Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm definately suprised by the responses here ... I can't fathom preferring Clinton over Giuliani, Thompson, or any of the other Republican candidates except maybe Ron Paul. I don't know where everybody's getting the idea that she's 'moderate'...
Riley W





Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 857
Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5
votes: 10
Location: Manitoba

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well if it was Rudy v. Hillary I'd vote Rudy, because at least he has right wing pressures on his moderatism....Hillary's moderatism has left wing pressures...

Also suspicious at her feminist streak...
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

westmanguy wrote:
moderatism


Either I'm learning new words from a 15 year old or that isn't a word.
Riley W





Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 857
Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5
votes: 10
Location: Manitoba

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

:oops: :? :(
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7528
Reputation: 301.2Reputation: 301.2
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stephen wrote:
Interesting question: Would any of the Republican-leaning posters here vote for Hillary Clinton over any of the GOP candidates for President?

If so, which one/ones?


I have no issue with Fred, Mitt and even Rudy.

But I would sooner vote Clinton over Paul.
Red





Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 5
Reputation: 1

PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hilary is a closet communist, her social policies are pure Socialist/communist. I'd vote for a goat before I'd vote for Hilda Beast. Ron Paul, perhaps.
Bleatmop





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 953
Reputation: 17.5Reputation: 17.5
votes: 10

PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
westmanguy wrote:
moderatism


Either I'm learning new words from a 15 year old or that isn't a word.


moderatism

noun
a political philosophy of avoiding the extremes of left and right by taking a moderate position or course of action
intrepi





Joined: 05 Oct 2007
Posts: 1


PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:19 pm    Post subject: What to say and how to say it ? Reply with quote

I'm a Canadian, I have no simple solutions as the questions and conflicts are too complex and too severe. I have read the posts here and I do understand that some here believe that anyone with the ability to provide some form of logical answers to questions put to him are enough to make him a leader. Sorry, but I don't agree, it's not the answers to the questions that make a leader, it's the ability to see beyond with a vision that makes the country an admirable country, with a leader who has the love, oh my, what a mindfield this will open up.
Well, what's done is done and I make no apologies as there are many leaders of many countries who really have the love and support of the people of those countries. Now when was the last time anyone spoke badly of Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore or a lot of other countries who have neither supported nor acted outwardly to support war on any country ?
It takes no genius to promote propaganda, like Bush did with Iraq and weapons of mass destruction was total propaganda, no doubt, no argument, not bull, FACT ! More than half of the USA still believe their war lies with Iraq and they are there to prove it. Well, folks, the fact is Iraq had NOTHING to do with New York, the Twin Towers or Bush ! Clue in now, it was Osama Bin Ladin who created this along with his supporters who are in Afghanistan, not Iraq. Anyone getting this ? Now, this is a fact, the only weapons of mass destruction were the planes, manufactured in the USA and controlled by henchmen that were instructed by Osama. I believe our Prime Minister of the time was correct in supporting the United Nations as the only idiot out there that supported Bush was Tony Blair and needless to say we all know what kind of legacy the Brits have laid on his leadership. This we can all thank our previous leader who would not support Bush and now we find we are supporting Bush via Harper. Ok, Mr Harper, since you have done so well in the USA, how about you tell us how it paid of with our Free Trade Agreement which the USA reniged on ? I believe you came out with, it was the best deal we could make. What happened to the original deal, somebody ignore it, flush it down the toilet or just lost sight of what the hell it was ? The problem with Harper is lack of enforcement, lack of ability to force the terms and conditions of the original agreement even with the World Court that ruled against the US for Free Trade violations. Now I read the posts saying how Mr Harper is a great leader and has the ability to make all the logical replies to all and any questions. Well, having the ability to make logical and practical replies to questions does not make you a leader, it makes you a manipulator.
AmericanTory





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 23
Reputation: 13.8

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stephen wrote:
Interesting question: Would any of the Republican-leaning posters here vote for Hillary Clinton over any of the GOP candidates for President?

If so, which one/ones?


I think if it came down to Clinton v. Romney or Clinton v. Paul, I'd sit it out. I might consider it briefly, but I just don't think I could vote for her, and I know I absolutely cannot support Romney or Paul. Probably in the equally unlikely (as compared to Paul's chances) scenarios of Clinton v. Hunter or Clinton v. Tancredo, too.
urbanmonk





Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 307
Reputation: 16.8Reputation: 16.8
votes: 5

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Red wrote:
Hilary is a closet communist, her social policies are pure Socialist/communist. I'd vote for a goat before I'd vote for Hilda Beast. Ron Paul, perhaps.

WHAT!! You mean her plans to take the money from the evil rich and redistribute it to all the poor helpless victims of society is communistic?
You just don't understand that it 'takes a village'!
:D
urbanmonk





Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 307
Reputation: 16.8Reputation: 16.8
votes: 5

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:16 am    Post subject: Re: What to say and how to say it ? Reply with quote

intrepi wrote:
Now I read the posts saying how Mr Harper is a great leader and has the ability to make all the logical replies to all and any questions. Well, having the ability to make logical and practical replies to questions does not make you a leader, it makes you a manipulator.

Well I'd say having the ability to come up with and articulate logical and practical ideas is a good start for a leader. In Harpers case I think he has demonstrated leadership skills in many areas, much to the dismay of his opponents.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A Democratic win for president would give credence and a mandate to what the party stands for not just the leader - so no, I would never vote Democrat regardless of the stances of their leader.
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A Democratic controlled White house and a Dem controlled house of reps mean more isolationism and less trade. It can't happen!
urbanmonk





Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 307
Reputation: 16.8Reputation: 16.8
votes: 5

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think it's safe to say that Hillary will be the Democrats candidate with Obama as a likely running mate. Under normal circumstances I think she would lose to the republicans but with Bush's and his party's low ratings and the prospect of Giuliani getting the Republican nod I'm afraid she could win. If the Christian right don't get a pro-life ticket they may switch to an independent of their own and split the conservative vote much like Perot did (giving the Dems the presidency)
Who knows though, maybe the right will be so frightened at the prospect of a 'President Hillary Clinton' that they will band together as never before to defeat her. One can only hope!
Riley W





Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 857
Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5
votes: 10
Location: Manitoba

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 1:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

urbanmonk wrote:
I think it's safe to say that Hillary will be the Democrats candidate with Obama as a likely running mate. Under normal circumstances I think she would lose to the republicans but with Bush's and his party's low ratings and the prospect of Giuliani getting the Republican nod I'm afraid she could win. If the Christian right don't get a pro-life ticket they may switch to an independent of their own and split the conservative vote much like Perot did (giving the Dems the presidency)
Who knows though, maybe the right will be so frightened at the prospect of a 'President Hillary Clinton' that they will band together as never before to defeat her. One can only hope!


This is a hell of a circumstance for the Right in America...

Most Americans (not the loony left) hate Bush, not the Republican Party, taking him out of the equation helps the Republicans a lot, during the campaign they got to keep Bush out of the way...

Oh and the running mate for Hillary will be Edwards. I am pretty positive on that.

The Christian Right...ick...this is a difficult situation.

The Evangelical ministers said they will NOT support a Pro Choice candidate.

1) Rudy Gulliani - Pro Choice.....the Evangelicals won`t accept this.
2) Fred Thompson - Christian...but has given some lip to the Christian Right before and doesn`t exactly have the role model wife.
3) Mitt Romney - PERFECT....but....Mormon.

If the Christian Right wants the best candidate for their movement they better get behind Huckabee in droves.

If Rudy was smart he would get Huckabee as a running mate to try to cuddle the christian right.

A 3rd party/candidate for the Christian Right would be giving the presidency to Hillary.

Or maybe your right, and the Christians will swallow their pride and get behind rudy to stop a Hillary.

Rudy has to secure Huckabee though, that would give him better chances....

Or the Christian Right has to support Huckabee big time and give him the chance of winning the primaries.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Hillary Clinton for president!!!

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB