Acting as if Senator George Allen is not a legitimate and worthy candidate for President of the United States is a fool's game, and undermines the credibility of anyone shilling that farce.
Who's acting as if he's not a legitimate candidate? Every voter decides who's most worthy of their vote. All I'm saying is that I'm not voting for a gun-grabber or an open-borders advocate. Allen may prove to be neither. But until I hear forceful statements from him that renounce his prior pro-gun-control and anti-American-national-sovereignty votes, based upon his record, I'm suspicious of him on both issues.
But your insults, implied or otherwise, are childish and improper. I'm just saying I won't vote for him RIGHT NOW, and would consider him were his stance clarified as I wish. Meanwhile, you claim his worthiness on an amorphous record. What would be clear enough to make you NOT vote Allen? Evidently it doesn't matter all all to you that he was with Feinstein, Clinton and Kennedy on some pretty important issues. Where would you draw the line, or is it all about 'winnability' with you? What if he came out in favor of an assault weapons ban or for a national law against concealed carry? What if he came out for open borders publicly?