Skip to comments.
With Thompson out, Tom McClintock leans to Ron Paul
Los Angeles Times ^
| Jan 25, 2008
| Dan Morain
Posted on 01/25/2008 12:59:01 PM PST by 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 Thompsons 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, McClintocks endorsement is seen as important in California.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: california; donquixote; elections; fredthompson; mcclintock; paul; ronpaul; tommcclintock; tommiclintock
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 401-420 next last
To: CautiouslyHopeful
21
posted on
01/25/2008 1:09:57 PM PST
by
Brian S. Fitzgerald
("We're going to drag that ship over the mountain.")
To: antinomian
"Remember wars end..."
Yes, for example when a country loses and is overrun by its enemies and subjugated to their precepts. Which is what will happen if we turn tuck-tail on the War Against Islamofascism.
To: ToryNotion
On this issue, Ron Paul is a strong as you can be Paul's view is the same as John Murtha's. I pray I never need you people to defend my country.
23
posted on
01/25/2008 1:10:49 PM PST
by
chesty_puller
(70-73 USMC VietNam 75-79 US Army Wash DC....VietNam was safer.)
To: Nachum; AuntB
He's better on illegal immigration You may want to check him out before he started running for president. He opposes using the military or national guard on the border, he opposed a national US immigration policy, he said we should let in anyone who wants to work, and he voted for the 2001 amnesty. If you like the Libertarian style of immigration policy, free and open borders, he is your guy.
24
posted on
01/25/2008 1:11:08 PM PST
by
mnehring
To: Redcloak
The war is maybe the only thing I don’t agree with him on. I disagree with the others far more.
25
posted on
01/25/2008 1:11:22 PM PST
by
stevio
((NRA))
To: CautiouslyHopeful
This tells me a lot about the remaining Republican candidates. Tom McClintock has
earned the respect of Californians over the years. It was not bestowed on him because he has a R after his name; it was earned by him because of his thoughtful and consistent stands on issues.
This tells me that the standing field really IS as bad as I thought it was. God bless Tom McClintock.
26
posted on
01/25/2008 1:11:26 PM PST
by
Finny
(FOX News: "We report only what we like. You decide based on what we decide.")
To: All
Could it be, maybe, perhaps...No facts here. Just speculation.
27
posted on
01/25/2008 1:11:58 PM PST
by
McGruff
(Fred Thompson. The last hope for conservatism.)
To: CautiouslyHopeful
But can the Republican Party really endorse an anti-Iraq-War candidate?
Out of the total votes cast in the events held so far the Republican primary voters have shown no indication of selecting Paul as their Party nominee..... He’s received somthing like 6.27% of the almost 1.7 million votes cast todate.
So in answer to your question my guess is the party is not going to endorse an anti-Iraq candidate.......
28
posted on
01/25/2008 1:11:59 PM PST
by
deport
(Go Florida... --11 days Super Tuesday -- [ Meanwhile:-- Cue Spooky Music--])
To: CautiouslyHopeful
The rest of the region could be with our withdrawal from Iraq. If other Western nations or the UN want to step in, by all means they can have it. I think Dr. Paul’s position is that we’d first allow gold and silver to compete with the dollar. A return to gold would have to be gradual. The first step is to strengthen the dollar and stop purposely using inflation to drive consumption.
To: Redcloak
If Paul wasnt a moonbat on the war, Id support him.
Same here. I have strong libertarian leanings, but Paul is way off base on foreign policy. Plus there just something about the guy that kinda bothers me.
30
posted on
01/25/2008 1:12:20 PM PST
by
zencat
(The universe is not what it appears, nor is it something else.)
To: wideawake
Granted, but concensus is the absence of leadership. If you are going to lead, then you lead to your point of view.
31
posted on
01/25/2008 1:12:28 PM PST
by
Bruinator
("It's the Media Stupid.")
To: Nachum
"If only if he wasn't so loony tunes." He might only be perceived as "loony tunes" because so many people here say he is. If he's right on (most) of the issues, then is he really that loony, or moreso significantly than the other candidates? McCain? Rudy? Romney? Huck?
So Ron Paul is the loony in that crowd? I don't buy it. I don't necessarily support Paul right now, but he is the most principled of those four, without a doubt in my mind. The others just blow with the wind...
32
posted on
01/25/2008 1:12:34 PM PST
by
buckleyfan
(WFB, save us!)
To: Truthsearcher
Wars could also end with a loss. Yea, but I would rather have someone whose goal isn't loss.
33
posted on
01/25/2008 1:12:38 PM PST
by
mnehring
To: CautiouslyHopeful
Loony is as loony does.
34
posted on
01/25/2008 1:12:40 PM PST
by
jmaroneps37
(Conservatives live in the truth. Liberals live in lies.)
To: Redcloak
“”If Paul wasnt a moonbat on the war, Id support him. I like everything else Ive heard him say, but the wars a deal breaker.
Fred Thompson is still on my ballot and Im voting for him anyway.””
Exactly my sentiment!!
35
posted on
01/25/2008 1:13:18 PM PST
by
o_zarkman44
(No Bull in 08!)
To: CJ Wolf
36
posted on
01/25/2008 1:13:39 PM PST
by
nicmarlo
To: antinomian
wars endSo do nations. I'd prefer that we did not.
37
posted on
01/25/2008 1:15:19 PM PST
by
Lucius Cornelius Sulla
(Mike Huckabee: If Gomer Pyle and Hugo Chavez had a love child this is who it would be.)
To: CautiouslyHopeful
Paul has always been my first choice, in spite of his foreign policy positions (which I don't share.) But I supported Fred, and now support Mitt, because I see them as both more electable, and better able to unify Conservatives.
Had I been as selfish and uncompromising as many other appear to still be, I would have supported Paul to the exclusion of all the others. To be honest, I don't care anywhere near as much about foreign policy as I do domestic policy. I fear things have gotten so bad at home, that foreign policy may be approaching irrelevancy.
38
posted on
01/25/2008 1:15:40 PM PST
by
sourcery
(Electile Disfunction: The inability to get excited about any of the available candidates)
To: RKV
I believe that the loss of liberty at home is the biggest threat we face. Paul is the only one who really wants smaller, less intrusive government. He is the logical choice.
To: antinomian
Remember wars end but federal programs never do.********************
Funny thing about wars. Usually, one side loses.
40
posted on
01/25/2008 1:16:25 PM PST
by
trisham
(Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 401-420 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson