[Jim Robinson]

What amazes me are those conservatives who believe that Bill Clinton would be better for the country than Bob Dole, especially after having suffered through eight years of slime and corruption, not to mention the huge losses in national security, etc. Now you're ready to sit on your hands and turn it over to Gore or Hillary? Some principles I do not understand.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

He signed CFR. I believe I said earlier on this thread that I could put up with almost any compromise Bush makes, but CFR did me in, so to speak.

[Twodees]

I never met a single conservative who thought that Clinton was a better choice than Dole. All of the conservatives I know realized that there wasn't a discernible difference. I'm certainly not willing to sit on my hands and let the democrats have it. I just ain't willing to vote for somebody who may as well be a democrat. How is it more principled to vote for a republican who'll allow a huge national security risk like an open southern border during a war than not to vote? Is pandering to the citizens of another country, here illegally, not corruption? It makes no sense to me to say, "I'm a conservative, dedicated to preserving the Constitution of the US and supporting a return to our founding principles, but I'll vote for a liberal of this party to keep a liberal of the other party from winning". What principle are you adhering to by voting for whoever the GOP trots out just because they aren't democrats? Whatever it is, I don't understand that one either.