Rudy Democrats Could Make The Difference

[Annie]

again.... any republican running for president will be running on the platform of the republican party. As long as the platform of the republican party is what it is, and as long as the platform of the democratic party is what IT is, why would I vote for someone standing on a platform with which I profoundly disagree? Because he did a good job in front of the cameras on 9/11?

And we haven't even mentioned the nomination of judges!

I agree with Thompson, there shouldn't be party platforms. Let's judge each nominee on their merits.

 

[Ninja]

I am, for example, supporting Bill Richardson for my party's nomination and am on his state committee.

He's the only guy on either side whose leadership ability is unquestionable. Get him the nomination and I may very well vote for him.

 

[Annie]

He's the only guy on either side whose leadership ability is unquestionable. Get him the nomination and I may very well vote for him.

Outside of myself, I know snowman is 'Gop' kind a guy. That's two of us that have been open to more than GOP slate. Where do we see that openess on the the other side? I don't.

 

[maineman]

Outside of myself, I know snowman is 'Gop' kind a guy. That's two of us that have been open to more than GOP slate. Where do we see that openess on the the other side? I don't.

I am open to working with any republican at any time. I do know, however, that politics is a team sport...and if you believe in what your team stands for, the only way you are going to get that agenda accomplished is if your team is on offense (in the majority and in the white house) and not on defense. The sweetest republican in the world is still going to appoint conservative judges to the bench who may very well rule to disassemble many of the gains that progressive liberalism have made over the last century.

 

[Annie]

I am open to working with any republican at any time. I do know, however, that politics is a team sport...and if you believe in what your team stands for, the only way you are going to get that agenda accomplished is if your team is on offense (in the majority and in the white house) and not on defense. The sweetest republican in the world is still going to appoint conservative judges to the bench who may very well rule to disassemble many of the gains that progressive liberalism have made over the last century.

I'll take you at your word. On the other hand I do remember your posting something to the effect that the party had a hand in the candidates stance. As well it should.

I can't find it, you can disavow it, but do you disagree?

 

[maineman]

I'll take you at your word. On the other hand I do remember your posting something to the effect that the party had a hand in the candidates stance. As well it should.

I can't find it, you can disavow it, but do you disagree?

not in the least. the candidate should support the platform of his or her party.... if not, why be a member of a party! And if an individual, therefore, believes in the platform of a particular party, they ought to be able to cast their vote for that party's candidate. For example..... in 2000, my candidate of choice was Bill Bradley. I voted for Gore. In 2004, my candidate of choice was Wes Clark. I voted for Kerry. In 2008, my candidate of choice is Bill Richardson. I hope like hell I will be able to vote for him. If not, I will vote for the democrat who gets the nomination.... because I believe in what the democratic party stands for and what they try to accomplish and I am proud of what they HAVE been able to accomplish.

 

[red states rule]

I am open to working with any republican at any time. I do know, however, that politics is a team sport...and if you believe in what your team stands for, the only way you are going to get that agenda accomplished is if your team is on offense (in the majority and in the white house) and not on defense. The sweetest republican in the world is still going to appoint conservative judges to the bench who may very well rule to disassemble many of the gains that progressive liberalism have made over the last century.

Name some

 

[red states rule]

not in the least. the candidate should support the platform of his or her party.... if not, why be a member of a party! And if an individual, therefore, believes in the platform of a particular party, they ought to be able to cast their vote for that party's candidate. For example..... in 2000, my candidate of choice was Bill Bradley. I voted for Gore. In 2004, my candidate of choice was Wes Clark. I voted for Kerry. In 2008, my candidate of choice is Bill Richardson. I hope like hell I will be able to vote for him. If not, I will vote for the democrat who gets the nomination.... because I believe in what the democratic party stands for and what they try to accomplish and I am proud of what they HAVE been able to accomplish.

Once again, the items you said you are for - your candidates are against

Yet you attack me for going with Rudy. Your double standards are showing once again

 

[maineman]

Once again, the items you said you are for - your candidates are against

Yet you attack me for going with Rudy. Your double standards are showing once again

you miss several key points:

I didn't GO for Gore or Kerry until after my party had nominated them. I had actually done work for both the Bradley and Clark campaigns because I believed that they were closer to my personal priorities. I ended up voting for Gore and Kerry because they were closer to the democratic platform than Bush.

YOu, on the other hand, have abandoned your supposed "hardcore conservative" principles IN THE PRIMARY season and will not even lift a finger to provide any meaningful support for any of the real hardcore conservative candidates running for your nomination. If you would vigorously do so, and then, if your guy lost and you ended up voting for Rudy because he was closer to the republican platform than the democratic candidate, that would be understandable and totally acceptable.

It is your abandonment of YOUR conservative principles that allows you to ignore real conservatives that believe as you do on a LOT more issues than Rudy does just because you want to get ANY republican elected and you really DON'T care about which one or what their core principles might be.

 

[red states rule]

you miss several key points:

I didn't GO for Gore or Kerry until after my party had nominated them. I had actually done work for both the Bradley and Clark campaigns because I believed that they were closer to my personal priorities. I ended up voting for Gore and Kerry because they were closer to the democratic platform than Bush.

YOu, on the other hand, have abandoned your supposed "hardcore conservative" principles IN THE PRIMARY season and will not even lift a finger to provide any meaningful support for any of the real hardcore conservative candidates running for your nomination. If you would vigorously do so, and then, if your guy lost and you ended up voting for Rudy because he was closer to the republican platform than the democratic candidate, that would be understandable and totally acceptable.

It is your abandonment of YOUR conservative principles that allows you to ignore real conservatives that believe as you do on a LOT more issues than Rudy does just because you want to get ANY republican elected and you really DON'T care about which one or what their core principles might be.

so you dumped all your prinicpals and went with a candidate for President you disagreed with on the issues

Thanks for proving my case - you only care abour political power and everything else be damned

 

[maineman]

so you dumped all your prinicpals and went with a candidate for President you disagreed with on the issues

Thanks for proving my case - you only care abour political power and everything else be damned

no.... that is exactly what YOU have done. YOU have abandoned hardocre conservative candidates to throw your support to Rudy who clearly is NOT a hardcore conservative.

Let me ask you: if someone other than Rudy gets the republican nomination, does that mean you will vote for the democrat?

 

[red states rule]

no.... that is exactly what YOU have done. YOU have abandoned hardocre conservative candidates to throw your support to Rudy who clearly is NOT a hardcore conservative.

Let me ask you: if someone other than Rudy gets the republican nomination, does that mean you will vote for the democrat?

Of course, when you are busted - you want to change the subject

 

[maineman]

little intelligence here...I am moving on now.

 

[red states rule]

little intelligence here...I am moving on now.

you mean you are running away from the facts - again