With Thompson out, Tom McClintock leans to Ron Paul

Los Angeles Times ^ | Jan 25, 2008 | Dan Morain

[CautiouslyHopeful]

With Fred Thompson out of the presidential race, who's a self-respecting conservative to go for? Could it be, maybe, perhaps, a certain Republican-libertarian from Texas?

That's one question perplexing California state Sen. Tom McClintock, possibly the second-most-famous California Republican currently in office after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

McClintock created a stir two months when he endorsed Thompson’s presidential candidacy. Having run for governor, lieutenant governor and state controller, McClintock has shown that while he has not won a statewide contest, he can win GOP primaries, which conservatives tend to dominate. So heading into the Feb. 5 primary, McClintock’s endorsement is seen as important in California.

[ajay_kumar]

So Ron Paul will position soldiers in tall buildings?

[CautiouslyHopeful]

200 posts on this thread. Ron Paul really does hit a nerve.

[trisham]

When November rolls around and McCain or Romney loses in a landslide to Hillary I'll be making plans to move to Costa Rica.

**********************

Why wait? If your loyalty to our country is so frail, leave now.

[darkmatter]

“War does not equal conservatism”

No but anti-war and anti-american does equal liberal!

Surrendering to a Rebel government in Richmond, to the Germans, Japanese and Alquaeda aint sure as hell aint conservative.

As far as your 7 out of 10 comment, tell me again where you differ from the anti-war left? Cause you sure sound like a kos kid to me.

[CurlyBill]

I must say, I don’t know why so many individuals find Romney much better than McCain. To me, Romney seems to have just as many warts.

McCain supported Amnesty. McCain opposed the Bush tax cut and actually used class warfare rhetoric straight from the Democratic handbook in doing so. McCain is fully on board the whacko Al Gore "glocal warming" kick. Republicans can't stomach that. Romney was not my candidate, but McCain has far more warts.

[3niner]

Fred Thompson is still on my ballot and I’m voting for him anyway.

Good! I've been elected as a delegate, from my precinct, to my county convention. I intend to keep supporting Fred. He might have dropped out of the race, but he could still bring some delegates to the national convention.

[trisham]

I’m voting for Fred in the primary. At least I can feel good about it, which I could not voting for any of the others.

[3niner]

Tancredo -> Romney (while Thompson was still a contender)
Hunter -> Huckabee
McClintock -> Ron Paul

Is anybody sincere anymore?

[who knows what evil?]

Dr. Paul may be a bit of a tard on foreign policy, but don't kid yourself for a second that his domestic policy doesn't beat the tar out of any other GOP candidate out there.

I have to agree...his 'Economic Revitalization Plan' (posted at his website) is a conservative's wet dream; repealing the death tax, eliminating capital gains taxes; taxes on tips and social security, etc.

[CautiouslyHopeful]

Given the choices, what’s insincere about supporting what you believe to be the lesser of five evils?

[darkmatter]

“Sources, please...”

CIvil War:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbOE4Ip7In0 - 126k

World Wars 1 and 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k0u_v9T0F8&feature=related

Yea call me picky but I would rather vote for a Mitt or a Rudy who actually cares whether we win than that clown you call a leader.

By the way if you are so for Ron Paul, why wouldnt YOU vote for the ‘Rats? Dennis Kucinich loves your guy:

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/119606963456620.xml&coll=2

The only people here close to voting for dems are anti-war Ron Paul supporters.

[aj7360]

"Will it not leave a power vacuum?"

Sure.

Much like the vacuum in Paul's HEAD!

[glorgau]

But can the Republican Party really endorse an anti-Iraq-War candidate?

The party can't, but lots of voters will. I'm voting for him because he's far better than "none of the above".

[frankiep]

Now that's something I can get behind.

I have found myself liking Paul more and more in the past few weeks. I always thought that in the grand scheme of things that there is a dimes worth of difference between R's and D's (for the most part). What I particularly like about Paul is that despite his low poll numbers and nonexistant media coverage up to this point, he hasn't changed his Constitutionalist views. The rest of these guys change their views, or at least try to conceal them, whenever they think it might get them a few more votes and then attack everyone else for changing their views.

[CPT Clay]

Good Tagline!

[FocusNexus]

Just imagine, if McClintock would have become gov of CA, now the Gov of CA would be endorsing Ron Paul!

[ronnie raygun]

Great choice Tom! Guess you’ll be going down with the ship MMMMMMM

[Catphish]

Why not former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney? "I want somebody with a consistent record," McClintock said. "I want someone who didn’t have to go through a political epiphany the day before he announced his candidacy."

Me too. No Romney for me, no way, no how.

[Maelstorm]

There are two things with Paul that keep me from supporting him. His isolationist stance on the MiddleEast and his support for legalization of drugs and support for other neoliberal causes. As for the Primary. I’m voting for Fred Thompson and I may just write him in for the General Election depending on how the nominee behaves himself. McCain and Romney are going to watch themselves because if they start using “compassionate conservative” rhetoric then I’m not voting for either of them.

I’m sick of it. I gave it a try with GWB and all it got him was beating by the left and it has shattered the GOP into splinters. It also blurred in the minds of the general public the differences between Republicans and Democrats.
Now we have to reestablish ourselves as the party of fiscal responsibility. I don’t think it will be too hard because looking at the proposals coming out of the left fiscal responsibility isn’t even on their minds. What they are proposing will make the spending of Republicans look like an account only slightly overdrawn. One thing is certain is that if the GOP nominee decides to play nice with the left he will be destroyed.

The gloves are off and there is a reason the Democrat controlled Congress is rushing to implement a tax cut rebate. They see it as an investment with hopes of more spending and future tax hikes.

[Castro]

Obviously there is going to be disagreement on the WOT. Dr. Paul has, through his rhetoric, convinced me that his position is the correct one. That aside, because among conservatives there will not be agreement, what are the positions that Dr. Paul is less conservative than the other candidates? Abortion? Paul is the most pro-life of the candidates and can speak on the issue (and has) from a very personal perspective. Economics? A return to a secure dollar which can compete internationally and creates true wealth for Americans is factorially more conservative and better for you and me than the other candidates. Entitlement programs? Paul wants to end all of them. Immigration? He wants to deport all illegal immigrants and offer no amnety. Trade? Paul is the only one who will condemn the horrible free-trade agreements that the U.S.A. has signed into and furthermore is the only one who will address and oppose the slipery-slope leading to a North American Economic Union. Guns? Paul is the staunchest individual-freedom candidate left.