*IF* Thune wins the GOP nomination, who's his VP?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 07:07:27 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  *IF* Thune wins the GOP nomination, who's his VP?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: *IF* Thune wins the GOP nomination, who's his VP?  (Read 4529 times)
milhouse24
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,331
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: February 20, 2010, 12:59:44 AM »

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
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,331
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: February 20, 2010, 01:03:11 AM »

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
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,331
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: February 20, 2010, 01:08:06 AM »


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
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: February 20, 2010, 02:55:19 AM »

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
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 960
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.42, S: -1.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: February 20, 2010, 04:50:26 AM »

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
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,803
Spain


Political Matrix
E: -8.65, S: -9.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: February 20, 2010, 12:38:16 PM »

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
useful idiot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,720


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: February 20, 2010, 12:49:09 PM »

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
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,331
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: February 20, 2010, 02:07:46 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?
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: February 20, 2010, 02:36:16 PM »

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
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: February 20, 2010, 02:36:46 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?

No, I don't trust them, and I would not vote for them.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« 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
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: February 20, 2010, 04:06:23 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?


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
Rookie
**
Posts: 146


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: February 20, 2010, 04:53:18 PM »

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
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,042
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: February 20, 2010, 04:58:13 PM »


Uh, JSo, you might want to check in...
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: February 20, 2010, 05:13:20 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

This sock is good, really good. Tongue
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: February 20, 2010, 05:39:28 PM »
« Edited: February 20, 2010, 05:44:21 PM by President Thomas E. Dewey »


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?  
Logged
phk
phknrocket1k
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,906


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: February 20, 2010, 06:14:47 PM »

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
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: February 20, 2010, 07:34:21 PM »

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.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: February 20, 2010, 08:41:32 PM »

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
pragmatic liberal
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 520


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: February 20, 2010, 09:44:10 PM »
« Edited: February 20, 2010, 09:46:24 PM by pragmatic liberal »

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.
Logged
milhouse24
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,331
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: February 20, 2010, 09:55:11 PM »

I know Rick Santorum!!!  Yes, we want Santorum!!!
Logged
milhouse24
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,331
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: February 20, 2010, 10:23:24 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?

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
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: February 20, 2010, 11:10:52 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?

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
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,347
Samoa


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: February 20, 2010, 11:35:34 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?

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
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: February 21, 2010, 12:33:47 AM »

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
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.083 seconds with 13 queries.