Who do you favor for the Republican nomination for President?

16 Responses to "Who do you favor for the Republican nomination for President?"

  1. riceowlex  October 11, 2007 at 11:00 pm

    Saying Ron paul IS UNELECTABLE is insane…he’s already been elected by his district 10 times and could have made it 20 but he HAS A REAL JOB!! That kind of thing plays in Russia or Cuba, of course they are dictatorships…
    If your thinking that an honest man with an excellent record isn’t qualified I’ve got a bridge I’d like to sell you.

  2. pbr90  March 20, 2008 at 3:03 pm

    Results of 21% for McCain as opposed to other candidates is ridiculous.

    Putting Mr. Straight Talk with Mr. Double Talk is the kiss of death to McCain credibility.

  3. pondering_it_all  July 27, 2007 at 7:01 am

    I think the poll results will be quite misleading: I voted for Ron Paul because I am a Democrat and Ron Paul would be the perfect un-electable opponent for any Democrat who wins the nomination. (I could not honestly check the “I wouldn’t vote Republican” choice, since I would consider a moderate Republican if the Democrats ran a real jerk.)

    It would be more useful to ask: “Who is your choice out of the potential candidates?”, and then list ALL of them (Rs, Ds, and 3rd party)

  4. Doug Thompson  July 27, 2007 at 8:41 am

    We ran an earlier poll on the Democratic candidates for President. It has been our experience that trying to poll a choice with both parties is misleading in a primary season with so many candidates running.

  5. mwaynebennett  July 30, 2007 at 4:01 pm

    I find it regrettable that people like pondering_it_all have such a low opinion of the American electorate as to say that Ron Paul is unelectable. Perhaps pondering_it_all is correct. Perhaps Americans are too used to believing in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny and “free lunches” to be able to recognize what our federal government is legally authorized to do and what it is not. Perhaps they are too simple-minded to understand that Dr. Paul is the ONLY member of congress to have even a scintilla of integrity and understanding of the US constitution.

    There is not a dime’s worth of difference between the “top tier” democrats and republicans for anyone with an IQ over 70 to get excited. They will all make government grow larger at the expense of future generations, perhaps the most insidious and disingenuous way of buying the votes of the simpletons who are susceptible to such ploys.

    And the beat goes on.

  6. Elmo  July 27, 2007 at 3:39 pm

    Ron Paul may be unelectable but that’s mostly because, like Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich, he says what he believes not what he thinks that voters want to hear. But if he were to get the Republican nomination, I would have to give him serious consideration because I still believe that it is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for something you don’t want and get it.

    The Repugnicrat party hasn’t nominated anyone who I’d like to see President since 1972 when there was still a difference between Repugnicans and Democraps.

  7. riceowlex  October 11, 2007 at 10:55 pm

    I’m still waiting for someone to define unelectable. To me UNELECTABLE is someone that promotes an illegal war, promotes torture, gives billions of dollars OF MY MONEY to friends in no bid contracts after they’ve killed 1.2 million people and destroyed their city, now MY MONEY IS GOING TO REBUILD IT. To me UNELECTABLE is someone that lies to the public and Congress repeatedly. To me someone is UNELECTABLE who skips out on his service and lets his neighbors sons die in combat. To ME unelectable is a cammander-in-chief that DODGED yet will send someone else’s children to die for his profit. To me UNELECTABLE is someone that pardons a man convicted of treason in order to avoid a higher incrimination of himself or his staff. To me UNELECTABLE is a person that has shown no consideration for the laws of the constitution. To me UNELECTABLE is someone without honesty and integrity either through unfaithfulness or questions of character. Stop me when I get warm…This shit of saying that Dr Ron Paul A BEACON OF HONESTY, INTELLIGENCE AND INTEGRITY is unelectable will get you a face full of my fist…I hope that I never hear ir aloud….it’s just stupid!

  8. Richard  July 28, 2007 at 12:16 pm

    Ron Paul is completely unelectable even if the heavens opened and miracles rained downed that would give him the republican nomination. Americans would NEVER support his mindless policies which are devoid of any socio-ethical responsibility Americans have to each other.

    Perhaps CHB readership is doen and Thompson needed to draw more Paul supporters to his site, so he rolled over and proclaimed Paul as his choice for president.

    The gigantic lead Paul has in this poll demonstrates that these “polls” have absolutely no value whatsoever. In the REAL polls, scientific polls, he remains stuck between 0-3%.

  9. neveringham  August 21, 2007 at 5:27 am

    Mindless policies? Accurate polls? Polling Ron Paul at 0-3%? To believe that crap, I believe someone’s been watching too much fox news. As far as your thoughts on your fellow Americans, who will NEVER support his unique views…Question, who’s signs do you see all over the highway? How come when the one you’ve recently seen vanishes another one isn’t far away to recapture your attention? Where are the signs for your candidate?

    It seems like supporters of Ron Paul are far more motivated. He’s becoming known because friends are telling friends, who are telling friends. Who is to be trusted a friend of the spin doctors behind mainstream media?

    I think If elected…

    Hilary – Majority of troops stay in Iraq (look into some of her campaign funding) American’s interests not at heart. More Big Business as usual

    Obama – with eight more years of experience he will be president.

    Edwards – Avg. Joe, I honestly don’t think he has the balls, too much of a mommas boy.

    Ron Paul – An republican more like our founders than todays repubs, who firmly believes in protecting the constitutional. At this point it’s more of a restoration project. An underdog, with an army of driven supporters. Look at his voting record, he knows a bad idea when he sees one and has voted accordingly.

    Giuliani – Voted “team player of this generation” regarding his flawless role in the 9/11 cover up. I will not be surprised to see him winning the RNC nomination. (If bush can be appointed president then win with less than one percent of the vote-without a recount due to voting machine fraud, anythings possible) Frankly, I believe certain people promised him the white house for playing ball.

    Biden – Do you remember what happened the last time he ran?

    Richardson – Not bad ideas very similar to Ron Pauls

    Romney – With 70% of the voting pop. being Evangelists who, in the past had a tough time voting for a Catholic. Unfortunately for Mitt, even if all the Mormon’s in the land show up to vote it won’t be enough to conquer the radical bible thumpers(Jesus camp anyone?)

    McCain – A lot cooler when he wasn’t backing Backing bush’s unpopular policies. Probably was promised the presidency but that one will be broken. Should have stuck it out and ran with Kerry.

    Thompson – Is that guy even running? That’s right, he’s there to take away the votes of the mis-informed tv watcher. aka the simpletons

    It wasn’t until Congress relinquished even more power to the real evil doer’s by placing control over FISA in the hands of a known liar and a director of intelligence who serves at the pleasure of the president (and vice president) not congress or us that I decided to change parties with one purpose in mind and that is to vote for Ron Paul in the primary.

    I do look forward to the day when we can all listen to Gonzo and Gates say “thats classified” or the president pulls out the “everyone is protected and cannot be held accountable under my trusty executive privilege order” in response to the congressional committees requests for information regarding the “improvements” made to FISA and the NYTIMES will read with no oversight, comes no answers.

    Wasn’t there some other “improvement” made in 2005? Not so funny how that one started out and ended up.

  10. Reverend.Fred  August 23, 2007 at 10:14 pm

    “socio-ethical responsibility Americans have to each other”? I’m sorry, but I am utterly unaware of any socio-ethical responsibility I have to any other Americans outside of not intruding on their person or property.

  11. justthinkin  July 29, 2007 at 12:15 pm

    “Posts that contain racism, homophobia, bigotry or Antisemitism will be removed and the posters banned.”

    I happened to see your “policy” on posting, and was wondering how you define each of the following:

    racism
    homophobia
    bigotry
    Antisemitism

    Also, since you claim to be some sort of American/Congressional political website, do you not officialy embrace the principle of freedom of speech enshrined in the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, except as it fits your particular political (don’t-cross-that-line, verboten itz) agenda?

    An answer would be greatly appreciated.

  12. mwaynebennett  July 30, 2007 at 4:23 pm

    justthinkin makes a very good point.

    A “Semite” is defined as follows:
    “a member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Middle East and northern Africa.”

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:semite&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

    Arabs are “Semites.”

    Should the term “anti-Zionist” be substituted for “Antisemitism” (sic) to keep those who question the legitimacy of Israel’s existence from posting?

  13. Omniscient  July 30, 2007 at 6:31 pm

    Richard-

    I had to create an account just to reply to your idiotic comment!

    I am familiar with Ron Paul’s policies…but apparently not enough to be aware of the ‘mindless’ ones. Do us a favor and be specific with the policies you are referring to that are ‘mindless’.

    Also could you enlighten us as to the socio-ethical responsibilities Americans have to each other? I don’t remember that from the Constitution.

    Furthermore perhaps you could define for us what a REAL, scientific poll is as opposed to this one. I can only assume a REAL poll is one that agrees with YOUR point of view.

    …I don’t suppose we’ll be hearing from Richard again.

  14. Patrick Henry  July 30, 2007 at 7:24 pm

    The polls are correct.

    The public is ready for a change from the corporate sponsered politicians we have come to know.

    Ron Paul represents the Constitution and more importantly the Bill of Rights which a majority of Americans are tired of seeing disregarded and manipulated.

  15. RicoSuave  July 30, 2007 at 8:28 pm

    I would honestly vote for Ron Paul in a second and wish him the best, but here is why the poll here is unscientific:

    1. I was able to successfully vote twice
    2. This site attracts people with similar political leanings, thus skewing the results in that favor.

    I don’t someone to trash me for these comments, as they are the truth.

  16. willers32  July 30, 2007 at 10:06 pm

    Richard,
    If anyone is being “mindless” it is you.
    Have you bothered to take the time to study Ron Paul’s proposals? If you had you’d learn that he wants to return this country’s foreign policy to the one recommended to us by George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. I guess they were “mindless” too.
    I guess it is “mindless” to believe in the rule of law.
    I guess it is “mindless” to propose a Constitutionally sound and legal method of dealing with terrorists – Letters of Marque and Reprisal (I would bet you don’t even know what that means) instead of going to war with whole countries that have done us no harm.
    Ron Paul will restore sound currency. It is “mindless” to assume that we can continue to allow a private banking cartel to control our monetary supply. It is “mindless” to want to continue having inflation, recessions and depressions.
    Apparently, you haven’t figured out that the reason the “rich get richer and the poor get poorer” is because we have a “Federal Reserve” banking system that causes the “inflation tax” that takes wealth from the poor and the middle class and gives it to the rich.
    Next time, before you sound off with your accusations about “mindless” policies, do what Ron Paul has done. Spend a few decades studying economics and history. When you’ve finished reading – and writing – as many books on these topics as Ron Paul has, then maybe some intelligent person might listen to you.
    Until then, keep quiet – you’ll appear smarter than you are.

Comments are closed.