The Republican debate
Cut down version:
Or as a click through.
Things are looking promising, aren't they?
Or as a click through.
Things are looking promising, aren't they?
Labels: Elections, United States
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, May 09, 2007 at 4:40 pm.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
ron paul is the man to watch
I've been a fan of Ron for years - he has run as a Libertarian in the past.
Off Topic and if Croydonian will forgive me - I'd like to encourage all regular readers to vote for this site as Best Conservative Newcomer Blog over at ConHome when the polls open.
All of the nominees are good, but this place easily has the edge in my opinion.
Geoff, modesty forbade...
Very kind of you. Much appreciated.
I want Guiliani for it. i think he can smash Clinton.
The Rep's have much better candidates overall.
The best of the "2nd Tier" candidates is Duncan Hunter. He is comfortably conservative and libertarian for me and I hope he puts in a good showing.
He is a good example, as cityunslicker says, of the strength of the Republican slate of candidates.
There are some good people in the GOP ranks, no disputing that. I chanced a tenner on Fred Thompson a while back hoping the odds would drop (they've halved) and I could short him if necessary. Maybe I will....
CU - wrong on Guiliani,I fear. He is wrong on gun control, and to red states, that means, he is weak on law and order. Also, he's a bit too "unusual" in the same way that Obama Barak is a bit too "unusual" for the Dems. Interesting; idea to flirt with; but no.
I think there's a governor from out West that people are talking about, but can't remember his name. Ron Paul, yes, good.
Frankly - although it is totally out of the question this time - I think Jeb Bush is the best man with the best chance. He's a strong man; he governs a state with a lot of hispanics, who like him; he is married to a Mexican lady and his children are Mexican Americans. This gives him traction in the SW, California, and the big industrial cities in the North.
Obviously, the points I mentioned aren't policies, but he's sound on conservative policy. Like his dad and his brother, which is why this is the wrong time for him to run. Too bad, because he could steal votes from the Dems. But not to be this time around.
I see Obama made a clunker on national TV. This guy, way too full of himself, has been in national office for all of two years and now thinks he is called upon to run for the presidency of the United States.
Hillary will get the Democratic nomination. She carries all the bitter, angry socialists who want a new world order. The Dems won't nominate Obama because he is a new boy, doesn't have the experience of Washington under his belt that Hillary genuinely has, and - my guess - America's blacks won't think he has paid his dues with five or six generations of being American after slavery was abolished. They have a unique point of view, and a unique culture, which white America has bought into, and I don't think they will relate to Obama. I could be completely wrong about this. It is my reading, that's all.
V - I think you are spot on re Obama. It would be a real shock for Hillary not to get the nomination.
But I still like Guiliani, he is a true liberal conservatice and I think this would be a good thing for Amercia after the very conservative Bush administration. I doubt the swing states want to have another hard right candidate; but perhaps I am wrong as I have not been to the US for over a year.
Guiliani has the right balance and is a good free-trader too. He would make an excellent president. Gun Control is such a sideshow as is abortion. The people who care think it important; rather like Tories and euroscepticism on this side of the pond.
» Post a Comment