WorthyNewsBot Posted October 22, 2007 Group: Bots Followers: 3 Topic Count: 39,879 Topics Per Day: 6.44 Content Count: 44,557 Content Per Day: 7.19 Reputation: 987 Days Won: 2 Joined: 06/06/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted October 22, 2007 Republican presidential candidates clashed Sunday over who is conservative enough to defeat Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton. http://www.worthynews.com/news/cbn-com-CBNnews-254046-aspx/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marnie Posted October 22, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 811 Topics Per Day: 0.12 Content Count: 7,338 Content Per Day: 1.08 Reputation: 76 Days Won: 2 Joined: 10/06/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted October 22, 2007 She was referenced more that the candidates that were on stage! It was embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kat8585 Posted October 22, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 1,360 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 7,866 Content Per Day: 1.23 Reputation: 26 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/22/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/18/1946 Share Posted October 22, 2007 She was referenced more that the candidates that were on stage! It was embarrassing. But they really got some points across about her and how they differed with her. It was great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whirlwind Posted October 22, 2007 Group: Junior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 113 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 11 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/06/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/22/1946 Share Posted October 22, 2007 She was referenced more that the candidates that were on stage! It was embarrassing. What if she does'nt get the nomination? Then........Whooo Hooooo, Yaaah! Then Republicans have to beat the Breck Girl or Barack HUSSEIN Obama and if they can't do that then we are in terrible, terrible trouble. I don't know yet who has my vote but I know who doesn't have it. .......Whirlwind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning_Ember Posted October 22, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,009 Content Per Day: 0.29 Reputation: 100 Days Won: 3 Joined: 09/20/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted October 22, 2007 I don't think the issue is so much who is conservative enough, so much as who can appeal to more left leaning voters. The Iraq War, Expanding healthcare, are all issues that the majority of Americans agree should be dealt with in a more left leaning manner. It doesn't matter if you appeal to the majority of the Republican base, which has shrunk significantly, unless you can also win the Presidency. The only people that stand a chance against Hillary are Rudy and John M. Otherwise, the race is over before its begun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forrestkc Posted October 22, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 114 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,015 Content Per Day: 0.60 Reputation: 8 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/15/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted October 22, 2007 I am a registered Democrat, so take this for what its worth. However, that said I am not trying to lead anyone astray here, just giving my personal point of view. The country right now does not want a president that touts themselves as being a big conservative. They just don't. Now you guys do, but most of you guys are probably registered Republicans or may as well be. So yes, you want a solid conservative, your friends may want a solid conservative, but if you look at the demographics of this nation today, and the political mood of this nation today, especially among independents, they don't want a solid conservative. Right now, right or wrong, most people associate conservatism not with fiscal conservatism, but instead with social conservatism and military interventionism. Social conservatism has pretty much lost its punch with the mainstream. Virtually every single cultural issue ranks way down on the list among voter priorities outside of the Republican base. A foreign interventionist policy is even less popular today among voters, basically such an agenda has not support at all outside of the Republican base. What people really seem to want today is a moderate / pragmatic candidate. Basically, people are wanting the Nixon / Bush Sr. / Eisenhower / Clinton type of candidate (Nixon pre-watergate of course ). They want a president that is not bound to ideological dogma, and that can and does change his or her mind on issues as dictated by events. There are times when American wants a Reagan or an FDR, and there are times when America wants an Eisenhower or a Clinton, and right now it looks like an Eisenhower / Clinton time. Now, as it looks right now, Hillary Clinton will get the nomination. To be honest with you, I would prefer Obama get it, but while he can certainly raise money, he doesn't seem to be able to get the kind of support Hillary is getting. Now, you guys might be thinking that Hillary is a big liberal. Well, in her heart, she may well be, but she is not running as one. She is running as a fairly middle of the road / pragmatic candidate, and she is doing so fairly convincingly. Now you guys may be unconvinced, even I am unconvinced, but it looks like more and more voters are being convinced. Moreover, I think she is interested enough in being a popular president that she will govern as a moderate assuming she is elected. Now, if you ask me, your best chance at beating Hillary will be with either Guliani who is a moderate on social issues, or McCain, who is fairly conservative, but is also pragmatic. It is not going to be easy though, Hillary is no Gore or Kerry, she is a very formidable candidate and she is raising a lot of money. Either way though, its not going to be the end of the world. Every presidential election both sides act as though its the most important one ever, yet nothing really ever changes that much regardless of who wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinM Posted October 22, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 144 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,512 Content Per Day: 0.68 Reputation: 625 Days Won: 10 Joined: 04/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/07/1979 Share Posted October 22, 2007 I am very suspicious of Hillary Clinton. Most all circumstantial evidence paints her as a corrupt opportunist that will sell anything so long as she gets a campaign contribution. Everything is up for auction. Someone with that much blind ambition is very dangerous. If she wins the presidency, it will be by a very slim margin, no one trusts her. For the life of me, I cannot understand why people continue to support her. Everyone is looking for the pay-off and it sickens me. I have never voted for a President based on what he promised to do for me. I have always voted on someone who I thought was best fit to lead this country. Hillary Clinton is bottom of the bucket scum. 15 years ago, there's no way she would have gotten the nomination, or even been considered a viable candidate. Her campaign finance continues to be suspect with her receiving even more funding from disappearing contributors. How do we know she isn't owned by the Chinese? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nagwalk Posted October 22, 2007 Group: Junior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 115 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 5 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/13/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted October 22, 2007 America is already owned by the Chinese and the globalists won't do anything to change that. You do have some true conservatives but since they are not the media darlings, they don't have a chance. Wanting a conservative government, evangelicals will have to decide whether it is better to have a democrat or republican as president. That may mean holding your nose and voting or you may face the prospect of having a democrat as president if the republican candidate doesn't measure up to the christian conservatives standard . Just a few thoughts from a canuck who can't vote cause I'm from the country north of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forrestkc Posted October 22, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 114 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,015 Content Per Day: 0.60 Reputation: 8 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/15/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted October 22, 2007 I am very suspicious of Hillary Clinton. Most all circumstantial evidence paints her as a corrupt opportunist that will sell anything so long as she gets a campaign contribution. Everything is up for auction. Someone with that much blind ambition is very dangerous. If she wins the presidency, it will be by a very slim margin, no one trusts her. For the life of me, I cannot understand why people continue to support her. Everyone is looking for the pay-off and it sickens me. I have never voted for a President based on what he promised to do for me. I have always voted on someone who I thought was best fit to lead this country. Hillary Clinton is bottom of the bucket scum. 15 years ago, there's no way she would have gotten the nomination, or even been considered a viable candidate. Her campaign finance continues to be suspect with her receiving even more funding from disappearing contributors. How do we know she isn't owned by the Chinese? Two things: 1. You can disagree with someone politically without referring to them as "bottom of the bucket scum". That is just being hateful. 2. As someone who has traveled to China and spent time there, I can say from experience that the Chinese like us a lot, and are definitely our competitor, but not our enemy. They need us as much as we need them. Do they spy on us, yes of course they do. We undoubtedly spy on them, but our relationship with them has improved over the last 3 decades and continues to do so. Personally, I think that Russia is far more a concern than China is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts