Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by fromtheright, Apr 9, 2002.
Who is your first choice for President in 2004?
I'm also quite interested in any names you think I should have added.
Colin Powell is the only one worth voting for.
Colin Powell is my first choice. Ross Perot would be second.
The better question is "Who to back in 2008?"
Thanks for including Howard Phillips. He was on the ballot in the last election in most states.
From reading several posts on BB I know he is attractive to many conservatives here. I greatly admire him, and am lucky to have met him many years ago when he was getting The Conservative Caucus off the ground. He is truly a conservative's conservative, being "right" on social, economic, Constitutional, and foreign policy issues. I hope he does well in the poll, though I suspect that II people are crossing over and will skew the results.
I like Howard Phillips though it is difficult for someone outside the 2 parties to get elected. I voted for Alan Keyes in the poll. He and other true Conservatives in the Republican party are often ignored by the party elite who don't like his uncompromising stands. Bush is doing a good job but at times seems to lack direction. Personaly I think Bush will be in there til 2008 but who knows?
Good point, but IMHO the two parties are really one, and they are ruining out nation. So, in most cases (I say most because there is a rare instance of a truly good candidate on the Demopublican ticket) you're just throwing your vote away, when it could be used to get some steam into a minor party, which as I see it is our only hope.
Ever wonder how the Demopublicans can ban all opposition from public debates, even those who are ON THE BALLOT, and hardly anyone even questions it? It's so incredibly rotten and un-democratic, yet it's accepted. And now our president has broken one of the few promises he made and signed the Shays-Meehan Incumbent Protection Act.
Hopefully he'll be on the ballot here in 2004
This was asking about conservative/republican view? Powell isn't a conservative/republican, he isn't as liberal as McCain or middle of the road like President Bush. He's for even bigger goverment than President Bush is.
Both parties are to the left today!!!
Conservative/republican would have to be Alan Keys now that Pat isn't a republican.
I'm not even sure you can use conservative and republican together today.
That was fun! It was fantasy, right? I was left with only one choice, J.C. Watts, and I only picked him because I used to watch him play football. I have to agree with Jeff Weaver, John McCain would have been a good choice for me, anyway.
OK, here's the dream scenario:
The Constitution party and the Libertarian party join forces. This dcould be made possible by the Libertarians giving the not to the faction of their party who are pro-life (the true Libertarians!). Then, the Reform party joins with them, recognizing a true opportunity to reform. The Presidential candidate would then be Congressman Ron Paul, who ran for president as the Libetarian candidate in, I think, 1998.
Question: would "conservative" Christians support this, or vote for the ultra-liberal GW Bush, for no other reason that he's Republican?
I hate to admit it, but for me it depends on who the Democrat is and what the chances look like close to election.
I know it's just a fantasy, but I think this coalition would not be particularly strong:
(1) The Constitution Party, as much as its ideals strongly appeal to me, is a tiny group who would not add much muscle to the electoral chances;
(2) The pro-life wing of the Libertarians is pretty small in itself; whether those among them who remain libertarian/liberal on other social issues would stick with the coalition becomes further problematic (though I think Ron Paul could hold most of them; do you know how he did in 1998, that might prove me wrong);
(3) The Reform Party seems to me a Ross Perot quirk of assorted people, not just conservatives, disenchanted with the two parties, as evidenced by the radical Leftist that Buchancan was reportedly discussing the ticket with last time.
[ April 15, 2002, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: fromtheright ]
FTR, to your three points,
1) Yes, the Constitution party is small. But, it is the ONLY party that really represents the views of conservative Christians, and if they would support it with at least votes it would NOT be small. It is probably true that most won't, but like we tell our kids, "don't go and do something that's wrong just because all of your friends are doing it".
2) I did some work for Ron Paul's campaign. It's been awhile but if I recall he did about par with other more recent Libertarians. I agree, it's hard to say whether the rank and file would stay on board with a pro-life candidate today, but I think they did back then. Also I agree that Paul is the guy who could do it.
3) Yes, the Reform party is completely devoid of any cohesive principles or positions. Just like the Republicans. I think Buchanan made a HUGE mistake, he went for the $$$ and I think discredited himself to at least some degree as a candidate.
Check this out: http://covenantnews.com/baldwin010306.htm
I was surprised to see Carroll Campbell's name, since I haven't heard anything from him since he was governor of SC. Anybody know what he's up to these days?
I'm a big Lindsey Graham fan, so all you Gamecocks vote him into the Senate down there. I wouldn't mind seeing him on a presidential ticket someday.
I'll blame that one on my wife, as we were thinking of potential candidates. I'm embarrassed to say that McCain's name didn't occur to either of us.
Pa. Jim, Of the Libertarians here in Florida, I would vote for Bill Clinton or John McCain first and I can't stand those two.
Bob, my point is not that we should vote for libetarians, but simply that we should only vote for candidates who largely will work to implement things that we think are right. I too would not vote for many libertarians.
I would not vote for Bill Clinton if I thought he was "the best candidate who had a chance". And that goes for anyone else who opposes what I stand for, including GW Bush.