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.

[Jim Robinson]

Was Rudy a magnificent general in some other life or something? I don’t see anything in this life that would lead me to believe he should be put in charge of the military. The Boy Scouts, maybe. Oops, and maybe not.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

I think that there should be an unlimited number of candidates, all of them as conservative as Hunter and Thompson. The fact that you are not Red hasn’t prevented you from arguing from the aspect of Democratic Centralism. If the party voted to put minorities into gas chambers and creamatorias, would you go along? I would not.

[pay dirt]

Perhaps I wasn’t clear. I realize that no Democrats were listed in your table. The list included issues, but the WOT and our military’s best interests were not included. That, in my opinion, was a glaring error. I want the best and most reliable all around conservative too. I’ve seen that not everyone on any conservative/Republican forum has yet to agree on who would be the best candidate. That’s to be expected. What I am hoping and praying for is that sound minds WILL prevail when it comes time to pull that lever for the next President of the United States. We must NOT allow a Dem to become president because the worst of the R’s look like diamonds compared to what the Dem’s are offering up.

[Politicalmom]

How many of you agree with unspun that Huckabee is NOT a tax and spend nanny stater?

[unspun]

You're tempting me to stay in this thread longer. It is Jim R's, afterall....

1. I'd like to see more of a historian's analysis of the movement of the "social safety net" burden from the feds to the states, too. But I know it has occured (and we may be in for another dump-off, soon) and that state budgets all over the place have exploded. I'm just not familiar with states outside of my two.

2. Yes, I think Mike Huckabee has potential weaknesses in people-pleasing and perhaps even a bit of narcissism -- what politician doesn't, in his/her own way?

3. I think a part of Huckabee's thing is a "third way" approach, opposite of the New Democrats. However, I doubt that will hurt America any more than an intransigent Republican (who would likely give up the White House). Even if a Coolidge-type were elected, I think the backlash would be too strong and he would be a one-termer, followed by a problem Democrat reign of power. And speaking of the Coolidge analogy, I think we're headed for a big global recession, Pat Robertson or not and a Huckabee might even be able to keep the White House during one. (BTW, I think this will put some kybosh-sp? on globalism.)

4. Yes, I do hold out that Huckabee could use his persuasive prowess to teach Americans (think public school and state university kids - or think of Barna research) something of our principles -- based on the principles of the Declaration (and you know upon what that is based). I don't see how Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter can gain the "cred" to help to lead America out of our culture of degradation and death.

5. Justices, justices, justices.

6. Justices.

Now, give me some credit for not forcing a Biblical 7th point -- even though I am a Baptist preachers' kid -- and even though I don't believe I have to make that a disclaimer.   ;-`

[Jim Robinson]

Ok, which of the candidates listed in my table are in favor of surrendering and bringing the troops home and or otherwise weakening our national defenses.

[unspun]

And so, what say you?

[nicmarlo]

I’m still cogitating.....

and rereading...a third time.

I will respond....soon. : )

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

I think Huckabee would deserve a ‘W’, based on his comments about Guantamano and Bush’s ‘Bunker Mentality’.

[WOSG]

It’s wrong to mark Romney and the author of McCain-Kennedy the same on immigration. MCCain is worse.
McCain-Lieberman author is more of a nanny-stater than Romney. MCCain is worse.

[what's up]

Yes, but the time span between being sick to death enough for him to leave DC and then returning with a new lease on life strong enough to "change" Washington as President is pretty short.

Plus, his stifling of freedom of speech by backing CFR is no way to fix garbage in DC...CFR increases garbage.

Having said this, I will back Fred or anyone running as a Repub against the Democraps.

[vaudine]

PEOPLE KEEP MENTIONING NH--THOMPSON did not campaign there. He could have spent millions and McCain would still have won. He has been campaigning there for 8 years.

What gets me is that serious voters pay attention to NH only because MSM blather about it 24/7. I do not care how they voted. I have been there many times, and everyone I talked to (almost) was a Mass transplant and lib or lib-leaning.

Jim is dead on about Thompson and Hunter, and I am holding out for Fred to the bitter end. I refuse to allow the msm to tell me who is going to win.

vaudine

[WOSG]

Tancredo endorsed Romney.

If Tancredo can figure out that you eventually have to line up behind someone you dont agree with 100%, so should most thinking freepers.

I will vote for the GOP nominee, but McCain, Rudy and worst of them all - Huckabee ... not on a full stomach.

[LordBridey]

So my method comes down to...

Excellent

Now we are starting to broach the serious business of handicapping, and your approach is a starter, but if the goal is to pick the candidate who has the best chance to win in November there are a lot more categories that need to considered. Jim Rob's just selects the man who is most conservative. If the goal of the party is to win, which I believe is the purpose of a party to begin with, we have to consider a lot more factors, such as age, charisma, experience, past track record, current economic climate, current attitude of electorate, name recognition, money, potential to raise money, qualifications and appeal of the opponent, recent success or lack thereof, effort, strength of campaign staff, appearance, geographic advantages, appeal to strong, what base can be drawn to generate the most support , world situation, gendre, race, etc. etc. These are all considerations if we want to win.

I have not attributed numerical values to these qualifications, but a quick glance at the field shows me that Huckabee would be someone to consider to put money on, despite numerous personal reservations about the man. I might have a personal inclination to big horses or black greyhounds, but when I bet money, and more importantly when I bet on someone who will definitely have an impact on my country, I will set my personal preferences aside to select the winner.

Hillary must be stopped!

[colorcountry]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but from looking at your table, Romney is the worst candidate.

There are two candidates with five X’s, Mitt and Rudy. Mitt also has two W’s, while Rudy has none. Every category for McCain has a mark, however he has only 3 X’s and four W.

And what difference does it make, they are ALL unacceptable.

Thanks for clearly pointing it out, in an easy to understand format.

[RebekahT]

Nic,
Please take a look at this open letter from an Arkansan that has made its way all over the internet, including on Hugh Hewitt’s blog:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1947524/posts

It was written by a personal friend of mine.

[pay dirt]

Your poll did not list the candidates; Democrat candidates nor Republican candidates. The poll simply referred to the “eventual Republican candidate”. The issues that were listed did not include the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, nor the WOT, nor support for our military men and women’s missions. I believe the WOT and our military is at the top of ANY issue we face in this election. Am I wrong?

[unspun]

Arrgh! Help us, Lord!

Ah, now I see why your gracious response, LB.

[pay dirt]

As a side note, perhaps your chart would be even more effective if you were to place the Democrat candidates stance on those issues side by side with the Republican candidates. And, of course, also include the WOT, Iraq, Afghanistan, and our military’s best interests in your list of issues as well.

Also, may I ask which issue is at the top of your list? It’s easy to make a “laundry list” of issues that are important to us, but when push comes to shove, a wise person does have priorities.

[nicmarlo]

the "social safety net" burden from the feds to the states

Is this in reference to his stance on illegals? or commutations or taxes, or other issues? If to illegals....federal laws require that states, cities, towns follow those laws over and above any state laws.

Federal Law--Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)

A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or local government) commits a federal felony when she or he: assists an illegal alien she/he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or encourages that illegal alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or her to an employer or by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.

In its clear reading, therefore, any individual, city, group of people, or person, who defies federal law, due to personal conscience or any other reason is in violation of federal law. There is no legal validity to "sanctuary cities" or, for that matter, enacting state laws which contradict federal laws. I don't see that Huckabee has enforced, or shown a desire to enforce, existing laws.

People-pleasing skills. Well, I guess it's one thing to have a problem with that. We aren't all perfect in all areas. But that isn't what was brought up. (I recall earlier today we touched on the "vindictiveness" part concerning his son. This is the second time I've now read something about that. I don't know him, so I can't level that kind of charge against him. However, "if" that is something within his character, it's quite different than merely having difficulty with "people-pleasing." Leaders cannot have vindictiveness as a character trait and be a good leader, imo. It creates fear. Do you know this man well enough to say that this is just comments made by people who misunderstand or are just out to get him?

As to helping lead America out of our culture of degradation and death, I assume you believe that Huckabee, because of his Christian background, would be able to do this. I don't know his position on abortion within the state. But if you're referring to, also, his commutations, I don't think "forgiving" murderers who have been convicted by a jury of their peers sets a very good example, either, for accepting the consequences of evil deeds, even if they later, after conviction, show remorse. Commutations, by the thousands, may have, instead, made him look like a "get out of jail free" by saying "I believe." (I know you are aware that God enacted the death penalty in the Old Testament, so, it is not sinful to continue it.)

Concerning judges, I have not read anything (yet) on his appointments as governor. I assume, by your repeated notations, he made excellent choices and would continue to do so.

I thank you for your responses and for tarrying here longer than you had planned. You must have the patience of....Job. : )