Who Are The Conservatives?
 

I do not tend to pigeonhole people into categories, particularly for the purpose of making my voting decisions. I suspect I may be in the minority in that regard. But I am curious which of the prospective Republican candidates are acceptable to those on this forum who call themselves "conservatives"?

Among those who seem to have begun to campaign for the GOP nomination, who would the conservatives here find acceptable? Which of them could you really get excited about supporting?

Of equal interest, who among them wouldn't be an acceptable "conservative" candidate?

Will conservatives vote for any Republican candidate, even though he might not meet the standards for being adequately conservative? I use John McCain as an example. While he was the GOP candidate, he is now being pilloried for "not being a true conservative". I'm a little lost as to who's who on the Republican side of the upcoming election.

I am a fiscal conservative. I also have many other conservative views. But there are some things I am not conservative about. I support stem cell research.

I do not like Sarah Palin. I am sure she has many good qualities but she is a little too gamey for me and I just don't think she acts like she could lead this country.

Kahuna,

Those that would be acceptable to most of the posters of this forum on the "conservative" side would be the reactionary right to most people.

When the almost sacred name of Ronald Reagan is invoked, these people do not realize that Reagan's speaking ability came from his many years of being a "B reel" movie actor and radio announcer. He conned his way into politics through name recognition. It is very similar to Jesse "The Body" Ventura becoming governor of Minnesota and Al Franken a senator as well as Sonny Bono being a Congressman.

If Francisco Franco or Juan Peron were natural born American citizens (and (of course) changed their names to Americanized versions) these would be acceptable conservatives to a lot of the posters on this forum.

(See what happens when I don't play golf for one day. Luckily, I have tee times for tomorrow and Friday.)

Oh, well I guess Bugs is the expert and I think I'll just let him answer for the conservatives. I don't think I'm going to go for the bait, myself.

How About You?
 

Ahh, non-commital, Richie? In that you haven't chosen a dog for the hunt, it makes it easier to do those drive-by pot shots at whichever candidate seems to be a target of opportunity later on.

C'mon, Richie...who are you backing? Which one of 'em really lights your fire?

I've already stuck my neck out there. It'll be Christie or Bloomberg for me if they throw their hat in the ring. (I'd like to see either of them plus Joe Scarborough on a ticket.) I don't think Romney will pass muster with the religious right even though he's clearly capable. I suppose I could back Pawlenty or Daniels if they don't do or say something stupid. If none of those make it on the ticket, I'll probably vote for Obama again. I don't see any sense in simply witholding my vote in such an important election. And I'd be scared to death to have any of the others actually running the show from the oval office.

Now...how about you?

The fact that you can say, with a straight face, that you'd like someone with the stature of Christie to run, but that you might vote for Obama AGAIN, makes me discount anything further you have to say on the subject. That's just too Jekyll and Hyde politically, for me.

How's this, ANYONE but Obama. He's dangerous, bad for America, he's anti-American ideals and he makes me actually miss Bill Clinton.

They (the left) can climb on their philosophical soapbox, pretend they are more academic than others, more thoughtful, smarter, manipulate, bait, trick, blame, attack or whatever they wish. Fact is Obama must go and he will. <bookmark it>

VK, you say never vote for an incumbent, but you plan to vote for Obama, if the Repubs nominate a conservative. With the possible exception of Christie everone you mentioned is moderate, at best. The fact that you even mentioned Bloomberg and Scarbough says a lot.

not bloomberg
 

i like bloomberg personally but i did not think he did anything to prevent the mosque being built so close to ground zero, in fact he endorsed it. that is not the kind of material i want in the presidency. i admire newt gingrich and mitt romney, huckabee, palin, pawlenty, alan west, would like to see condeleeza rice back in the picture. there are many people whom i would prefer to four more years of obama's policies. christie would be great but he says he won't run.

Christie, if he'll run. Also, am starting to pay attention to Herman Cain.

Think that lightbulb of yours burned out.

Looks like Chacha would really like to see Juan Peron and Francisco Franco's clones be President and Vice President of the USA.

Bloomberg is not a man with an agenda for America
 

he would be another candidate with a personal agenda to fulfill.
Lawyers, career politicians, wealthy & extremely wealthy or incumbents are not good candidates for America!!

I look forward to ongoing discussions about candidates and remain hopeful that when one or several are discussed their accomplishments are presented that warrant them being QUALIFIED for POTUS!!

A very different approach for both the R & D score keepers!!

btk

herman cain
 

i am not familiar with herman cain but have heard many good things about him...he is speaking i believe at mulberry grove on thursday, may 19 but not sure of ticket information...just FYI

Mr. Kahuna

First, all presidential candidates must have a valid birth certificate. I feel so much better that Trump proved Obama is a valid President.:oops:

Secondly, Newt has the experience to be in the oval office but his personal life is a train wreck. But hey, the conservatives will understand and forgive his flaws if they think he has a chance to win.

Thirdly, I may vote for Obama knowing that he is a valid certified American, thanks to Trumps investigation.:confused: