The neoconservative agenda of a constantly active military and hardline diplomacy can only continue for as long as it is acceptable to the American people. A Fox News opinion poll reveals that 73% of Americans believe "it is time that [Iraqis] take on most of the burden of security in their country and let U.S. troops start to come home". In response to this question: "What do you think the United States should do in Iraq?" Only 39% of Americans responded with "Continue involvement in Iraq". The neoconservatives' ultimate dreams, as stated by "Project for the New American Century", envision permanent troop deployments in the middle east as well as "multi-theater wars" across the globe. With so many highly ranked Republicans standing as founders of "PNAC", it is likely that the next GOP candidate will also have to support the imperial agenda. If things in Iraq and Afghanistan do not improve (or if the war is expanded to Iran or NK), a true neoconservative candidate would likely have to lie about these imperial ambitions to even be elected. If the candidate lied and then put America in another compromising war...it could be a major setback to the republican party. So this leads to several concluding thoughts. Republicans on this board: it is in your best interest to choose a traditional republican candidate not another PNAC tool. Neoconservatives on this board: if your policies are truly un-electable, what will be done to keep control of the oval office?