What do you think?
2007-12-30 05:42:47 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I have never told anyone this but i do like Duncan Hunter. What better candidate to oversee senate affairs?
2007-12-30 05:49:01 · update #1
Hunter wouldn't try whacking him. It would accomplish nothing.
2007-12-30 06:02:04 · update #2
Thomas S: That is true....He is smart.
2007-12-30 06:22:15 · update #3
i'd vote...
2007-12-30 05:56:53 · answer #1 · answered by ....................... 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
I don't really have a problem with Hunter, other than he is for the war, like most other Republicans. It's the only issue that is keeping most of them unelectable, since most of the country wants at least a timetable of withdrawal before 2013 (aka Hillary and Obama's terms). Edwards or Gravel/Kucinich would be great too, but only in a dream. Walter Williams is hinted as a possible VP, smart guy.
2007-12-30 06:19:00 · answer #2 · answered by ThomasS 5 · 5⤊ 2⤋
How about Hunter/Paul? It might sooth those that think that Ron Paul isn't presidential for what ever reason, but may accept him as a VP
2007-12-30 07:27:20 · answer #3 · answered by lordkelvin 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Hunter wouldn't agree to be Ron's VP. Hunter wants to stay in Iraq, Paul doesn't; it's too big of a difference in policy.
2007-12-30 06:42:04 · answer #4 · answered by Ron Paul 2112 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Paul has talked about running with Walter E. Williams:
{snips}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_E._Williams
Conservative comic strip Mallard Fillmore has launched a campaign to draft Williams for the Republican nomination in the 2008 United States presidential election.[5] Williams has stated that he is inundated with emails, but won't run, although he won't completely rule out the possibility. Instead, he endorsed Republican candidate Ron Paul. Paul himself has suggested "somebody like Walter Williams" as a running mate.
*********************************************************
2007-12-30 06:13:18 · answer #5 · answered by beesting 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋
I'd vote for it.
Better would be Paul/Badnarik that way Ron Paul wouldn't have to worry about looking over his shoulder to make sure Hunter isn't there trying to whack him. A la Johnson/Kennedy, Bush/Reagan.
2007-12-30 05:45:23 · answer #6 · answered by Lars 4 · 6⤊ 3⤋
Paul would have to pull a VP choice from somewhere other than the current field. Hunter isn't going to be willing to give up the one issue that matters that the Presidency can actually affect, which is the war and on which Paul is wrong.
All of which contributes to Paul's unelectability.
2007-12-30 05:47:10 · answer #7 · answered by RTO Trainer 6 · 2⤊ 8⤋
I'd support it, only two republicans which don't accept lobbyist money.
I'd perfer Paul/Kucinich even if they don't agree on everything
2007-12-30 05:45:36 · answer #8 · answered by Edge Caliber 6 · 8⤊ 3⤋
The only ticket is see worse would be Paul/Kucinich.
2007-12-30 06:11:20 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋
Got my vote...
I'd also go for...
Paul/Biden
Paul/Dodd
Paul/Kucinich
Paul/Webb
2007-12-30 05:47:12 · answer #10 · answered by jlohlinger 3 · 8⤊ 3⤋
I'm down.
2007-12-30 05:48:12 · answer #11 · answered by Freethinker 5 · 7⤊ 2⤋