Thompson's gone, now what?

[The Rabbi]

I feel your pain, but can you pick the worst 2 of the 3?

Well, the advantage of Obama is that if elected (c'v) he will be the Jimmy Carter of the 21st century. Carter came in proclaiming himself an outsider and discovered the down side of that was that no one owed him anything. So he couldnt get anything done.

Hillary knows how to get stuff done, which is scary given her agenda.

Edwards is just a nightmare. Might as well hand over the keys of corporate america to the trial lawyers and be done with it.

[Marswolf]

Yes, Edwards is basically the poster child for the need for tort reform. I have never understood why this is never brought up.

[dariks]

This election is going to be about choosing the lesser evil. I am not excited about any of the current candidates and some of them (Hillary) actively scare the crap out of me. I'll just have to research and vote for the candidate that I think will do the least damage.

Obama and Hillary are trying to make the election about electing the "First". Either the First Black Man or the First Woman president. Sadly, there are people out there that think those are good reasons to elect someone. They don't stop to think that their policies might be more important.

[Guest db99wj]

What about Huckabee, according to his site, he supports the 2A.

• The Second Amendment is primarily about tyranny and self-defense, not hunting. The Founding Fathers wanted us to be
  able to defend ourselves from our own government, if need be, and from all threats to our lives and property.
  
• Second Amendment rights belong to individuals, not cities or states. I oppose gun control based on geography.
  
• I consistently opposed banning assault weapons and opposed the Brady Bill.
  
• As Governor, I protected gun manufacturers from frivolous law suits.
  
• I was the first Governor in the country to have a concealed handgun license.

No candidate has a stronger, more consistent record on Second Amendment rights than I do. Our Founding Fathers, having endured the tyranny of the British Empire, wanted to guarantee our God-given liberties. They devised our three branches of government and our system of checks and balances. But they were still concerned that the system could fail, and that we might someday face a new tyranny from our own government. They wanted us to be able to defend ourselves, and that's why they gave us the Second Amendment. They knew that a government facing an armed populace was less likely to take away our rights, while a disarmed population wouldn't have much hope. As Ronald Reagan reminded us, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction." Without our Second Amendment rights, all of our other rights aren't inalienable, they're just "on loan" from the government.

Other candidates say gun control doesn't affect hunting. Now I'm a very avid hunter, but the Second Amendment isn't really about hunting. It's about tyranny and self-defense. The Founding Fathers weren't worried about our being able to bag a duck or a deer, they were worried about our keeping our fundamental freedoms.

I once saw a bumper sticker that said, "Criminals prefer unarmed victims." Criminals will always find a way to get guns. By disarming our law-abiding citizens, we take away the strongest deterrent to violent criminals - the uncertainty that they don't know who is helpless and who is armed. Our law enforcement officials can't be everywhere, all the time. Lawfully-armed citizens back them up and prevent robberies, rapes, and the murder of innocents. Right after Katrina, with law enforcement non-existent, many victims were able to protect their lives, their homes, and their precious supplies of food and water only because they were armed.

Other candidates believe gun control should be determined geographically, but Second Amendment rights belong to individuals, not cities or states. Your Second Amendment rights don't change when you change your address.

Other candidates filed frivolous law suits against gun manufacturers. When I was Governor, I protected gun manufacturers from exactly those types of suits. I allowed former law enforcement officials to carry concealed handguns and removed restrictions on concealed handgun permit holders. I was the first Governor in the country to have a concealed handgun license, and of course I'm a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association.

Other candidates have supported banning assault weapons. When the federal ban on assault weapons expired in 2004, I said, "May it rest in peace." It won't be returning in the Huckabee Administration.

Zealously protecting your Second Amendment rights is another way that I will lift all law-abiding Americans up, by consistently championing your right to defend yourself.

I'm still reading up on him, but so far......and Chuck Norris supports him!

Here is a FYI section on his stance on many issues, http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Issues.Home

[creeky]

What they say now and what they do when they get into

office can be very different things. I'm unsure any of them have any

real convictions about anything. (*Keep in mind I'm still jaded.)

[Guest supergus]

I'm absolutely terrified at the thought of Hilary in the W.H. (again) She's gonna do some serious damage to this country. On the bright side though, she won't make it past 4 years. The country will see what the Dems are really capable of and put a republican back in. What worries me about Paul is that I don't believe in my heart that he would take the war to the islamic fascists. He comes across as too much of a pacifist. He'd wait till we're attacked again. And with him as COC we will be!

[Marswolf]

I refuse to vote for another religion nut. Carter was awful and militarily scary. I consistently vote for him as our absolutely worst President. And I worked for him. I also worked to prevent him having a second term. Bush hasn't been much better. A born-again druggie. I guess I should give him some slack for his cocaine fried brain?

Guns are only one of my issues, and Huckleberry is on the wrong side of a lot of issues for me. I just can't support him. Jesus might tell him to do something off-the-wall and he'd do it. I suspect he has a direct line to Jesus.

I have nothing against religious people. I'm more religious now than ever before in my life. But that doesn't mean I have lost all common sense and touch with reality. People need to leave their beliefs at the door of the governmental office they have been elected to. If they can't do that, they are not qualified for the office. You have to represent all of the people, not just those who agree with your views.

I'll vote for Beelzebub first. Come to think of it that probably is Clinton.

Maybe I'll just not vote. Right now, I'm seriously considering semi-Beelzebub - McCain. He seems to me to be a principled and sincere, if confused, candidate.

[Marswolf]

What worries me about Paul is that I don't believe in my heart that he would take the war to the islamic fascists.

What would worry me about Paul, if he was at all viable, is that he's a total flake. That doesn't mean I disagree with all of his ideas. I tend to agree with him on a lot off issues. But he's Jimmy Carter on defense.

[molonlabetn]

McCain is probably the best and most likely to succeed conservative option.

Personally... at this point the choice is simply anyone but Hillary.

[Guest mc30707]

I think the issue is to vote for the lessor of 2 evils:popcorn:

[The Rabbi]

I'd cut Bush some slack. I suspect in 20 years he will be remembered far more fondly than now.

I agree with your assessment of Carter. Totally ineffective. And he hasnt improved any with age.

Between McCain and Obama, I'd vote McCain. Between Obama and Giuliani or Romney, I'd probably vote for Obama, just because I dont think he will get anything done and we'll be finished with him in 4 years. The time off will give the GOP time to get their act together and push maybe Haley Barbour or Jindal.

[Marswolf]

As I mentioned, I worked for Carter on some international matters. He scared me absolutely to death. I was terrified he might be re-elected. He hasn't gained any wisdom since them. Thank you America for voting Reagan into office.

You know, I'm less pro-someone and more anti-Huckabee every day.

[Guest jackdog]

Let's see, Clinton no way, Obama not( he hates guns) Edwards is probably the lessor of the evil triad. Repubs. Paul Is the only way to go. I think based on his passed voting record he can and will do the job. As for this not being as bad as the seventies, we could have real debate on that issue.

[Marswolf]

I think Thompson has actually been gone for a while.

I'll probably go for [holds nose] McCain.

Please dissuade me.

[dariks]

I think Thompson has actually been gone for a while.

I'll probably go for [holds nose] McCain.

Please dissuade me.

/me dissuades Marswolf

[Marswolf]

/me dissuades Marswolf

How about suading me?

[molonlabetn]

McCain has a nearly identical voting record as Fred Thompson, and has a similar stance on most issues... he simply markets himself differently. I personally see the two as equally competent leaders, Fred just had a more interesting personality.

I'm all for a McCain / Thompson ticket.

[The Rabbi]

As for this not being as bad as the seventies, we could have real debate on that issue.

ANyone who thinks there is debate possible didnt live through that era. I mean, you had both leisure suits AND Tony Orlando and Dawn. It doesn't get much worse than that.

[Guest TargetShooter84]

McCain has a nearly identical voting record as Fred Thompson, and has a similar stance on most issues... he simply markets himself differently. I personally see the two as equally competent leaders, Fred just had a more interesting personality.

I'm all for a McCain / Thompson ticket.

I agree with this....I do know that McCain has similar beliefs that Thompson did. I'm for McCain...it would be alot better if Thompson was asked to be McCain's VP.

[Guest db99wj]

This is good stuff. Learning a lot.

[Guest triggertime]

I see Ron Paul as another Ross Perot. The people who vote for Paul are going to be responsible for Hillary winning the keys back to White House. The goal in this election

is to prevent Hillary from moving back in, even if you don't like the GOP nominee.

You have to hold your nose and vote for whoever has the ability to beat her, that is,

unless you're a fan of feminist socialism.

[Daniel]

their is a poll on another forum i am a member of that is mostly late 20's liberally minded people involved with music in one form or another this was a poll put up yesterday on who they would vote for if the election was today.

President

Hillary Clinton (Democrat) [ 4 ] [14.29%]

Barack Obama (Democrat) [ 10 ] [35.71%]

John Edwards (Democrat) [ 2 ] [7.14%]

Mitt Romney (Republican) [ 1 ] [3.57%]

Ron Paul (Republican) [ 11 ] [39.29%]

John McCain (Republican) [ 0 ] [0.00%]

Mike Huckabee (Republican) [ 0 ] [0.00%]

[Guest ACMM]

their is a poll on another forum i am a member of that is mostly late 20's liberally minded people involved with music in one form or another this was a poll put up yesterday on who they would vote for if the election was today.

Ron Paul's foreign policy and platform are the same as Ronald Reagan's were and he was wildly popular. RP's the only candidate that doesn't equal the staus quo, so that poll doesn't surprise me at all.

How in the world can people so soon forget the McCain amnesty bill for illegal aliens that almost passed?

[Guest bkelm18]

Really the only Repub choices for me are Paul and McCain. Huck's not getting my vote as I will not vote for someone who wants to "put God back into government", his words not mine. If it comes down to it and I had to vote for a Dem, I'd probably go Obama.

[molonlabetn]

...How in the world can people so soon forget the McCain amnesty bill for illegal aliens that almost passed?

Ain't none of the choices perfect.