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]

I don’t know, you have the tax increases for cigarettes, tobacco, snuff, wine, hunting and fishing, and the fat tax, etc., pretty soon Huckabee’s gonna start taxing fun.

[TigersEye]

Stifling the www? Online Freedom of Speech Act (H.R. 1606)

"1606 is needed because federal courts have ordered the Federal Election Commission to regulate "electioneering communications" on the Internet because of the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act (McCain-Feingold). If H.R. 1606 fails to become law, your Web site or blog could be shut down for the 30 days prior to a primary election and the 60 days prior to a general election should you express "electioneering communications."

[Tramonto]

How many of you agree with unspun that Huckabee is NOT a tax and spend nanny stater? I don't think he is. On January 20th, you should do a poll on who everyone will support if Fred doesn't make it.

[Iscool]

And the majority of Republicans are going for the Xs and Ws...

[unspun]

I agree with “unspun” that Governor Huckabee isn’t a “tax and spend nanny stater” ... but only because you explicitly asked.

More evidence for the defense.

(But I still might give him "W's" there.)

[Jim Robinson]

I think unspun is beginning to see the evidence. Won’t be long until the “W” becomes an “X.”

[Jim Robinson]

That’s pretty sad.

[Iscool]

The only two candidates without 3 or more Xs are Hunter and Thompson, with a combined vote total in NH of 2%. Which perhaps explains why some are willing to consider other possibilites.

This doesn't explain 'why' most are considering other possibilities...This explain that many ARE considering other possibilities...And we can only guess at WHY...

[WOSG]

Huckabee is your lousy candidate... why are you asking me to do all the homework. Gov Matt Blunt is the #1 Gov for fiscal responsibility and you are free to find out all you want about him from Cato or elsewhere.

Huckabee was ranked 45th! AWFUL, DREADFUL, a true tax-and-spend liberal with an R label. Not a conservative.

It seems to me YOU need to do some homework as you lack the basic understanding of the difference between a real conservative and a Huckster!

The numbers and the facts are plain, and all you do is try to spin away the truth. Huckabee is not a conservative; I didn’t say it, Rush said it and Rush is right.

[unspun]

I think unspun is beginning to see the evidence. Won’t be long until the “W” becomes an “X.”

Still a-sittin' right here, post #154.

...plus #157, of course (Huckabee - no land for peace; Thompson - fine with that)

...plus giving Thompson a solid "W" for Abortion/Marriage, for his federal "laziness," there, hiding behind the 10th, and his grumpy reluctance to relate the principles.

[Tramonto]

“The only two candidates without 3 or more Xs are Hunter and Thompson, with a combined vote total in NH of 2%. Which perhaps explains why some are willing to consider other possibilites.”

This doesn’t explain ‘why’ most are considering other possibilities...This explain that many ARE considering other possibilities...And we can only guess at WHY...

Its the spin/honesty column. If you can’t spin with the best of them, you can’t win. For example... In the Sunday debate, Thompson says, with a straight face, that we need to reduce future SS benefits and Mitt chimes in that we only need to reduce benefits for the rich.

[johnny7]

I don’t see a category for Iraq/Fundemental Islam... in which Hucklebee is definitely weak. To me... Iraq/Fundemental Islam, Open Borders/Amnesty are the two issues you MUST get right in order to get my vote. Anti-Free Speech, Tax and Spend, Gun Grabbing, and Abortion/Gay Rights... follow closely behind.

So far, only Thompson and Hunter score high marks across the board.

[unspun]

WOSG, anyone,

Please thoroughly relate the record of any governor of more than four years, in a state with an average or greater degree of poverty, who has an excellent rating in “tax and spend” in the years beginning with 1998.

Well, WOSG has miserably failed me. Obviously not a compassionate conservative.

Can anyone else come to the aid of this poor, ignorant FReeper?

Give me the whole low-down -- years in office, budget in, budget out, deficits? surpluses? tax cuts? tax hikes?

Is there any governor that hasn't had a budget buildup, in the late 90's and/or since?

[WOSG]

Do you approve of Huckabee’s support for the comprehensive amnesty for illegals bill?

Huckabee on President Bush’s illegal immigration plan:

“To think that we’re going to go lock up 12 million people, or even round them up and drive them to the border and let them go, might make a great political speech, but it’s not going to happen. What should happen, however, is exactly what I think the president has proposed, and that is that we create a process where people make restitution for the fact they have broken the law.

It’s not an amnesty, and I know that there are some who think that anything less than essentially grabbing them by the nape of the neck and tossing them over a fence, real or imaginary, is amnesty. But I think that’s ridiculous. And whether it’s Patrick Kennedy, Rush Limbaugh, or an illegal immigrant, there ought to be some rationality in how we apply our law. We do that every day.”

[Jim Robinson]

No wonder none of them are running as conservative Republicans. They just don’t measure up. Big government nanny staters have taken over.

[WOSG]

unspun - how unbecoming of you. I didn’t fail you. I gave you a name - Matt Blunt - and gave you directions.

If you are so clueless as to be a Huckster supporter even after begin informed of his dreadful tax-and-spend soft-on-crime record, then why should I bother doing your research for you on these irrelevent questions you have?

You obviously dont care about facts or you’d dig for them yourself. All you want is to waste my time on irrelevencies. Slick as the Huckster himself but no sale.

“Can anyone else come to the aid of this poor, ignorant FReeper?” -— Yes, lets simplify it. You are ingorant, so pick another candidate. Pick ANYONE BUT HUCKABEE and then take it from there.

“Give me the whole low-down — years in office, budget in, budget out, deficits? surpluses? tax cuts? tax hikes?”

It is so hard for you to find the Cato website and get their detailed reports? google is your friend.

“Is there any governor that hasn’t had a budget buildup, in the late 90’s and/or since?”
The spending increases under Mitt Romney were less than Mike Huckabee’s.

[unspun]

No wonder none of them are running as conservative Republicans. They just don’t measure up. Big government nanny staters have taken over.

My point is it's been dumped, state-by-state, nanny-by-nanny, onto the 50 capital laps -- especially for any state that has bunches of poor folk (and their Democrat politicians). Clinton and Gingrich called it "welfare reform."

Not that it was a bad move for the feds. It's just caused some real hard times for GOP'ers in the states -- and parties for the Democrats.

BTW, you did see Huckabee's moves for fiscal discipline here, right boss?

"Center-right," as the venerated Mr. Norquist would say.

[Tramonto]

That sounds like something Huckabee, Thompson and Romney all said.

I like Huckabee’s current plan however, Im not sure that even a majority of illegals will self deport. There is going to be amnesty even if Tancredo was president. The best I am hoping for is border security and employee verification laws to prevent future invasions.

[unspun]

unspun - how unbecoming of you. I didn’t fail you. I gave you a name - Matt Blunt - and gave you directions

Nope; doesn't qualify (though I did look at Cato and CforG sites and didn't find).

The spending increases under Mitt Romney were less than Mike Huckabee’s.

Yup, by some. Each state is different. Massachussetts likely had a ton of social programs already in place, compared to a Southern state -- more fat more easily cut, here and there.

[Jim Robinson]

Yeah, campaign spin. I’ve seen it... and heard it. Simply increases the untrustworthy spin factor.