(09/07) Who would you like to see as the next President of the United States?

[Grubendol]

*sigh*

There was extensive reporting of black voters in Florida not being allowed to vote, physically being prevented by police and poll workers. Most were legally registered but were prevented because Texas had transmitted a list of known Texan felons and anyone who had the same name was prevented from voting.

Yes, Mississippi has extensive voter fraud, so does Ohio, where Republicans under Ken Blackwell (the Registrar for Ohio) who actively took place in caging and other practices for which the Republican party had court orders to not do.

The point being that in the two key swing states of the last two president elections there was extensive Republican “election” fraud, not voter fraud. Voter fraud is individual voters voting illegally, election fraud is actively disenfranchising people from their legal right to vote.

(among the fun ones in Ohio was the active prevention of active military personnel from being allowed to vote because they didn’t live at home at the time and thus their votes were disallowed)

[1968]

It seems that Fred Thompson is catching up with Giuliani in this poll. Can someone familiar with Thompson comment on where he differs from the majority of other GOP candidates?

[Pete Hanlin]

If the situation in the 2000 election were reversed (i.e., George Bush wins the popular vote but loses the electoral vote), I'm pretty sure I would have been quite upset. I'd also like to think I would have "gotten over it" by now...

The sad truth is, in each national election there are some very questionable voting practices conducted by both Republicans and Democrats (anyone who claims its just one party or the other is simply blinded by partisanship). In the final analysis, Al Gore lost the 2000 election because voters in Miami-Dade screwed up their ballots (unless Buchannon was actually really popular in that area for some reason). The 2004 election was rather less controversial (although I'm still amazed Bush was re-elected... I mark that down to Kerry's incompetence as a candidate).

I'm hoping Fred Thompson will win the GOP primary and the 2008 Presidential election.

[Grubendol]

If the situation in the 2000 election were reversed (i.e., George Bush wins the popular vote but loses the electoral vote), I'm pretty sure I would have been quite upset. I'd also like to think I would have "gotten over it" by now...

The sad truth is, in each national election there are some very questionable voting practices conducted by both Republicans and Democrats (anyone who claims its just one party or the other is simply blinded by partisanship). In the final analysis, Al Gore lost the 2000 election because voters in Miami-Dade screwed up their ballots (unless Buchannon was actually really popular in that area for some reason). The 2004 election was rather less controversial (although I'm still amazed Bush was re-elected... I mark that down to Kerry's incompetence as a candidate).

I'm hoping Fred Thompson will win the GOP primary and the 2008 Presidential election.

I'll twin bill the 2004.... Kerry was indeed an incompetent candidate (though I still feel that he would have been a much better pres than Bush, then again almost anyone would), but there has been extensive documentation of the several million people prevented from voting properly in Ohio as well.

[Pete Hanlin]

Kerry was indeed an incompetent candidate (though I still feel that he would have been a much better pres than Bush, then again almost anyone would)...
Wow... I'm beginning to feel good about how well I coped with 8 years of Clinton administrations.

...but there has been extensive documentation of the several million people prevented from voting properly in Ohio as well.
According to the DNC report on the 2004 election in Ohio, I was also a victim of attempted disenfranchisement (I voted in Florida- but I had to wait over 2 hours to register my vote at my Tampa precinct).

Anyway, we finally found something you have in common with Republicans (at least with Republicans who voted Nixon in 1960).

Several million people were prevented from voting in Ohio in 2004?

I suppose this will have to be an issue where we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Thompson in '08

[Pete Hanlin]

Can someone familiar with Thompson comment on where he differs from the majority of other GOP candidates?
The defining difference for me is his focus on limiting the role of federal government (which is at the heart of my own conservativism). All the other GOP candidates have failed to raise the issue nearest and dearest to my own political beliefs- "Why is the federal government exercising control/power in so many areas specifically reserved for the states?"

For example, here are some quotes from his description of federalism (the complete article found at this link: http://www.fred08.com/Principles/PrinciplesSummary.aspx).

The result has been decades of growth in the size, scope and function of national government. Today’s governance of mandates, pre-emptions, regulations, and federal programs bears little resemblance to the balanced system the Framers intended...

...It is as true today as it ever was: the closer a government is to its people, the more responsive it is to the felt needs of its constituencies. Too often, however, state and local leaders have to answer to federal bureaucrats first and their constituents second. When the federal government mandates a program that states and localities are forced to implement, or when a federal grant program is created to fund a specific state or community need, it blurs the lines of accountability.

Nothing could be closer to my own opinion regarding the scope of the federal government. In fact, I believe I posted almost word for word the portion of the quote that is bolded.

Simply put- Fred Thompson is a Republican in the best sense of the word (IMHO). According to a recent Newsweek article, Thompson was heavily influenced by the book Conscience of a Conservative, by Barry Goldwater. This is particularly encouraging and revealing. Basically, it means Thompson probably believes in limited federal government and personal liberty (i.e., definitely not a member of the "religious right"). When I read his opinions, I find they pretty much mirror my own- which is what I suppose anyone looks for in a candidate.

I don't like posting long quotes (and usually don't read lengthy quotes pasted by others), but this is simply another gem from the aforementioned article worth repeating here for anyone who cares:
When you hold firm to the principles of federalism, there’s another advantage: our federal government can better carry out its own defining responsibilities – above all else, the security of our nation and the safety of our citizens. Sometimes I think that our leaders in Washington try to do so many things, in so many areas, that they lose sight of their basic responsibilities.
We saw some improvement in the post-1994, “Contract with America” takeover of Congress – strings to federal programs were cut, more federal programs were being turned over to states, historic legislation to reduce unfunded mandates became law, and we rolled back the Clinton anti-federalism executive order. But in recent years we’ve seen backsliding.
The recent immigration bill was a case in point. That bill failed, and it failed for good reason. The federal government simply had no credibility on the issue.
The promises of the 1986 immigration bill have not been fulfilled. Current laws have not been enforced. The federal government has been failing in its fundamental responsibility to control the borders. Worse, when state officials have tried to act with reforms of their own, federal authorities have gotten in the way. In the end, many in both parties in Congress have learned a lesson: promises about immigration reform aren’t worth much unless you have credibility. And in this case there’s only one way that credibility can be regained. Federal leaders must do their job and secure the borders of the United States.

On a personal level, I have to admit to also kinda liking the fact that I don't think Fred Thompson actually has a burning desire to be President. Its a pleasant contrast that against the rest of the candidates.

Anyway, I'll be voting for Thompson in the Texas primary, and will probably vote for him in the national election- whether he wins the nomination or not. I was rather disparing of the field of GOP candidates until I became better informed on Fred Thompson.

I'm with Fred.

[Grubendol]

Kerry was indeed an incompetent candidate (though I still feel that he would have been a much better pres than Bush, then again almost anyone would)...
Wow... I'm beginning to feel good about how well I coped with 8 years of Clinton administrations.

...but there has been extensive documentation of the several million people prevented from voting properly in Ohio as well.
According to the DNC report on the 2004 election in Ohio, I was also a victim of attempted disenfranchisement (I voted in Florida- but I had to wait over 2 hours to register my vote at my Tampa precinct).

Anyway, we finally found something you have in common with Republicans (at least with Republicans who voted Nixon in 1960).

Several million people were prevented from voting in Ohio in 2004?

I suppose this will have to be an issue where we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Thompson in '08

I realize you may never see the facts that I see as facts, but you should really read the Robert Kennedy Jr. article in Rolling Stone about this issue.

[RA]

...on rationalism rages on.
What's up with republicans? woohoo let's ban science and use the bible as a science textbook.
I'm not a fan of either party , at least the dems aren't trying to pull us back into the dark ages.

:hammer:

[Pete Hanlin]

I realize you may never see the facts that I see as facts, but you should really read the Robert Kennedy Jr. article in Rolling Stone about this issue.
I read this article after seeing the back and forth on the Ohio 2004 results earlier in this thread. It was an interesting read, and- if one is so inclined- probably convincing as well. I obviously don't buy what he's selling (I'd like to think I'd be objective enough to feel the same way were the outcome reversed- who knows though).

Anytime there is a loser by a close margin, the losing side is going to play the "but what if" game... whether it be sports- or politics.

[cocoisland58]

It seems that Fred Thompson is catching up with Giuliani in this poll. Can someone familiar with Thompson comment on where he differs from the majority of other GOP candidates?

He's an actor? Wait, no, that's not it. He's a better actor?

[1968]

...on rationalism rages on.
What's up with republicans? woohoo let's ban science and use the bible as a science textbook.
I'm not a fan of either party , at least the dems aren't trying to pull us back into the dark ages.

:hammer:

No, they're just trying to push us back into the Middle Ages via Robin Hood's philosophy: take-from-the-rich-redistribute-to-the-poor.