CONS, LIBS & THE PRESIDENCY: What is Your View?

Question

I believe Republicans consistently win the Presidency because when people have to make a decision about the leader of the United States, the Democrat always reminds people of the last kid picked for the kickball team in elementary school gym class and the Republican is one of the two captains picking the team. In other words, Americans don't want an impotent guy like Carter getting *****-slapped by the Ayatollah of Iran or a degenerate like Clinton who you'd expect to be touching himself under his desk. They want leaders like Nixon (twice elected) , Reagan (twice elected), Bush (War Hero) and Bush Jr. (twice elected).

Answer 1

I'm Conserv. Democrats don't seem to see the whole picture. All they do is bash Bush and blame him for the war. You can blame Clinton for the war. He didn't do **** when we kept being attacked. Most ignorant people vote democrat, proven fact.

Answer 2

I think that the appeasement or even adoption of liberalism by the republican party is a real threat to the viability of the GOP. Witness the last election, how they got kicked out of majorities in both the house and senate. The real story here is how that happened. Did there suddenly become more liberals than conservatives? Did the swing voters hand them that victory.

NO!

What handed that victory to the dems was the little known fact that, in an unprecedented move, 20% of conservatives voted democrat.

Why did they do that? For one, they are trying to send a message to the republican party. That message is that you cannot adopt the liberalism proposed by the Bush forces and still count on the support of the conservative base. Since the conservative base is what gets the republicans elected, this results in defeat, so you better damn well tow the line. I don't think the republicans quite grasp the implications of this. With the support of conservatives, they win, every time, no matter who else they alienate. Without the support of conservatives they lose. Only conservatives are important to their getting elected. They have forgotten this. They better figure it out and soon.

One thing the democrats have been doing is courting conservatives. They talk a good game but never follow through. This is unfortunate. But, what is worse is that enough conservatives believe them that it courts disaster. What was the first thing the new congress did? Started implementing a radical left anti-american agenda. I hope the conservatives who voted democrat realize that pain they are feeling in their back is from the knife the candidates they voted for stuck there.

What's needed is for the republicans to get tough on liberals and field candidates that are not republicans in name only. The number one guy for the job in '08 is Tom Tancredo. He's currently the most powerful republican in the party and heads up the forces for real immigration reform (ie kick the illegals the hell out of the country) and a return to conservatism in general.

Unfortunately, Guiliani is running this term and he is likely to win because of his great name recognition. Problem is that Guiliani, while a conservative, is on the wrong side of certain issues....abortion, gun control. Although these issues are not important this term (ie they will remain status quo no matter how you feel about them) he runs the risk of alienating conservatives.

What's needed is for Guiliani to make clear that he is a conservative and that he plans to work toward their means and goals. Choosing Tancredo as a vice president would go a loooong way toward doing this. That's a winning ticket that will easily win the presidency and will pick up alot of seats in congress to boot.

Answer 3

I think it is because liberal candidates tend to be based on personality, republican candidates tend to be who' "next in line" if you will. Therefore republican candidates tend to be more experienced than Democrats. Look at the people running now Obama, Democrat has been in the Senate for 2 years he is not a leader on any of the issues, just a smart guy with a good personality. Clinton Senate for 6 years also not a stand out on anything. Then you have McCain Republican, weather you like him or hate him no one can say he's not qualified. When it comes time to actually cast a vote more people will go with the guy who's been around not the one who is cool.

Answer 4

I think you've already made an attempt to answer your own question or viewpoint on this. Overall I tend to agree with you in that, for example, if you Google a photo of our current President and one of Senator Kerry, when they were both in college you'd see that one (good ole fun lovin' G.W.) is most likely the guy you'd like to hang out with and the type of person who'd watch your back, while the JFK wanna be looks like the Dork of the year. But hey, now I'm not even being objective.

Answer 5

I'm just glad you said Johnson instead of Nixon and you said "escalated" which in a backwards way admits that JFK got our active involvement going. I know, since Korea we'd been "advising" but that's like a coach - we started contributing players under JFK.

Answer 6

I don't see the point in the question now that you answered yourself. But I agree with you on most of it. I think that it's a shame what Nixon did, because he had a lot of credits to his name that he would have been remembered for otherwise. Mainly being responsible for the first nuclear treaty in history. And I really don't like the Clinton's. They are thugs.

Answer 7

Oh my,what an easliy impressionable mind you have!

Liberals of most kinds love America in fact. Hatefulness is often,by my experience,disguised (and justified)in reactionary politics.

True, Mondale,Dukakis,and Kerry didnt look like much as president candidates BUT MOST CONSERVATIVE POLITICS IS SO REPULSIVE MOST GREAT LIBERALS AVOID POLITICS TO AVOID THEM.So all your left with is the minority of "weak" liberals.

And I wouldnt say Nixon was so great,either.Like a conservative,he talked out of both sides of his mouth.

Answer 8

My view is that you were the last kid picked for the kickball team. I guess Carter should have given Khomeni arms to spring the hostages like Reagan did. Did you know that Reagan's favorite newspaper was printed by Rev Moon's church? Talk about creepy.

Answer 9

I feel that when I see everything going down the drain - that we should vote who is best and has the country as a whole in mind. Not to protect people who have the deepest pockets and who gave us the most money. Money, money is what is all about and the oil of coarse. But, the Dem's are rocking the house, so let the games continue..................

Answer 10

I judge based on ideas and results. Some ideas have demonstrated results. Carter and Reagan are excellent examples here. Carter's ideas didn't work. Reagan's did.