Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 26, 2014, 12:26:01 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2012 Elections (Moderators: Mr. Morden, Bacon King, Sheriff Buford TX Justice)
| | |-+  *IF* Thune wins the GOP nomination, who's his VP?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print
Author Topic: *IF* Thune wins the GOP nomination, who's his VP?  (Read 3162 times)
milhouse24
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2340
View Profile
« Reply #25 on: February 20, 2010, 12:59:44 am »
Ignore

Um, no. We haven't had a strong pro-lifer for a GOP nominee yet.

But I don't think there was any real fanatically pro-abortion candidate from either party until Mondale in 1984.

Well I guess "strong" is a relative term, I suppose it has more to do with being a religious person.  I'm under the impression that the GOP ticket cannot have a pro-choice person.  While I think there are many qualified GOP women, they are usually pro-choice.  Palin, Bush, Dole were all outspoken pro-lifers.  McCain wasn't very outspoken about the issue, perhaps this contributed to his loss.  GHWB somehow managed to convince people for a short period of time that he was pro-life.  I would say one of the things that helped Bill Clinton and Obama win were that they were religious men or at least often spoke about religion, Clinton was a southern baptist, and Obama was not endorsed by emily's list in the primaries.
Logged
milhouse24
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2340
View Profile
« Reply #26 on: February 20, 2010, 01:03:11 am »
Ignore

Well to counter Thune's weaknesses, I would pick an older person with foreign and national defence experience. Also maybe someone from the east coast.

Maybe Cantor, he's not old, but it might attract more non-evangelical people to his ticket.

Not sure...

I don't think Cantor, his religion would cast doubts about mid-east policies.  Romney could be a good choice, if he was able to get more foreign policy experience.  I would think Petraeus would be too tainted by the Iraq war to be credible.  I think Americans just want to move on from that.
Logged
milhouse24
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2340
View Profile
« Reply #27 on: February 20, 2010, 01:08:06 am »
Ignore

Sarah Palin

I don't think Palin would be put on any ticket as VP again, primarily because she already lost once.  They don't want a 2-time loser. 

She had served only one term as govenor.  I just have doubts about her intellect and ability to handle the economy, and basically anything else.  But she should run in the primary and see how she stacks up in the primary debates. 
Logged
Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #28 on: February 20, 2010, 02:55:19 am »
Ignore

Um, no. We haven't had a strong pro-lifer for a GOP nominee yet.

But I don't think there was any real fanatically pro-abortion candidate from either party until Mondale in 1984.

Well I guess "strong" is a relative term, I suppose it has more to do with being a religious person.  I'm under the impression that the GOP ticket cannot have a pro-choice person.  While I think there are many qualified GOP women, they are usually pro-choice.  Palin, Bush, Dole were all outspoken pro-lifers.  McCain wasn't very outspoken about the issue, perhaps this contributed to his loss.  GHWB somehow managed to convince people for a short period of time that he was pro-life.  I would say one of the things that helped Bill Clinton and Obama win were that they were religious men or at least often spoke about religion, Clinton was a southern baptist, and Obama was not endorsed by emily's list in the primaries.

That's because putting a pro-abortionist on the Republican  ticket would be suicide.
Logged
cannonia
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 961
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.42, S: -1.30

P P
View Profile
« Reply #29 on: February 20, 2010, 04:50:26 am »
Ignore

Thune strikes me as a GWB without the family name or executive experience.  The bottom half of a Thune ticket would have a lot to make up for.  How about Condaleezza Rice or David Petraeus?  The danger, of course, is that anyone you add to the ticket would potentially steal the spotlight from Thune.
Logged
Niemeyerite
JulioMadrid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6695
Spain


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: February 20, 2010, 12:38:16 pm »
Ignore

Haley Barbour, Mitt Romney, Snowe or Collins (if he wants to win indep. votes), Linda Lingle, Mitch Daniels or Jim Douglas.

I think the best of the above are Jim Douglas and Linda Lingle (moderate GOP governors).
Logged

My evolution (by The Political Matrix):
E: -6.06 -> -6.97 -> -6.97 -> -8.13 -> -7.29 -> -8.26 -> -8.65 -> -7.03
S: -6.78 -> -6.09 -> -7.30 -> -7.13 -> -8.09 -> -8.35 -> -9.04 -> -8.61
useful idiot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3686


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: February 20, 2010, 12:49:09 pm »
Ignore

Thune-Ridge would lose every state McCain did, plus Missouri, Arizona, Montana, and Georgia.

The only winning issue Thune has is being pro-life. Putting a pro-abortionist on the ticket will end that.

I used to think Ridge had a chance at VP, but he really needs a conversion to pro-life if he wants a chance on the ticket.  Heck, Dick Cheney was pro-gay marriage and he never talked about it, ever.  Ridge can say he supports the Nominee and pro-life.  The Christians wouldn't vote for the Democrat anyway. 

Also, Senator P. Bush founded Planned Parenthood, yet both GHWB and GWB convinced Christians they were pro-life, go figure!

Well, Dubya and Bush Senior are Pro-Life retard.

Yeah, they both converted to Pro-life, how convenient of them for political gain. 

Al Gore became pro-choice when picked by Clinton to be his VP. Kucinich became pro-choice when he decided to run for president too. This isn't that uncommon...
Logged
milhouse24
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2340
View Profile
« Reply #32 on: February 20, 2010, 02:07:46 pm »
Ignore

Um, no. We haven't had a strong pro-lifer for a GOP nominee yet.

But I don't think there was any real fanatically pro-abortion candidate from either party until Mondale in 1984.

Well I guess "strong" is a relative term, I suppose it has more to do with being a religious person.  I'm under the impression that the GOP ticket cannot have a pro-choice person.  While I think there are many qualified GOP women, they are usually pro-choice.  Palin, Bush, Dole were all outspoken pro-lifers.  McCain wasn't very outspoken about the issue, perhaps this contributed to his loss.  GHWB somehow managed to convince people for a short period of time that he was pro-life.  I would say one of the things that helped Bill Clinton and Obama win were that they were religious men or at least often spoke about religion, Clinton was a southern baptist, and Obama was not endorsed by emily's list in the primaries.

That's because putting a pro-abortionist on the Republican  ticket would be suicide.
But do you think some of the GOP are genuine in their conversion to pro-life or are merely doing it for political gain like GHWB, McCain, Romney, or would you trust someone like Ridge, Collins, Snowe, Hutchison if they wanted to convert to pro-life to get on the ticket?
Logged
Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: February 20, 2010, 02:36:16 pm »
Ignore

Thune-Ridge would lose every state McCain did, plus Missouri, Arizona, Montana, and Georgia.

The only winning issue Thune has is being pro-life. Putting a pro-abortionist on the ticket will end that.

I used to think Ridge had a chance at VP, but he really needs a conversion to pro-life if he wants a chance on the ticket.  Heck, Dick Cheney was pro-gay marriage and he never talked about it, ever.  Ridge can say he supports the Nominee and pro-life.  The Christians wouldn't vote for the Democrat anyway. 

Also, Senator P. Bush founded Planned Parenthood, yet both GHWB and GWB convinced Christians they were pro-life, go figure!

Well, Dubya and Bush Senior are Pro-Life retard.

Yeah, they both converted to Pro-life, how convenient of them for political gain. 

Al Gore became pro-choice when picked by Clinton to be his VP. Kucinich became pro-choice when he decided to run for president too. This isn't that uncommon...

Yeah, I would expect that from Gore, but what was up with Kucinich? It's not like abandoning his pro-life views somehow made him any more electable even within the Democratic party.
Logged
Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #34 on: February 20, 2010, 02:36:46 pm »
Ignore

Um, no. We haven't had a strong pro-lifer for a GOP nominee yet.

But I don't think there was any real fanatically pro-abortion candidate from either party until Mondale in 1984.

Well I guess "strong" is a relative term, I suppose it has more to do with being a religious person.  I'm under the impression that the GOP ticket cannot have a pro-choice person.  While I think there are many qualified GOP women, they are usually pro-choice.  Palin, Bush, Dole were all outspoken pro-lifers.  McCain wasn't very outspoken about the issue, perhaps this contributed to his loss.  GHWB somehow managed to convince people for a short period of time that he was pro-life.  I would say one of the things that helped Bill Clinton and Obama win were that they were religious men or at least often spoke about religion, Clinton was a southern baptist, and Obama was not endorsed by emily's list in the primaries.

That's because putting a pro-abortionist on the Republican  ticket would be suicide.
But do you think some of the GOP are genuine in their conversion to pro-life or are merely doing it for political gain like GHWB, McCain, Romney, or would you trust someone like Ridge, Collins, Snowe, Hutchison if they wanted to convert to pro-life to get on the ticket?

No, I don't trust them, and I would not vote for them.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20104
United States


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: February 20, 2010, 04:04:03 pm »

Um, no. We haven't had a strong pro-lifer for a GOP nominee yet.

But I don't think there was any real fanatically pro-abortion candidate from either party until Mondale in 1984.

Well I guess "strong" is a relative term, I suppose it has more to do with being a religious person.  I'm under the impression that the GOP ticket cannot have a pro-choice person.  While I think there are many qualified GOP women, they are usually pro-choice.  Palin, Bush, Dole were all outspoken pro-lifers.  McCain wasn't very outspoken about the issue, perhaps this contributed to his loss.  GHWB somehow managed to convince people for a short period of time that he was pro-life.  I would say one of the things that helped Bill Clinton and Obama win were that they were religious men or at least often spoke about religion, Clinton was a southern baptist, and Obama was not endorsed by emily's list in the primaries.

That's because putting a pro-abortionist on the Republican  ticket would be suicide.
But do you think some of the GOP are genuine in their conversion to pro-life or are merely doing it for political gain like GHWB, McCain, Romney, or would you trust someone like Ridge, Collins, Snowe, Hutchison if they wanted to convert to pro-life to get on the ticket?

When was McCain pro-choice?
Logged

HOG & Blondie: A Tale of Atlas Future

What is your opinion of this thread?

Watch Dave being briefed by the mods.

Being a moderator is basically like one giant party.  Except you're the one ruining the party and everyone hates you.
Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #36 on: February 20, 2010, 04:06:23 pm »
Ignore

Um, no. We haven't had a strong pro-lifer for a GOP nominee yet.

But I don't think there was any real fanatically pro-abortion candidate from either party until Mondale in 1984.

Well I guess "strong" is a relative term, I suppose it has more to do with being a religious person.  I'm under the impression that the GOP ticket cannot have a pro-choice person.  While I think there are many qualified GOP women, they are usually pro-choice.  Palin, Bush, Dole were all outspoken pro-lifers.  McCain wasn't very outspoken about the issue, perhaps this contributed to his loss.  GHWB somehow managed to convince people for a short period of time that he was pro-life.  I would say one of the things that helped Bill Clinton and Obama win were that they were religious men or at least often spoke about religion, Clinton was a southern baptist, and Obama was not endorsed by emily's list in the primaries.

That's because putting a pro-abortionist on the Republican  ticket would be suicide.
But do you think some of the GOP are genuine in their conversion to pro-life or are merely doing it for political gain like GHWB, McCain, Romney, or would you trust someone like Ridge, Collins, Snowe, Hutchison if they wanted to convert to pro-life to get on the ticket?

When was McCain pro-choice?


I don't know if McCain was ever really "pro-choice" but he's been pretty weak on the issue in the past. He did flip-flop from supporting Roe v. Wade to claiming he wanted it overturned.
Logged
KeeptheChange
Full Member
***
Posts: 148


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: February 20, 2010, 04:53:18 pm »
Ignore

Ridge obviously fits Jmfcst's requirements of being Roman Catholic, moderate and strong on defense issues.  He is a true American hero for serving the way he did in Vietnam.  The problem others have pointed out is pretty significant though. He supports the right of women to murder babies.  This cannot be tolerated in the Republican Party.  It's shameful we still put up with it.

Alexander and Gregg have both been mentioned, and both are fairly conservative pro-lifers.  Their age should not be a factor if they are healthy.  Thune is young and it won't hurt him to have a grey haired kind of "mentor" figure lurking in the background.  Voters felt a certain amount of reassurance with both Biden and Cheney in voting for relatively inexperienced Presidents.  (Though what reassures anyone about Biden is beyond me.)

I don't really believe a VP should be selected in order to "help" in a home state, anyway.  So if I were Thune, I would look to someone like Duncan Hunter.  California is probably a lost cause (although with the way Obama is wrecking the country, you never know!) Hunter is strong on fiscal, military and social issues.  Bob Dornan would be a good choice if he had been in Congress recently, but he is pretty much out of circulation.  Although...the more I think about it, the more appeal this has.  Dornan is hardly inactive...I didn't realize he was running again...

http://www.bobdornan.com/index2.html

He certainly represents American and Christian values, unlike Ridge.  And he has military experience.

Regardless, I am sure Thune will make a sound and reasoned choice.  Aside from Senator DeMint, he may possess one of the strongest intellectual minds in the Senate today. So you can bet he won't choose a candidate at the last minute and fail to properly vet them.
Logged
Joe Republic
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30910
United States


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: February 20, 2010, 04:58:13 pm »
Ignore

[snip]

Uh, JSo, you might want to check in...
Logged



Real Americans (and Big Sky Bob) demand to know.


I just slept for 11 hours, so I should need a nap today, but we'll see.
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27521
United States


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: February 20, 2010, 05:13:20 pm »
Ignore

Quote
Bob Dornan would be a good choice if he had been in Congress recently

This sock is good, really good. Tongue
Logged

Lincoln Republican
Winfield
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10735


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: February 20, 2010, 05:39:28 pm »
Ignore

Sarah Palin

I don't think Palin would be put on any ticket as VP again, primarily because she already lost once.  They don't want a 2-time loser.  

She had served only one term as govenor.  I just have doubts about her intellect and ability to handle the economy, and basically anything else.  But she should run in the primary and see how she stacks up in the primary debates.  

Actually slightly less than 2/3 of a term.

So if she can't even stick around for one term as Governor of a small state like Alaska, why would anyone in their right mind think she has the wherewithal to serve as President of the United States, which has about 1,000,000 times the work load?  
« Last Edit: February 20, 2010, 05:44:21 pm by President Thomas E. Dewey »Logged





POWER IN DC
phk
phknrocket1k
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12975


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

View Profile
« Reply #41 on: February 20, 2010, 06:14:47 pm »
Ignore

Ridge obviously fits Jmfcst's requirements of being Roman Catholic, moderate and strong on defense issues.  He is a true American hero for serving the way he did in Vietnam.  The problem others have pointed out is pretty significant though. He supports the right of women to murder babies.  This cannot be tolerated in the Republican Party.  It's shameful we still put up with it.

Alexander and Gregg have both been mentioned, and both are fairly conservative pro-lifers.  Their age should not be a factor if they are healthy.  Thune is young and it won't hurt him to have a grey haired kind of "mentor" figure lurking in the background.  Voters felt a certain amount of reassurance with both Biden and Cheney in voting for relatively inexperienced Presidents.  (Though what reassures anyone about Biden is beyond me.)

I don't really believe a VP should be selected in order to "help" in a home state, anyway.  So if I were Thune, I would look to someone like Duncan Hunter.  California is probably a lost cause (although with the way Obama is wrecking the country, you never know!) Hunter is strong on fiscal, military and social issues.  Bob Dornan would be a good choice if he had been in Congress recently, but he is pretty much out of circulation.  Although...the more I think about it, the more appeal this has.  Dornan is hardly inactive...I didn't realize he was running again...

http://www.bobdornan.com/index2.html

He certainly represents American and Christian values, unlike Ridge.  And he has military experience.

Regardless, I am sure Thune will make a sound and reasoned choice.  Aside from Senator DeMint, he may possess one of the strongest intellectual minds in the Senate today. So you can bet he won't choose a candidate at the last minute and fail to properly vet them.

I WANT TO KILL YOU
Logged

Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #42 on: February 20, 2010, 07:34:21 pm »
Ignore

Ridge obviously fits Jmfcst's requirements of being Roman Catholic, moderate and strong on defense issues.  He is a true American hero for serving the way he did in Vietnam.  The problem others have pointed out is pretty significant though. He supports the right of women to murder babies.  This cannot be tolerated in the Republican Party.  It's shameful we still put up with it.

Alexander and Gregg have both been mentioned, and both are fairly conservative pro-lifers.  Their age should not be a factor if they are healthy.  Thune is young and it won't hurt him to have a grey haired kind of "mentor" figure lurking in the background.  Voters felt a certain amount of reassurance with both Biden and Cheney in voting for relatively inexperienced Presidents.  (Though what reassures anyone about Biden is beyond me.)

I don't really believe a VP should be selected in order to "help" in a home state, anyway.  So if I were Thune, I would look to someone like Duncan Hunter.  California is probably a lost cause (although with the way Obama is wrecking the country, you never know!) Hunter is strong on fiscal, military and social issues.  Bob Dornan would be a good choice if he had been in Congress recently, but he is pretty much out of circulation.  Although...the more I think about it, the more appeal this has.  Dornan is hardly inactive...I didn't realize he was running again...

http://www.bobdornan.com/index2.html

He certainly represents American and Christian values, unlike Ridge.  And he has military experience.

Regardless, I am sure Thune will make a sound and reasoned choice.  Aside from Senator DeMint, he may possess one of the strongest intellectual minds in the Senate today. So you can bet he won't choose a candidate at the last minute and fail to properly vet them.

LOL, look who dared to show his face again.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32091
United States


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: February 20, 2010, 08:41:32 pm »
Ignore

Ridge obviously fits Jmfcst's requirements of being Roman Catholic, moderate and strong on defense issues.  He is a true American hero for serving the way he did in Vietnam.  The problem others have pointed out is pretty significant though. He supports the right of women to murder babies.  This cannot be tolerated in the Republican Party.  It's shameful we still put up with it.

Alexander and Gregg have both been mentioned, and both are fairly conservative pro-lifers.  Their age should not be a factor if they are healthy.  Thune is young and it won't hurt him to have a grey haired kind of "mentor" figure lurking in the background.  Voters felt a certain amount of reassurance with both Biden and Cheney in voting for relatively inexperienced Presidents.  (Though what reassures anyone about Biden is beyond me.)

I don't really believe a VP should be selected in order to "help" in a home state, anyway.  So if I were Thune, I would look to someone like Duncan Hunter.  California is probably a lost cause (although with the way Obama is wrecking the country, you never know!) Hunter is strong on fiscal, military and social issues.  Bob Dornan would be a good choice if he had been in Congress recently, but he is pretty much out of circulation.  Although...the more I think about it, the more appeal this has.  Dornan is hardly inactive...I didn't realize he was running again...

http://www.bobdornan.com/index2.html

He certainly represents American and Christian values, unlike Ridge.  And he has military experience.

Regardless, I am sure Thune will make a sound and reasoned choice.  Aside from Senator DeMint, he may possess one of the strongest intellectual minds in the Senate today. So you can bet he won't choose a candidate at the last minute and fail to properly vet them.

Give it up JSojourner.  You are worst disappointment since Hawkeye.  Sad
Logged

J. J.

"Actually, .. now that you mention it...." 
- Londo Molari

"Every government are parliaments of whores.
The trouble is, in a democracy the whores are us." - P. J. O'Rourke

"Wa sala, wa lala."

(Zulu for, "You snooze, you lose.")
pragmatic liberal
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 525


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: February 20, 2010, 09:44:10 pm »
Ignore

The obvious answer here would Tom Corbett, if he wins the Pennsylvania governorship this November. He's a former National Guardsman, is Roman Catholic, pro-life, and a longtime DA-turned-State Attorney General.

OTOH, he'd be a new, first-term governor, and those *usually* aren't picked, although Spiro Agnew and Sarah Palin can certainly attest to the fact that they do occasionally make it.

If Pat Toomey wins the Senate seat, he too could fit the bill, although he's probably too right-wing. (Thune's equally conservative though.)

Also, speaking of potential 2010 winners, Thune - or whoever the Republican nominee is - might look at some of the 2010 class of incoming GOP senators. He could pick Kelly Ayotte, for example - seen as relatively moderate despite being pro-life and anti-gay marriage, Roman Catholic, and a woman from a less GOP-friendly region. She's a bit of a dull speaker though. Sue Lowden from Nevada or Jane Norton from Colorado could also be picks, although to be honest, neither is very solid on the stump - Norton seems especially poor.

Of course, all these people have to WIN their races. And probably a few of them won't. But the outlook will be clearer after November.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2010, 09:46:24 pm by pragmatic liberal »Logged
milhouse24
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2340
View Profile
« Reply #45 on: February 20, 2010, 09:55:11 pm »
Ignore

I know Rick Santorum!!!  Yes, we want Santorum!!!
Logged
milhouse24
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2340
View Profile
« Reply #46 on: February 20, 2010, 10:23:24 pm »
Ignore

Um, no. We haven't had a strong pro-lifer for a GOP nominee yet.

But I don't think there was any real fanatically pro-abortion candidate from either party until Mondale in 1984.

Well I guess "strong" is a relative term, I suppose it has more to do with being a religious person.  I'm under the impression that the GOP ticket cannot have a pro-choice person.  While I think there are many qualified GOP women, they are usually pro-choice.  Palin, Bush, Dole were all outspoken pro-lifers.  McCain wasn't very outspoken about the issue, perhaps this contributed to his loss.  GHWB somehow managed to convince people for a short period of time that he was pro-life.  I would say one of the things that helped Bill Clinton and Obama win were that they were religious men or at least often spoke about religion, Clinton was a southern baptist, and Obama was not endorsed by emily's list in the primaries.

That's because putting a pro-abortionist on the Republican  ticket would be suicide.
But do you think some of the GOP are genuine in their conversion to pro-life or are merely doing it for political gain like GHWB, McCain, Romney, or would you trust someone like Ridge, Collins, Snowe, Hutchison if they wanted to convert to pro-life to get on the ticket?

No, I don't trust them, and I would not vote for them.
What about Lindsey Graham?  He's a solid guy, very solid guy, a guy I could love but not in that way.
Logged
Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #47 on: February 20, 2010, 11:10:52 pm »
Ignore

Um, no. We haven't had a strong pro-lifer for a GOP nominee yet.

But I don't think there was any real fanatically pro-abortion candidate from either party until Mondale in 1984.

Well I guess "strong" is a relative term, I suppose it has more to do with being a religious person.  I'm under the impression that the GOP ticket cannot have a pro-choice person.  While I think there are many qualified GOP women, they are usually pro-choice.  Palin, Bush, Dole were all outspoken pro-lifers.  McCain wasn't very outspoken about the issue, perhaps this contributed to his loss.  GHWB somehow managed to convince people for a short period of time that he was pro-life.  I would say one of the things that helped Bill Clinton and Obama win were that they were religious men or at least often spoke about religion, Clinton was a southern baptist, and Obama was not endorsed by emily's list in the primaries.

That's because putting a pro-abortionist on the Republican  ticket would be suicide.
But do you think some of the GOP are genuine in their conversion to pro-life or are merely doing it for political gain like GHWB, McCain, Romney, or would you trust someone like Ridge, Collins, Snowe, Hutchison if they wanted to convert to pro-life to get on the ticket?

No, I don't trust them, and I would not vote for them.
What about Lindsey Graham?  He's a solid guy, very solid guy, a guy I could love but not in that way.

Hell no. I despise Lindsey Graham. I was really hoping he would lose his Senate seat in 2008.
Logged
President Mitt
Giovanni
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3647
Samoa


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: February 20, 2010, 11:35:34 pm »
Ignore

Um, no. We haven't had a strong pro-lifer for a GOP nominee yet.

But I don't think there was any real fanatically pro-abortion candidate from either party until Mondale in 1984.

Well I guess "strong" is a relative term, I suppose it has more to do with being a religious person.  I'm under the impression that the GOP ticket cannot have a pro-choice person.  While I think there are many qualified GOP women, they are usually pro-choice.  Palin, Bush, Dole were all outspoken pro-lifers.  McCain wasn't very outspoken about the issue, perhaps this contributed to his loss.  GHWB somehow managed to convince people for a short period of time that he was pro-life.  I would say one of the things that helped Bill Clinton and Obama win were that they were religious men or at least often spoke about religion, Clinton was a southern baptist, and Obama was not endorsed by emily's list in the primaries.

That's because putting a pro-abortionist on the Republican  ticket would be suicide.
But do you think some of the GOP are genuine in their conversion to pro-life or are merely doing it for political gain like GHWB, McCain, Romney, or would you trust someone like Ridge, Collins, Snowe, Hutchison if they wanted to convert to pro-life to get on the ticket?

No, I don't trust them, and I would not vote for them.
What about Lindsey Graham?  He's a solid guy, very solid guy, a guy I could love but not in that way.

Ugh, as one of his constituents, I can assure you he's trash.
Logged

[This space is available for purchase]
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14163
Jamaica


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: February 21, 2010, 12:33:47 am »
Ignore

Um, no. We haven't had a strong pro-lifer for a GOP nominee yet.

But I don't think there was any real fanatically pro-abortion candidate from either party until Mondale in 1984.

Well I guess "strong" is a relative term, I suppose it has more to do with being a religious person.  I'm under the impression that the GOP ticket cannot have a pro-choice person.  While I think there are many qualified GOP women, they are usually pro-choice.  Palin, Bush, Dole were all outspoken pro-lifers.  McCain wasn't very outspoken about the issue, perhaps this contributed to his loss.  GHWB somehow managed to convince people for a short period of time that he was pro-life.  I would say one of the things that helped Bill Clinton and Obama win were that they were religious men or at least often spoke about religion, Clinton was a southern baptist, and Obama was not endorsed by emily's list in the primaries.

That's because putting a pro-abortionist on the Republican  ticket would be suicide.
But do you think some of the GOP are genuine in their conversion to pro-life or are merely doing it for political gain like GHWB, McCain, Romney, or would you trust someone like Ridge, Collins, Snowe, Hutchison if they wanted to convert to pro-life to get on the ticket?

No, I don't trust them, and I would not vote for them.
What about Lindsey Graham?  He's a solid guy, very solid guy, a guy I could love but not in that way.

Ugh, as one of his constituents, I can assure you he's trash.

Is there anyone besides the morons in South Carolina (sorry Gio) who actually like Lindsey Graham? He seems to be one of the most universally hated Senators.
Logged



17:20   bore   the point of atlasia is to achieve things which you can then use as pick up lines
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines