Southern democrat,
I will only vote for a conservative.

[ripnbang]

It’s old school Wash. DC supporting each other. It is time for a change. Even though Fred has been there previously, he is not entrenched. Hunter would be good as well. I love the Thompson/Bolton ticket though...

[GovernmentIsTheProblem]

Correction - Hunter has none too and he’s been my #1 all along.

Still the point stands - Hunter and Paul are the only ones who get 100% on this list.

[LibLieSlayer]

“What would you suggest”

One option is that one can legally vote “uncommitted” as a write in and these uncommitted delegates are required to vote for who they best think will represent the platform adopted at the Convention. At least your vote will count.

LLS

[longtermmemmory]

perfect except for the fact nobody is voting for him in any significant number.

[processing please hold]

Is there a party, anywhere, in America now for people with actual principles?

I beg you on bended knee, if you find one please ping me.

[Old Sarge]

Is there a party, anywhere, in America now for people with actual principles?

No.

[Grunthor]

“That would be wonderful. Unfortunately, they’ve barely pulled off 1% between the two of them in the primaries / cauci so far.”

Fred was third in Iowa and I think second in Wyoming.

[unspun]

Corections, regarding Fred Thompson:

1. Despite securing the endorsements of lobbyists...

Fred Thompson is opposed to the Human Life Amendment.
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/263508.aspx

Fred Thompson is opposed to the Marriage Amendment.
http://www.latestpolitics.com/blog/2007/09/fred-thompson-proposes-marriage.html

2. Thompson at least at one time held a pro-amnesty position, as did many of the other candidates.
http://www.redstate.com/stories/culture/life_issues/fred_thompsons_record_speaks_for_itself#comment-489629
His current propoosal is weaker than Mike Huckabee’s (send to Mexico and get to the back of the line) plan.

[Eagles6]

"they've barely pulled off 1% between the two of them in the primaries / cauci so far."

Long way to go and anything can happen. Look at iran's little boat show the other day. Also remember that these were 2 extremely liberal states.

And do you know anyone who has been polled? We have a fairly large, long lived clan who all vote and none of us, in our combined centuries of life, have never been polled or know anyone who has been.

[infidel29]

Do you think that we could convince Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter to run on the same ticket?

I'd like that, I also wouldn't mind if either one picked Rick Santorum as his VP.

[processing please hold]

We really need another option. “Any one of them” is a deal breaker. I guess I won’t be voting in this poll. :(

[My_Name_is_a_Number]

ILLEGAL ALIENS = Death of America

Who cares if the Republicans win if the result of their actions are detrimental to the country and its citizens? At that point any moral claim to office is abandoned.

If we want political leaders who have contempt for this country, its citizens, its laws and the Constitution, with a compulsive need to degrade our culture and sell our sovereignty on the cheap, we have Democrats for that. Better to be demeaned by actual foes that are easily definable and open about who they are. At least we know going in what to expect and prepare for.

Supposed conservatives that have led us to believe that their interests were our interests, and lulled into a false sense of security, we are ambushed and savaged by these “friends”. It is a vile betrayal and unforgivable. Fearful incompetent leaders, through gross negligence, that allow the quality of traditional American values to be sacrificed are anathema.

Republican leaders must now choose to either defend their country with everything they have to rid us of the scourge of illegal aliens, thereby regaining the respect and confidence of the public they serve...

...Or, they can give in to their childish fears of being called racists (actually a badge of courage that confirms the effectiveness of actions), sell out the country, thus surrendering everything, including their careers, and forever be remembered as cowards and dwarfs stunted by lack of character and courage.

If the latter path is chosen may they rot in hell chained between Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid.

I will never vote for McCain or Huckabee. The others must be made to wear a short leash

I live in Los Angeles. Need I say more?