2007-05-03 05:34:30 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yeah, Rudy Guliani was married to his cousin for 14 years and divorced his wife via a press conference, but Sean Hannity, Mr Conservative, can look right past that.
2007-05-03 05:39:50 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
I don't think there is a candidate that supports my morals and standards 100%. That's why I think so many don't vote because there is no real representation of the people. I would like to see "none of the above" as a choice so we could get some real people in there. Sometimes it's picking between the worst of evils which really isn't a choice. If majority really ruled and they counted all the non voters because they didn't want any of the choices given.....then no-one in office would be in office. I bet we'd have more active voters if "none of the above" was a legit vote and they'd have to start getting people in that the people really want instead of who has the most money or backed by those with the most money.
2007-05-03 12:55:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Adjust? No. Settle yes. Let's face it, there is not one politician out there that has the exact same, straight down the line, same value and believe system that each voter holds. This holds true for all party affiliations, however conservatives do have more moral standards so guess we do settle more than liberals.
2007-05-03 12:49:24 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Serious, party-line Repulican conservatives, like serious, party-line Democratic liberals, yes.
In the broader sense, no, conservatives would be more likely to choose to support or oppose a politician based on how well he lives up to thier moral standards. Such republican probably haven't voted Republican since 1984, however.
2007-05-03 12:43:49 · answer #4 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A politician's moral standards is an oxymoron.
If you think liberals don't do the same thing, why were they so up in arms about former Congressman Foley's messages to a 17 year old page, but seem to have conveniently forgot that Congressman Barney Frank and former Congressman Gary Studds had worse scandals with their underage pages?
2007-05-03 12:56:13 · answer #5 · answered by Pythagoras 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Believe it or not, there are a set of issues. Seems like each has different relative importance to people, but they all are important. ( I have become my parents !!)
In terms of a particular politician, their record is the issue. Like whether they accepted money from china.
I do strongly believe that both the libs and the cons love our country, only in different ways.
2007-05-03 12:50:27 · answer #6 · answered by Wonka 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope. I don't support the politician. I support the issues. If a particular politician supports my beliefs and views, they are my candidate, regardless of party. My morals never change.
2007-05-03 12:39:46 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Given the consistently low morals of the Republican Party I would have to say yes.
Newt Gingrich had an affair while he grilled Clinton for one.
2007-05-03 12:44:39 · answer #8 · answered by Jim W 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Possibly - but let's face it, compared to the consistently low morals of the denizens in the Democrat Party, at least the cons have high moral standards part of the time, right?
2007-05-03 12:40:20 · answer #9 · answered by Fast Eddie B 6 · 3⤊ 5⤋
I don't adjust my moral standards for any reason or person.
2007-05-03 12:39:06 · answer #10 · answered by El Pistolero Negra 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋