Election 2008, The race for the White House

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

I think I could go for this guy!

WeAz · **Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:23 pm**

I hope that guy runs. He'll send every moderate running towards the democrats.

Republican_Man · **Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:27 pm**

TrekkieMage · **Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:42 pm**

Republican_Man · **Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:49 pm**

WeAz · **Tue Jan 16, 2007 7:20 pm**

And Tancredo is incredible conservative. Too much so socially. He'd put people off.

Republican_Man · **Tue Jan 16, 2007 7:45 pm**

TrekkieMage · **Tue Jan 16, 2007 9:39 pm**

I'm talking about honesty about his character - not his political track record. I caught a clip of an article about an autobiography he wrote a while ago - prior to any presidential aspirations. He openly admits that he screwed up as a teenager and as a young adult. He isn't afraid of the fact that he has an imperfect past. Lets compare this to politicians who hide behind the ideal that they have a perfect past - and none do.

He doesn't strike me as the politician who would do anything to get ahead in his career (I'm thinking George Allen's issues with his taxes, and the Alaskan bridge to nowhere...).

But again, this is just an impression that I've gotten, not a fact based thesis or well researched opinion.

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

Republican_Man · **Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:27 pm**

Okay, so he's honest about his personal life, which is most certainly a good and idealistic quality. He is a good man. But he is far from honest about his politics, which is very, very important when trying to become elected to such an office. Rather, he's deceptive about them and hides behind the phony idea that he's a centrist when he is really very liberal.

If I was voting solely on character, okay, Obama would be up there with Tancredo. But when you put honesty about political views and political views in general, I couldn't even consider voting for him, or being happy about him being elected to the office.

I remember his speech at the Democratic convention and it was very good, very well-given, and very convincing. But it shadowed the truth about his political views. He's a liberal, but he doesn't want the public to know that. I can't blame him, but if he wants to be known as the honest politician, he should be honest about where he stands.

TrekkieMage · **Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:55 pm**

I'm not sure anyone can honestly claim to be centrist anymore. The entire thing is a spectrum, so everyone falls slightly to one side or the other. And if they fall slightly to the left, the right cries out: OMG!!THEY'RE TOO LIBERAL!!!!!!11!!

But if they fall slightly to the right, the left cries: OMG!!THEY'RE TOO CONSERVATIVE!!!!!11!!

However, I do see a bit of what you're complaing about:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/key-votes/

Only once on there did he break from the Dems. However, several of those votes (like the stem cell research) were things that a majority of Americans seem to agree with him on, or are indifferent to.

Republican_Man · **Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:07 pm**

Yes, well, this isn't a matter of him being just "too liberal" for being only slightly on the left. Lieberman is quite liberal, but many conservatives like him and don't consider him "too liberal." So that is far from the case. I would consider voting for Lieberman for president, but never once would I consider voting for Obama. (And that of course has absolutely nothing to do with race.)

What Obama is is, simply put, a leftist, plain and simple. He is a very liberal person. It's nothing like what you detailed there, because it's the truth.

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

It's official....

Republican_Man · **Sat Jan 20, 2007 9:34 pm**

Took her long enough

Republican_Man · **Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:12 pm**

A good analysis of the election thus far today in political analyst Dick Morris's latest column. And good news for Rudy.

Note to the Mods: I got this from an e-mail (he e-mails his columns) so I can't just post part of it and link to it. Go to www.dickmorris.com to subscribe to his column.

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

Let me feign my excitement that liberals are now running as Republicans

. Of course, after Bush, I'm sure we'll be lucky to get anyone labeled a Republican into the White House.

WeAz · **Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:15 pm**

I could vote for Giuliani. Not so for Tancredo.

Republican_Man · **Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:57 pm**

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

Republican_Man · **Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:24 pm**

A conservative needs to stand for the basic principles that make a conservative a conservative, and those are the principle of limited government and fiscal conservatism. Guiliani changed a three billion or so dollar deficit at the beginning of his term into a two billion or so dollar surplus at the end of his term - all while cutting taxes and shrinking the size of government. He's also strong as national security and decreased crime significantly as mayor.

My main problem with the Republican party and conservative movement is that it's been overrun by the social conservatives. I'm a social conservative, but only to an extent. I'm finding it difficult to reconcile my true conservative principles with my social conservative principles, however. I see the conservative movement today as different from that of Ronald Reagan, and I think that the Republican party has put too much focus on courting the evangelical, social conservative vote, and I think that's a mistake overall.

But so I believe fiscal responsibility/conservatism and the principles of limited government are what truly makes a conservative. And that, by all accounts, is the case, and I'd say Guiliani, looking at his record, is more conservative in the true sense of the term than Bush, though maybe I suppose they're about the same, considering all factors and what makes a neo-con (of which I am not).

I just watched an interview with Guiliani on Hannity and colmes. You should check it out later tonight when it's on FoxNews.com. He's better on social issues than I thought, and does not support gay marriage. My main distaste about him is that he's not much better on illegal immigration than Bush, but I'd trust him with national security like I would few others.

WeAz · **Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:28 pm**

Are there any Republican front-runners who aren't anti-gay?

Republican_Man · **Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:14 am**

You wanna play that game? Okay, I'll play.

Are there any Democratic front-runners who aren't anti-capitalism?
Are there any Democratic front-runners who aren't anti-life?
Are there any Democratic front-runners who aren't anti-family values?
Are there any Democratic front-runners who aren't liars?
Are there any Democratic front-runners who don't hate the rich?
Are there any Democratic front-runners who aren't pro-illegal immigration?

You want me to continue? My whole point is that playing that game is nothing short of despicable. It doesn't make any sense, and that's not the kind of politics you should play. If you support keeping marriage the way it's been - maintaining traditional marriage - you're anti-gay? Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

And now that you've both had your fun, back to campaign announcements.

Republican_Man · **Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:25 am**

Having to defend against a baseless attack against good men (including folks I detest and disagree with like McCain) isn't fun, you know.

Anyways, I would like Tancredo to get the nomination, but that's not going to happen. I was very, very impressed with Guiliani's display tonight. He really did well and really seemed presidential. I think that Guiliani's going to end up being my guy, and he may very well win the nomination and has a good chance at being our next president.