Bob Barr to put Georgia, North Carolina in play for Obama?
posted at 9:01 pm on June 4, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
All part of his daring master plan to make his name as widely reviled among the right as Ralph Nader’s is among the left.
Polls in Georgia and North Carolina over the last two weeks show Mr. Barr winning 8 percent and 6 percent respectively of the presidential vote, and in both cases helping keep likely Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama within striking distance of Mr. McCain in those states — which, taken together, account for more electoral votes than Florida, Pennsylvania or Ohio…
[InsiderAdvantage pollster Matt] Towery said North Carolina and Georgia are exactly the places that Mr. Barr could put in play: both have high African-American populations that Mr. Obama can tap to boost his turnout numbers, and have conservative-leaning voters whose dissatisfaction with President Bush could lead them to a third-party candidate.
The Georgia poll, taken just before Mr. Barr secured the Libertarian nomination, gave Mr. McCain 45 percent support, Mr. Obama 35 percent and Mr. Barr 8 percent. In North Carolina a Public Policy Polling survey released Monday found Mr. McCain at 43 percent, Mr. Obama at 40 percent and Mr. Barr at 6 percent. The poll’s authors said Mr. Barr’s support appeared to come particularly from independents who previously had broken for Mr. McCain.
I can understand a third-party run if, like Perot, you command a minority so sizable — 20 or 25 percent, say — that the party simply has to address some of its concerns, if not in this election then in the next. A five percent minority doesn’t do that. You can make up that amount elsewhere by doing a better job of mobilizing your base or pandering a bit to other constituencies at the margins. If you’re going to strike at the establishment, in other words, you’d better do it hard enough that the reaction is fear, not anger. How do you think libertarians will be received if this tool hands us President Obama? Exit question: On which issues, precisely, do Barr and Ron Paul propose to compromise with the 95% of Republicans who aren’t voting for them? They’re each trying to bring the GOP around to more libertarian positions, Barr by spoiling McCain’s chances and Paul by trying to work within the party for now and land a role at the convention. Surely they understand that there’ll be some give and take involved in reaching an accommodation with more centrist/hawkish conservatives. Yet Paul’s philosophy, in which every last position is presented as the one and only acceptable constitutional solution, makes that impossible. You have to do exactly what he wants, because that’s what the Constitution wants and there can be no compromise where the supreme law of the land is concerned. So how does this play out? If the GOP decides, sure, let’s give the gold standard a second look, what does America’s Greatest Patriot give back?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5]
King of the Britons on June 5, 2008 at 5:09 PM
First, it is the “strength of my convictions” that drives me to vote for them. I am concerned about results, not “self-expression” and all that good liberal stuff.
As for the “leaving” being a “self-indulgent protest,” you make it sound so grandiose. I left any official affiliation because it became useless. They never really did represent my views (did you know they don’t support repealing even one Constitutional amendment in their platform?–I’d like to reverse at least four of them!). However, the opportunity availed itself to participate in some official capacity. Eventually, I found I could put my time to better use in other activism. That is my “break” from the party.
Thus, it was not “self-indulgent” nor a “protest.” I would still work on their campaigns (how many hours per week and hundreds of dollars do you spend each election year?), a lot more, in fact, than most card-carrying GOPs.
What people like you need to understand is that the decades of failure have brought us to the point where, in a very real moral sense, “we” have lost the right to your type of holding to convictions. Simply, as Sowell said (see above), “we do not have the luxury of waiting for our ideal candidate or of indulging our emotions by voting for some third party candidate to show our displeasure– at the cost of putting someone in the White House who is not up to the job.”
Too many are wanting instant grafication, a product of the liberalism of recent decades, so they demand perfection and/or vote third party, regardless of the long-term consequences. But my convictions about loyalty and service to my country won’t let me do that. They drive me to do what must be done.
Tommygun on June 5, 2008 at 5:27 PM
And what people like you need to understand is that we are where we are right now because of people like you. If everyone who didn’t like McCain as the Republican candidate for president didn’t vote for him, he wouldn’t be the nominee. If everyone who had ideals and principles when it came to their elected officials, we wouldn’t have the contemptible cesspool in D.C. that we have now. And you have the audacity to say something like,
Are you kidding me? It would seem to me that it is people like you who have lost something - namely your passion for freedom and principles. I have not. I will never have a problem looking myself in the mirror or my kids in the eyes and tell them that I didn’t vote for John McCain, regardless of who ends up winning.
What you fail to realize is that as long as you keep voting for terrible candidates like McCain, you will never get a good candidate because they will all move to the center or left to get that constituency that McCain is shooting for. They will always assume that they will get voters like you who cry that we must vote for the lesser of two evils.
King of the Britons on June 5, 2008 at 5:41 PM
There be the rub, neither of them are up for the job. I honestly wish we had None of the Above, and when that got a majority, we could start over and find two different nominee’s. I wonder if they’ll include the option of none of the above in some polling, to show how many people are disgusted with our candidates.
Snake307 on June 5, 2008 at 5:43 PM
I’m sure that in any other situation, you and I would agree with each other. But our country is at war. With these people. And these people (”Don’t you DARE question our desire to kill every American!”). We can’t afford to let Barack Obama hand our country over to terror. If you don’t vote, if you protest vote, or if you (God forbid) vote for Obama to “send a message to John McCain” (you won’t, he is a liberal/moderate and always will be) then you will be, in effect, waving the white flag to terror. If you need another reason to vote for McCain, I’ve got one. The Iranian gov’t is scared of him. I’d bet a million bucks they aren’t scared of Barack “Without Preconditions” Obama.
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 5:43 PM
We can survive four years of John McCain. And I’m sure conservatives will come out of it much stronger. What we CAN’T survive is four years of Barack Obama. We may not have a country to argue about if he’s elected.
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 5:46 PM
Bob Barf 08
meci on June 5, 2008 at 5:48 PM
Pure stupidity and selfishness.
Uh, who said I backed McCain in the primary? The problem was that the conservatives were not actively involved. They sat it out, by and large, and let the more moderate forces stand in. In essence, they were demoralized, and let that guide their (in)action. However, I must add, he may be the best candidate to defeat the Dems (that is, that [further] Left candidate). Again, look for results, not selfish indulgence in “principles.”
“That’s right, kids. I helped get President Obama elected. Now don’t be late for madrassa! And don’t forget to salute the UN flag! I’m sorry about you getting raped, my daughter. I would have stopped him, but the goverment took my guns, and besides, that would have violated his civil rights. Fortunately, he won’t attack you today, as he’s drunk on the liquor he bought with his welfare money.”
(Okay, a bit over the top and internally contradictory, but point made.)
As opposed to voting for Hussein (vote for 3rd party = vote for Hussein), and then your views will be outlawed, and your rights lost anyway.
You almost make a point there, but just miss. The real answer is to influence from the bottom up. Promote your views with your friends and family. Take public stands in person against what’s wrong. Build public following, not of yourself, but of the ideas they hold but are afraid to say (like the fact that Hussein is a BLACK NATIONALIST TERROR SYMPATHIZER). Influence the “conservative movement” to hold and move in the right (no pun intended) direction. If that sort of open activist support developed, it will have the effect you want, with the organization and ability to succeed.
Before you will get the kinds of candidates you want in a situation where they can succeed, these other things must first happen. And again, it goes to what LimeyGeek said, it takes work. And it takes sacrifice–sacrifice of time, money, energy, indulgences, and yes, maybe even a few family and friends.
But until the Conservative/Right does this, it is stuck with this defensive approach. Your way will not gain success for “freedom and principles”. This way just might.
Tommygun on June 5, 2008 at 6:08 PM
Wow. Being lectured by a sell out. Sorry. No sale. I am just thankful that I was raised to stick to my beliefs and to remain persistent and steadfast to my principles.
You have your way of living, and I have mine. I reject yours, even though I believe that you are entitled to it just the same. I thoroughly understand what you are saying - I just reject it.
King of the Britons on June 5, 2008 at 6:42 PM
Your “principles” involve surrender to terror and turning America over to socialism. Wow. Some principles you got there, buddy. Instead of pretending to be a “conservative” who’s voting for Barr “out of principle”, why don’t you just do what you REALLY want to do?
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 6:47 PM
Politics of Fear…
Vote for our guy or its YOUR fault that the other guy wins…
Problem is that we did it before, and have lost any conservative direction to the party.
Fool me once, shame on you… fool me twice, shame on you…. Fool me three times and I’m still supposed to vote for you?
Uh, no. McCain supporter Rhetoric to the contrary, the country will not end if Obama is elected. Just like his stance on Iraq, and Iran, the public will force him to be centrist because HE HAS NO REAL SET AGENDA except getting elected… kinda like Clinton. Clinton, while not a great President, did not destroy the democracy, like some thought when he got elected… and in fact was fairly moderate in his governance.
Folks like me… who lived through Nixon, and Carter, and Ford realize that the President can only do so much… and in fact the best Presidents are those who do the least.
CURRENT Republicans have NOT governed conservativly, so why should we support them… besides that YOU believe that Obama is the Debil!
Romeo13 on June 5, 2008 at 6:52 PM
God, I can’t believe I’m being called a “McCain supporter” now. I want to take a shower.
—————————————
But hey, you’re right. Having Obama elected won’t hurt America.
Not one bit.
Hmm. That’s comforting.
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 7:00 PM
And the McCain sponsered Cap and Trade CO2 system is NOT Socialism? Or how about McCain Feingold (government beurocrats in control of Free Speech?).
Isn’t it amusing that Major corporations are funding the two major party Conventions and getting private access to all the power players through that… yet we can’t say somthing negative just prior to an election? McCain’s governing ability at its best.
Is it your contention that Obama wanting to talk to Iran, would do MORE damage than the CO2 cap and trade system? or graning amnest to 20+million illegal aliens?
Crap, let Obama talk… it won’t change anything accept to give Dinnerjacket a bit of credibility…
Romeo13 on June 5, 2008 at 7:12 PM
That is quite ironic. Those of you who are willing to sell whatever principles you may have down the river in order to get McCain elected (and not Obama) try to convince yourselves and everyone else that it is you who are the true principled ones by making this huge sacrifice of voting for someone who doesn’t share any of your beliefs. It is quite a bold jedi mind trick you attempt. Keep telling everyone that these aren’t the droids they are looking for and maybe it will work.
King of the Britons on June 5, 2008 at 7:32 PM
Weak. Very weak.
I say there is a BigFoot. There have been photos and foot prints. If you don’t think there is a BigFoot just show where that is wrong.
See what I mean.
P.S. You are not really helping McCain.
MB4 on June 5, 2008 at 8:02 PM
I completely agree with you. McCain is a raging liberal. But he’s a raging liberal who will keep our country safe. We’ll be rid of him in four years.
I’ve got to say this. Bob Barr doesn’t come much closer to my beliefs than John McCain does. I’m a CONSERVATIVE. Bob Barr is a LIBERTARIAN and takes all the crappy positions that come with it, including amnesty for illegals and a weak national defense. I liked him when he used to be a conservative, though. As for the other guy (Baldwin)…he’s just another PaulNut. I’d at least have some semblance of respect for you if either of your protest candidates were actually conservatives. And I’d probably join you in calling for a 3rd party candidate, if we weren’t in a time of war (which is the one thing you guys don’t seem to understand). Obama must be stopped. He will do much greater damage to our country than John McCain would ever hope to do. But you don’t seem to care.
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 8:03 PM
What you don’t seem to understand is that Obama will do much more in the way of “global warming prevention”/ruining our economy than McCain would ever do. And Obama’s amnesty is probably much worse than McCain’s (and, I know, you don’t think it can get much worse. But, trust me, Obama will find a way) ESPECIALLY if we end up with the Democratic super majorities in each house of Congress that everyone is predicting. No ifs, ands, or buts about it…Obama is MUCH more of a threat to our country than McCain can even dream of being.
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 8:08 PM
I hear this over and over and you just said it as well:
Let me ask you a question: Have you been affected by this war you speak of? I am not trying to be a dick either, I am just curious. I have. I commanded an infantry company through a year of it in Afghanistan. So, despite your belief that I don’t seem to understand it, I do. And I still won’t vote for McCain.
Why do you think that Ron Paul garnered so much support (money) from the military?
King of the Britons on June 5, 2008 at 8:09 PM
Lets see. He wants to defund the new Nuke. He wants to cut our amount of nuclear weapons. He has NO stated plan of what to do about Hez or Hamas. He has NOT come out for strong economic sanctions on Iran (somthing he could put forward in the Senate). He is NOT for drilling here (so we’re not funding terrorist states with Petro dollars). He has NO plan on how to deal with China. He has made no statement about Russia and how we are going to deal with it. He has made NO statement of what we do with Pakistan…
So, except for Iraq, just how is he that much better? Just how is he going to singlehandedly keep us safe with a Democrat Congress passing the laws, and controlling the money?
Cause I’m SOOOOOO sure he’ll secure the border…
Romeo13 on June 5, 2008 at 8:11 PM
We hear praise of a power-wielding, arm-twisting President who “gets his program through Congress” by knowing the use of power. Throughout the course of history, there have been many other such wielders of power. There have even been dictators who regularly held plebiscites, in which their dictatorships were approved by an Ivory-soap-like percentage of the electorate. But their countries were not free, nor can any country remain free under such despotic power. Some of the current worship of powerful executives may come from those who admire strength and accomplishment of any sort. Others hail the display of Presidential strength simply because they approve of the result reached by the use of power. This is nothing less than the totalitarian philosophy that the end justifies the means If ever there was a philosophy of government totally at war with that of the Founding Fathers, it is this one.
- Barry Goldwater
MB4 on June 5, 2008 at 8:12 PM
This thread is closed to everyone besides the three/four Paulnuts. They will argue amongst themselves.
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 8:33 PM
I know who’s trying to kill us. I’ve also raged long and impotently against the asinine politically correct nonsense that our Washington Elite have insisted we adapt in the war. The requirement of Congress that we not use ammunition manufactured in Israel for fear of offending the people we were shooting at. Apparently they don’t mind being shot, but if they’re shot with an Israeli bullet, that would make them angry. We wouldn’t want them angry now would we?
Bush is a little arrogant, I guess it’s understandable to a certain extent. However, compared to McCain, Bush is as humble as a Monk with a vow a silence. McCain loves to read his name in the paper, and do you think he’d suddenly turn on the Media, his real supporters over the years?
McCainiacs try and claim that the war on terror is the one thing we must consider when we’re voting. I have many things to consider. First, will John stay true to this? What has he stayed true to? Almost nothing. He’s pro life, unless that pro life position requires him to vote for a Constitutional Amendment, then he’s not about to do that. He’s against Gay Marriage, again unless a Constitutional Amendment is the answer, and again he’s not for it so much. So what has he been consistantly for? He’s against tax increases, unless it’s his Carbon Cap and Trade system, which will save the planet. He’s all for those taxes even if it will destroy the economy, he doesn’t care.
How do we fight a war with the economy in a shambles? We can’t. John will lose the desire to fight the war, when his Carbon tax kicks in, and you know the Democratic Congress will pass it. That’s one of the pillars of their platform after all. Once it kicks in, and the prices of things inflate out of reach of the people, will John be able to continue to war without money? Who will pay for the fuel to fly the soldiers there and back? Who will pay for the troops, the support systems, the medical? It all cost money, and the money is about to dry up with his cap and trade deal.
I can easily see John McCain backing down in Iraq, especially in the interest of bipartisanship.
If I can’t trust John McCain on Taxes, life, defense of marriage, and immigration, why would I feel I could trust him on the War?
Snake307 on June 5, 2008 at 8:51 PM
Oh,, I gues I hurt too many widdle feewings by calling y’all haters. And that was not the point of my post anyway.
My point is this:
Hildy voters may go for McCain, stay home, or at the very least not go out of their way to vote for Obama. Probably in even greater numbers than the “true real conservatives.” Especially when you consider the liberal sprinkling of Paulians and mobys among the “true conservatives” online.
The upshot may get John McCain elected. Which means, McCain would have won without your vote in 2008. Please tell me again how the message is supposed to get through?
Sekhmet on June 5, 2008 at 9:06 PM
You made some very good points. First off, I do think Cap and Trade and all the other “planet saving” taxes he advocates for would destroy our economy. But I also don’t think he’d be able to get most of them through in 4 years. The Democrats will vote against it, no matter how badly they want it, simply because a Republican’s name is on it. Some of it will get through, no doubt, but the little that will get passed can be repealed by the next POTUS (Romney, perhaps? Jindal?). I have to say, I don’t think the federal government should have any place in marriage, so I won’t go there. I will say, though, that he campaigned heavily for a Same Sex marriage ban in Arizona a few years ago. I don’t know much else of his history on the issue. As for respect for life…I understand that he doesn’t have much of it. But, for his four years, all we have to worry about is justices. Conservatives will FORCE him to pick pro-life judges. He did, ultimately, vote to confirm Roberts and Alito, but I’ll admit that his involvement in the Gang of 14 bothers me more than a lot. I have nothing to say about CFR. I’ve never seen more of an atrocity to the 1st amendment rights of Americans than McCain-Feingold. I can’t argue with you there (NOTE: I wrote the thing about CFR and then realized that you didn’t even mention it. Ha). I’m not used to arguing FOR voting for McShamnesty, and I have to say…it’s difficult. But when faced with the decision between him and Obama, it’s hard to choose Obama.
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 9:38 PM
McCain sucks less.
McCain ‘08
sulla on June 5, 2008 at 10:09 PM
Barr is going to be interviewed tomorrow night (fri) by glenn beck on his show. Maybe if you watch you could let glenn know at me@glennbeck.com what you think of barr.
Bambi on June 5, 2008 at 10:09 PM
Barr is a joke. He is just as much of a liberal as Mccain.
There is only one third party that can win this year…the Constitution Party..
The Paul supporters have already moved over to Chuck Baldwin/Constitution Party…And the evangelicals have been threatening to for a while..
Unless Mccain nominates Mike Huckabee there is no way he can keep us evangelicals in the so called republican party.
If Mccain decides to say FU to us evangelicals…
Get ready for the first third party president since Abraham Lincoln!
SaintOlaf on June 5, 2008 at 10:33 PM
It’s nice to see that the universal spokesman for all evangelicals everywhere is here on this comment thread. I can’t believe you’re a Huckabee supporter. I thought that most of them cared about winning the War on Terror, something Chuck Baldwin clearly states is not one of his objectives right on his website. You’re one nutty guy, SaintOlaf.
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 11:00 PM
malan89,
I think it’s quite strange that you, an atheist, are so aware of the fact that America and the world is in such mortal danger.
I will give you this…you are right about that.
America will probably be brought to it’s knees soon through jihadist nuclear attacks on major cites/ports and will never recover.
I’m telling you, when even the secularists and leftists are aware of the fact that the world is coming to an end….you know it’s coming soon.
Many people are coming to repent and put their trust in Jesus Christ just because they follow current events and realize these are the end days…I hope you will be one of them.
SaintOlaf on June 5, 2008 at 11:26 PM
This thread is closed to everyone besides the three/four Paulnuts. They will argue amongst themselves.
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 8:33 PM
They’re doing a great job.
DfDeportation on June 6, 2008 at 12:05 AM
And this is the guy you would put in office! http://iperceive.net/obama-odinga-the-kenyan-jihad/#comment-946
Not a 3rd party candidate but b hussein obama
Sof: For heavens sakes grow a brain! You are as bad as the muslims, you want to speed up the end of the world. You will have to answer for it.
Bambi on June 6, 2008 at 12:07 AM
Shhh.. ixnay on the odinganay story…that’s not supposed to com out till september.
SaintOlaf on June 6, 2008 at 12:12 AM
I’m not an atheist. You are so arrogant. You think you are the only person of faith anywhere. You are disgusting. You should be ashamed. You’ve done this to other people in other threads. If someone doesn’t agree with you, they must not be a Christian. Or they must not hold any morals. It’s very obvious that YOU don’t understand God’s message, or you wouldn’t go around questioning another person’s faith simply because they disagree with you. Shame on you.
malan89 on June 6, 2008 at 7:38 AM
Olaf, you and your other coo coo bannanas logins are so damn arrogant.
Squid Shark on June 6, 2008 at 8:54 AM
Lately, when I come to HotAir and start reading the comments, I often have to stop and double check the address bar and make sure I’m at the right place. The vitriol is nearing Kos-like proportions and conservatism seems to be the only casualty.
RobertCSampson on June 6, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Compacted and excerpted for brevity:
A valiant battle against possible trolls
entagor on June 6, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Good trolls versus bad trolls who do not give a rat’s ass
Good troll wages valiant battle against bad trolls
entagor on June 6, 2008 at 12:02 PM
Too bad the RNC doesn’t give a rat’s ass
entagor on June 6, 2008 at 12:14 PM
It frosts me that the McCain bots think its stupid, trollish, unpatriotic etc if I don’t vote for McCain. Listen, he has to EARN the vote, just saying he isn’t Obama isn’t enough. Every time I become luke warm on McCain, because he isn’t Obama, he flips me off.
Will I vote for Barr, not sure, as he also needs to earn my vote.
How to earn my vote? Well you can start with stop calling me stupid, trollish, unpatriotic etc. Follow it up with you will at least listen to conservatives…not saying you have to necessarily govern conservative, I am adult enough to realize that McCain is not conservative. But the more he flips me off, the more I say right back at you.
Red Pill, read up thread on how you were a liberal and found Christ and became conservative. That is awesome, and though we don’t agree with Huck, I am glad you have found God and changed your life accordingly. But I must ask you, ( wearing my libertarian hat ) did government cause you to have your come to Jesus moment? Hence does it matter who is in office for social reasons? I am sure the answer is when you have converted to be a social conservative you did it without the Supreme Court, without Congress, or the President. This is why it is more important to elect a fiscally responsible and foreign policy conservative…because the social stuff I leave for God. Technology will cause less abortions to take place, not who is in office…the more mothers learn about who is inside them, the less likely they will have an abortion because they will have a connection and have their “Jesus” moment.
Conservative Voice on June 6, 2008 at 2:08 PM
I dont think that and most dont. I think it is stupid and trollish to say that he is “just like Obama” but to have legitimate gripes with him is something else entirely.
For the most part, nothing will make you TC’s happy. That is why many of us who are trying to be constructive this election cycle and not surrender have given up trying to court you. Nothing, it seems, will work short of nominating Limbaugh.
I do listen to others, Let me tell you a story since you find Red Pill’s so interesting:
I would have never joined the Republican party if it were not for one man, John McCain. I came in from the Democrats working for him in 2000. He converted me to small government, anti-waste free market conservatism. (Jesus was not complicit in my conversion). I eventually became a big “purity and light” conservative but have mellowed out after 8 years of military service.
I did listen to conservative Ideals, from the man you T.C.’s revile so much. I carried water for Bush twice, even though I disliked him intensely. Many of us RINO’s did, despite feeling alienated by the TC’s. Now we have nominated someone who might just help us beat the odds in a a year where we should loose. All we want is the same effort you got from us in the 8 years.
Squid Shark on June 6, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Squid, not sure what you mean by TC, and btw I am not a big fan of Bush either, I think he is the main reason why Republicans lost Congress…
Bush failed to veto large spending measures
Bush failed to veto McCain Campaign Finance Reform
Bush failed to secure the border
Bush failed to push an energy policy that would of solved the problem we have now.
Bush failed to play hardball with the Democrats, too willing to compromise.
Bush failed to champion smaller government…increased entitlement spending.
The only things Bush has done right are taxes, the war and the judges ( though a flat tax would of been grand…he played with the idea, and I don’t hold it against him, since he had enough on his plate with regards to the war ).
Where McCain gets it is the 2nd Amendment, the war ( albeit his stance on torture is too soft, and closing GITMO is wrong ) and I believe he gets it with regards to taxes and spending. Where he causes me to think he is no different from Obama is this global warming crap and with regards to the border, nor did he win points with me when he along with Huckabee played the class envy card against Romney. If McCain picks a Veep who is a conservative, I will vote for McCain. And I don’t consider Huck to be a conservative ( though at least Huck tries to pretend to be one )
Conservative Voice on June 6, 2008 at 4:29 PM
It is a cute nickname for “True” Conservatives. Since RINO’s has become the condecending nickname of choice for thos os us who have decided to vote the ticket.
Squid Shark on June 6, 2008 at 4:51 PM
I actaully heavily agree with him on this topic.
Squid Shark on June 6, 2008 at 4:52 PM
I hope I helped you get a glimpse into the mind of a McCain supporter :)
Squid Shark on June 6, 2008 at 4:53 PM
So what you are saying is even though your party has been around for years, and has it own distictive platform, it should just get the hell out of the way for some other loser candidate because it might cause some people to vote with sanity, and that might give the other loser a chance to close on the first loser?
What a sorry ass concept….
paulsur on June 6, 2008 at 11:58 PM
Comment pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5]