Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/9/2007 7:09:55 PM EST
Well, all the candidates are in and they've had the first debate with the entire field. There are several candidates who really don't have any chance at all:

Huckabee
Tancredo
Hunter (even though he's the best man for the job )
Brownback
Ron Paul
McCain

And if there is anyone I've forgotten then they're really fucked.

The way I see it there are 3 contenders. I will list them in order of strongest to weakest right now:

1. Rudy Guiliani
2. Fred Thompson
3. Mitt Romney

So the question is, with the primaries starting in about 3 months who do you think the nominee will be?

I am pulling for Fred Thompson, but I have a feeling that it is going to be Rudy. What say you?
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:10:51 PM EST
I took that poll in another thread. 100% for Fred.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:12:38 PM EST
I'd say its gonna be close between Fred and Guliani.

The idea that it might even be close says alot about the make-up of the Republican party.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:13:33 PM EST
I agree with Andy it will be very close between Thompson and Rudy. I say Thompson in a squeaker.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:13:53 PM EST

Originally Posted By DigDug:
I took that poll in another thread. 100% for Fred.


I hope that you're right, but Fred needs to get his ass in gear. I hear he did OK in the debate tonight, but as the late comer he needs to be doing better than OK. He needs to start kicking some ass. The deck is stacked against any republican right now, especially one preaching personal responsibility and less handouts.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:14:00 PM EST
Between Rudy and Romney.

Rudy will probably get it, but Romney shouldn't be ignored.

I simply don't think Fred has it.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:15:14 PM EST
I'll bet $0.01 that it'll be a Rudy/Thompson ticket.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:16:27 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/9/2007 7:17:38 PM EST by motown_steve]

Originally Posted By Primos:
Between Rudy and Romney.

Rudy will probably get it, but Romney shouldn't be ignored.

I simply don't think Fred has it.


I'm concerned because I heard some talking head saying that Fred was talking about defunding SS in the debate and cutting payouts. That's the right thing to do, but they don't call SS the third rail of politics for nothing. Old codgers vote en mass and they don't want no one fuckin' with their handouts.

ETA - Rassmussen was on CNBC talking about how Fred has been dropping in the polls and how he really didn't see anything exciting from Fred in the debate.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:16:42 PM EST

The powers that be want Rudy.

Rudy it will be.

Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:19:11 PM EST

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The powers that be want Rudy.

Rudy it will be.

A lot is going to depend on how many states go through the nomination process. If there is a primary then it will play well for Fred. If it is through a closed convention process then it will play out better for Rudy esp in the northern states. I for the life of me can't see Rudy doing well in Georgia, Texas, Montana or other rural solid red states.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:20:31 PM EST
Who's the biggest danger against RKBA; Mitt or Rudy?

I searched Mitt's site and couldn't even find any reference to the 2nd amendment.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:20:42 PM EST

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The powers that be want Rudy.

Rudy it will be.



+1
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:21:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By Green70:
Who's the biggest danger against RKBA; Mitt or Rudy?

I searched Mitt's site and couldn't even find any reference to the 2nd amendment.
Rudy>Mitt
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:21:50 PM EST

Originally Posted By Green70:
Who's the biggest danger against RKBA; Mitt or Rudy?

I searched Mitt's site and couldn't even find any reference to the 2nd amendment.



He signed the MA assault weapon ban in 2004, saying (something to the effect of) 'these guns are only used to hunt down and kill people.'




He's certainly less vocal about it than rudy, but both of them are no friend to liberty.

Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:22:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The powers that be want Rudy.

Rudy it will be.

A lot is going to depend on how many states go through the nomination process. If there is a primary then it will play well for Fred. If it is through a closed convention process then it will play out better for Rudy esp in the northern states. I for the life of me can't see Rudy doing well in Georgia, Texas, Montana or other rural solid red states.


I have been listening to a lot of the local media here. Trust me, Rudy will do fine in Texas. It's not as conservative as we lead you guys to be. Austin is completely liberal and Dallas is almost completely controlled by Dems (I think there might be a Republican judge or two left). Some of the big media names down here (Mark Davis for one) have been blowing Rudy for months.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:24:27 PM EST

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The powers that be want Rudy.

Rudy it will be.



I agree. The media wants a Rudy/Hitlery showdown, and I would bet money that is
what we will get.

I refuse to vote for either one.

Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:24:34 PM EST

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The powers that be want Rudy.

Rudy it will be.

A lot is going to depend on how many states go through the nomination process. If there is a primary then it will play well for Fred. If it is through a closed convention process then it will play out better for Rudy esp in the northern states. I for the life of me can't see Rudy doing well in Georgia, Texas, Montana or other rural solid red states.


I have been listening to a lot of the local media here. Trust me, Rudy will do fine in Texas. It's not as conservative as we lead you guys to be. Austin is completely liberal and Dallas is almost completely controlled by Dems (I think there might be a Republican judge or two left). Some of the big media names down here (Mark Davis for one) have been blowing Rudy for months.
Looks like all of the solid Republican states are getting the shaft by liberal bedwetting city dwellers. We are having the same problem in Virginia due to all of the libs in NOVA, Charlottesville and Tidewater.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:26:26 PM EST
I want it to be Fred.

I don't always get what I want.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:26:40 PM EST
Ide like to think its gonna be fred..
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:27:53 PM EST
I'm starting to think Huckabee, though I have misgigivings about him for a number of reasons.

Freds is not impressing, it would take a tragedy in Iraq for Paul to move to the forefront, and the 3 RINOs are not an option. As for Hunter and the other posers have no shot, and Tancredo will be pegged a racist.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:29:38 PM EST
God, I hope it's Thompson, but I think it'll end up being that tranny Guiliani.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:32:58 PM EST
Clinton
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:36:37 PM EST

Originally Posted By dragongoddess:
Clinton


Wouldn't surprise me. Either party would nominate satan himself if they could be guaranteed a win.

Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:39:57 PM EST

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The powers that be want Rudy.

Rudy it will be.



Rudy/Hillary should lock it down real well. Hillary for the "win".
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:42:09 PM EST

Originally Posted By HermanSnerd:
The media wants a Rudy/Hitlery showdown, and I would bet money that is
what we will get.

I refuse to vote for either one.



Which is exactly why the MSM wants a Rudy nomination. Conservatives stay home = Hillary becomes president.
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 7:43:31 PM EST
Hunter is the way to go but it will be Rudi
Link Posted: 10/9/2007 8:10:34 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/9/2007 8:11:26 PM EST by HermanSnerd]

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Originally Posted By HermanSnerd:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The powers that be want Rudy.

Rudy it will be.
I agree. The media wants a Rudy/Hitlery showdown, and I would bet money that is
what we will get.

I refuse to vote for either one.

Great.

One less voter to block the path for The Beast.



Sorry Mac, but what has voting for milquetoast RINO's done for us??

I refuse to hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils.......AGAIN!

If elected, Rudy will sign anti RKBA legislation just as quick as Hitlery. Especially if he needs the House and Senate to play ball with him on any issue he deems more important.

Rudy talking tough about gun owners rights and securing the border is as phony as John Kerry talking about his love of hunting and posing for the cameras in his blaze
orange vest.

To paraphrase a quote by ARFCOM's own Airwolf from the last election:

Hillary would be the express elevator to hell. Rudy would be the slow boat.
Same destination, different ETA.



Link Posted: 10/9/2007 8:22:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/9/2007 8:23:22 PM EST by The_Macallan]

Originally Posted By HermanSnerd:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Originally Posted By HermanSnerd:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The powers that be want Rudy.

Rudy it will be.
I agree. The media wants a Rudy/Hitlery showdown, and I would bet money that is
what we will get.

I refuse to vote for either one.

Great.

One less voter to block the path for The Beast.



Sorry Mac, but what has voting for milquetoast RINO's done for us??

I refuse to hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils.......AGAIN!

If elected, Rudy will sign anti RKBA legislation just as quick as Hitlery. Especially if he needs the House and Senate to play ball with him on any issue he deems more important.

Rudy talking tough about gun owners rights and securing the border is as phony as John Kerry talking about his love of hunting and posing for the cameras in his blaze
orange vest.

To paraphrase a quote by ARFCOM's own Airwolf from the last election:

Hillary would be the express elevator to hell. Rudy would be the slow boat.
Same destination, different ETA.

Would we be better off now if Al Gore had won in 2000?

Pick among the choices presented to you - not what you'd wish the choices were.

Link Posted: 10/9/2007 8:31:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
Would we be better off now if Al Gore had won in 2000?


Good question.

I've gotta go with Yes.

We'd likely have strong majorities in congress and perhaps have a real conservative in the WH by now, Gore doesn't strike me as a two-termer, our candidates wouldn't have all Bush's baggage which will likely result in president Hillary, and it's hard to imagine anyone doing a worse job of actually governing than W has.


I spent a lot of time and money on getting W elected in 2000, and if I had to do it over again I'd probably just stay home that day.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 5:01:19 AM EST

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
Would we be better off now if Al Gore had won in 2000?

Pick among the choices presented to you - not what you'd wish the choices were.



We might be. If Gore would have won election in 2000, his response to 9/11
would most likely have been one of appeasement. His lack of charisma,
far-left views, and failed policies would probably have kept him from being re-elected
in 2004. Jorge Bush would have retired from politics after his failed 2000 election attempt, and would not have run again. And maybe, a strong conservative candidate would have emerged to contrast such a liberal President and won.

My hypothetical strong conservative candidate mentioned above might have decided to finally get tough on terrorists after 4 years of a limp dicked response with Gore as POTUS, and he might have rekindled the patriotism we all
felt as a nation on September 12,2001 and kicked some ass and really turned the dogs of war loose on all terrorists worldwide.

My hypothetical President would probably have a higher approval rating than our current President, and would be up for re-election in 2008. He would be very hard for Hitlery to beat. Hillary would lose in 2008, and go back to being a whiny Senator in New York

We could go back and forth all day on "what if"?

All I know is if we keep putting RINO's in office, the politicians will NEVER get the message that they work for us, and that we are sick of their bullshit.

We want a true conservative. Not someone that changes their policy based
on which way the political wind is blowing on a given day. We want a strong leader
that wants what's best for America and not what will keep their party in power on the Hill.

Hiilary as President will be awful, but maybe that is what the country needs to realize
that the far left and their communist ideals will destroy us as a nation. Maybe 4 years of The Beast will wake up the sheeple and cause a huge shift back to the right.

If you want to make an omelette, you have to crack a few eggs.

Maybe our country needs to hit rock bottom in order to return itself to it's former post WWII greatness. I just hope it's not too late already.

If we want a leader with convictions, we have to have some ourselves. I have mine.
I refuse to vote for another RINO regardless of what the consequences may be.

Link Posted: 10/10/2007 5:07:43 AM EST

Originally Posted By HermanSnerd:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
Would we be better off now if Al Gore had won in 2000?

Pick among the choices presented to you - not what you'd wish the choices were.



We might be. If Gore would have won election in 2000, his response to 9/11
would most likely have been one of appeasement. His lack of charisma,
far-left views, and failed policies would probably have kept him from being re-elected
in 2004. Jorge Bush would have retired from politics after his failed 2000 election attempt, and would not have run again. And maybe, a strong conservative candidate would have emerged to contrast such a liberal President and won.

My hypothetical strong conservative candidate mentioned above might have decided to finally get tough on terrorists after 4 years of a limp dicked response with Gore as POTUS, and he might have rekindled the patriotism we all
felt as a nation on September 12,2001 and kicked some ass and really turned the dogs of war loose on all terrorists worldwide.

My hypothetical President would probably have a higher approval rating than our current President, and would be up for re-election in 2008. He would be very hard for Hitlery to beat. Hillary would lose in 2008, and go back to being a whiny Senator in New York

We could go back and forth all day on "what if"?

All I know is if we keep putting RINO's in office, the politicians will NEVER get the message that they work for us, and that we are sick of their bullshit.

We want a true conservative. Not someone that changes their policy based
on which way the political wind is blowing on a given day. We want a strong leader
that wants what's best for America and not what will keep their party in power on the Hill.

Hiilary as President will be awful, but maybe that is what the country needs to realize
that the far left and their communist ideals will destroy us as a nation. Maybe 4 years of The Beast will wake up the sheeple and cause a huge shift back to the right.

If you want to make an omelette, you have to crack a few eggs.

Maybe our country needs to hit rock bottom in order to return itself to it's former post WWII greatness. I just hope it's not too late already.

If we want a leader with convictions, we have to have some ourselves. I have mine.
I refuse to vote for another RINO regardless of what the consequences may be.



I concur.

Remember, a lot of Democrats got elected in 2006 as anti-Republican and anti-Bush choices. Plus, a fair amount of those Democrat reps were fairly conservative.

We could see the same backlash in 2010 if Hillary gets elected and she and Congress go off the deep end with Hillarycare and other stuff. Could see 1994 repeated.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 5:09:00 AM EST

Originally Posted By K2QB3:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
Would we be better off now if Al Gore had won in 2000?


Good question.

I've gotta go with Yes.

We'd likely have strong majorities in congress and perhaps have a real conservative in the WH by now, Gore doesn't strike me as a two-termer, our candidates wouldn't have all Bush's baggage which will likely result in president Hillary, and it's hard to imagine anyone doing a worse job of actually governing than W has.



+1 !!
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 5:14:29 AM EST

Originally Posted By HermanSnerd:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The powers that be want Rudy.

Rudy it will be.



I agree. The media wants a Rudy/Hitlery showdown, and I would bet money that is
what we will get.

I refuse to vote for either one.



I will do everything in my power to keep the beast out of office. Rudy's not much better, but the beast must not win. I'm pushing for Fred, but he doesn't seem to want it bad enough.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 5:15:34 AM EST
We can joke about what the CR will vote for, but for what it's worth, a lot of Southern Republicans would not endure a NY or Mass nominee. We will not have them damn Yankee's in the white house attitude.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 5:33:21 AM EST

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By DigDug:
I took that poll in another thread. 100% for Fred.


I hope that you're right, but Fred needs to get his ass in gear. I hear he did OK in the debate tonight, but as the late comer he needs to be doing better than OK. He needs to start kicking some ass. The deck is stacked against any republican right now, especially one preaching personal responsibility and less handouts.


Absolutely!...............His slow start was an interesting ploy, but NOW is the time to start kicking ass by becoming the most aggressive candidate out there.

Fred COULD get the nomination, but he has gotta start revin' his engine!

Further, did anyone note the "smear association" with Nixon done on him by ABC yesterday............that does not help given the capacity of much of the voting public.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 5:35:02 AM EST
It ought to be Hunter
It could be Fred
And Rudy...well, he is just a degree or two off of Hillary with a smaller dick.

Rudy is no Republican, good mayor by NYC standards (Dinkins, Koch, Commieburg), but that's it.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 6:51:31 AM EST

Originally Posted By HermanSnerd:
Hiilary as President will be awful, but maybe that is what the country needs to realize
that the far left and their communist ideals will destroy us as a nation. Maybe 4 years of The Beast will wake up the sheeple and cause a huge shift back to the right.


And in the meantime how many Supreme Court justices could Hillary and a Dem controlled congress could put on the bench, FOR LIFE?
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 6:56:25 AM EST
In a perfect world, it would be Fred. I'd want it to be Fred.

It may end up being Rudy. I'm still pulling for Fred.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 6:59:14 AM EST

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Great.

One less voter to blocksecure the path for The Beast.

The trick is, we need to get as much people as possible to NOT let Hillary in.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 11:02:25 AM EST
It's too early to tell, but I wouldn't count Huckabee out. The religious right is behind him and if he can get some decent funding he will be a threat. I don't see Thompson going anywhere based on what I've seen so far and MCain has made wayyy too many enemies - he's done as well.

It will be between Roody, the slick mormon and Huckabee.

Huckabee is the only chance conservatives have as far as I'm concerned... send money...
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 11:07:06 AM EST
Fred
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 11:09:53 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 12:07:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The powers that be want Rudy.





Ain't that the truth. I don't see how he "won" the debate yesterday. It was more of the same punk Rudi " I BEAT Clinton!" "I BEAT Clinton" "New York"!!

Fred was OK. I think he's got more to give and hopefully we see it soon.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 12:10:52 PM EST
Fred. Hands down.

Julie-Annie is a piece of shit. If he wins the nomination, I might just vote for the Beast™ in order to hasten the revolution.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 12:19:03 PM EST

Originally Posted By Deej86:
In a perfect world, it would be Fred. I'd want it to be Fred.

It may end up being Rudy. I'm still pulling for Fred.


If it's not Fred then I won't vote in the final. The GOP will deserve the result.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 12:27:54 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 12:37:00 PM EST

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By Primos:
Between Rudy and Romney.

Rudy will probably get it, but Romney shouldn't be ignored.

I simply don't think Fred has it.


I'm concerned because I heard some talking head saying that Fred was talking about defunding SS in the debate and cutting payouts. That's the right thing to do, but they don't call SS the third rail of politics for nothing. Old codgers vote en mass and they don't want no one fuckin' with their handouts.

ETA - Rassmussen was on CNBC talking about how Fred has been dropping in the polls and how he really didn't see anything exciting from Fred in the debate.


R-A-S-M-U-S-S-E-N, not RASS....

Sorry, it's personal for me!

PS - I agree with the above, while Fred may be the better choice philosophically, he's boring as hell. Rudy unfortunately is seen as more palatable to the majority, even though there's factions of GOP supporters (pro-life, 2A supporters) that have huge problems with him.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 12:38:52 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2007 12:41:09 PM EST by LARRYG]
I love statements like this that show no clue of the process:


The Repubs want to win; they won't nominate somebody that many of their own people really hate. If they do, they are stupider than I thought



The Republican nominee will be the one that wins the primaries. Instead of some of you complaining about who the "GOP will pick", get your asses out and vote in the primaries.

If you don't vote in the primaries, don't bitch about who the nominee is.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 12:43:17 PM EST
I PRAY it's Fred but if I had to pick from Rudy or Mitt, I'd pick Mitt.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 1:00:45 PM EST
My preference is:

Fred > Mitt > Rudy
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 1:03:14 PM EST

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
I agree with Andy it will be very close between Thompson and Rudy. I say Thompson in a squeaker.
+1
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top