Posted on 09/22/2005 5:11:53 PM PDT by RWR8189
Richardson is an adulterer, how many people care about that? the friggin presidential candidate's husband took a BJ in the oval office, and you are telling me that the ticket is dead because the VP fooled around on his wife?
Well if its a choice between McCain and Hillary I guess I'd have to vote McCain. But we're talking about a choice between McCain and any other Republican candidate. I'm sure any other Republican candidate would win.
"One thing's for sure: you don't speak for anybody other than a few knuckle draggers in your klavern."
I work with washington lobbyists and conservative activists on a weekly basis and they ALL say McCain has no hope in the Primary.
You don't have to believe me but when McCain gets run out of New hampshire on a rail, I'll give you some lipstick so you can kiss my butt and tell me how I was right.
tell me, who did AZ elect as governor? Colorado elected a Dem hispanic in a statewide US Senate race.
they are in play.
What is your source for these stats? A link would be nice as well.
2) Richardson is an adulterer. Hillary's VEEP will either be Mark Warner or Evan Bayh, Richardson is a nonstarter
Nobody cares about somebody's private life. Bill Richardson is a helluva lot more in touch with his voters and his state than many other governors.
You're 0-2.
You won't change my mind. To me, there's no difference voting for McCain than voting for Clinton. We might actually be better off with Clinton because then maybe the GOP will grow some balls again.
MCCAIN NO!
I will not vote for people I don't like or trust. If Bill Clinton was a republican I wouldn't vote for him either.
Napolitano won by 11,000 votes. The Republican Party chose the wrong candidate to run against her. Even I had a hard time pulling the hammer for Salmon. There were also several third party candidates that got 100,000 votes which hurt Salmon. That won't be an issue in the race for the Presidency.
One more reason not to vote for Captain RINO.
McLame is shifting to the right?? I don't believe it.
31 states to 19. 31 -19 = 1?
"a solid conservative, who is unknown and uninspiring - WILL LOSE"
Two points
1) Even if a solid conservative can't win, it doesn't matter because the primary voters will ONLY vote for conservative candidates, so wer'e stuck with a noname conservative in 2008 whether you like it or not.
2) If you need name ID before the primary to win, then howcome Clinton defeated a sitting President in 1992 despite the fact that nobody knew who Clinton was in 1989?
"In 2000, we had a well known candidate, good name recognition, well funded, that the american people were comfortable with because his father had been president, who was the governor of a large state - AND WE LOST THE POPULAR VOTE."
You're rewritting history.
In 2000 we had the son of a failed President who was successfully painted as an idiot son of privilege by the Media and Gore campaign. Further Rove ran a mediocre campaign and we only lost the popular vote because of the stupid DUI revalation a week before the election.
"and in 2004, as an incumbent, we WON BY ONE STATE."
Again, Rove runs weak campaigns.
What does the republican party stand for if it votes for a ahole that turns our stomach?
NOT A CHANCE!!
If we become a handout society, McCain would be ideal.
AZ elected Butch, but only because of campaign finance laws. Matt learned his lesson.
we won in 2004 by one state electorally - the only result that counts.
As I've said, I can live with McCain as a last resort.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.