Conservative/Republican Choice for President 2004

Colin Powell is the only one worth voting for.

 

Colin Powell is my first choice. Ross Perot would be second.

 

John McCain

 

Thanks for including Howard Phillips. He was on the ballot in the last election in most states.

 

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.
Sue

 

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?

 

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

PA Jim

 

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.

 

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.