1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter(Laughs) Love your posts, but sometimes you can be a 'bomb-thrower' Actually, if we have to have Democrat President next, I'll take Hillary. She is a known quantity, we conservatives know what she's about and know how to deal with her .. after all we already did for 8 years already right when she was the assistant President ..er co-President .. Presidental Partner, whatever her title was when BC was TriPOTUS.
Should Democrats run Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for president? Of all the candidates, Ahmadinejad seems most in touch with their base on the issues.
And the final point is, she's probably the most 'conservative' of what the Democrats are offering up.
Of Course, I'm not exactly thrilled by who the RePubs are offering up either.
I think I'll do a write in for Condi Rice ..... :-)
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterReligious fundamentalist, pro-death penalty, aggressive foreign policy, anti-gay...
Should Democrats run Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for president? Of all the candidates, Ahmadinejad seems most in touch with their base on the issues.
Sounds to me like he'd vote republican.
1 edit
Originally posted by mtthwExcept only a portion of Republicans are conservative Christians, The Republicans have a gay segment (called the Log Cabin Republicans, if I recall correctly), nothing wrong with executing murderers, rapists, pedophiles etc in my book (we do it frequently in Texas) and if defending your country's population and interests is aggressive foreign policy, I'm for that. After all, the UN (Useless Nations) can't solve the problem in Dafur, now can they? And they can't be counted on to defend anyone either.
Religious fundamentalist, pro-death penalty, aggressive foreign policy, anti-gay...
Sounds to me like he'd vote republican.
Originally posted by SMSBear716Of course, the Useless States is not doing too well in Iraq either.
Except only a portion of Republicans are conservative Christians, The Republicans have a gay segment (called the Log Cabin Republicans, if I recall correctly), nothing wrong with executing murderers, rapists, pedophiles etc in my book (we do it frequently in Texas) and if defending your country's population and interests is aggressive foreign policy, I'm ...[text shortened]... ve the problem in Dafur, now can they? And they can't be counted on to defend anyone either.
Originally posted by buffalobillAll depends who you listen too... but lets not go there. Subject has been debated to death and no one here has had their views changed,,, funny thing is the leading Democrats running for 08 won't gurantee they will have troops gone by 2013. Guess they aren't getting any more MoveOn.org's money or George Soros.. wait, they are the same
Of course, the Useless States is not doing too well in Iraq either.