This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.

Conservative or Republican – which one are you?

Written on Wednesday, December 14, 2011 by

Print Friendly and PDF
nh gop debate

There is a breaking point for even the most committed Republican voter.  There are candidates whose conservative credentials are so flimsy that they give pause to pause to even the diehard supporters of the GOP.  Candidates like Wendell Willkie, Thomas Dewey, Bob Dole, and John McCain do little to drive GOP voters to the ballot box.  Yet, the major commonality of all four of the aforementioned Republican candidates is that they were the “establishment” candidate and none were considered “conservative” Republicans.  Looking at the Republican field of 2012, are there any candidates who are a risk at keeping Republican voters home on Election Day?

The group has seemed to be much more broadly appealing than the last Republican field in 2008.  Social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, and most other niche groups seem to be represented in this collection of candidates.  Even neoconservatives in the mold of President George W. Bush and Dick Cheney can support one of several of these candidates who are tough talkers when it comes to foreign policy.  I wouldn’t claim that any of these candidates is 100% pleasing to the electorate but they seem to be much closer to what most Republicans are looking for than what we had in 2008.  I wonder if there is even one of them that could kill the excitement about the next election that Republican voters currently enjoy.

Mitt Romney has somehow morphed into his father, George Romney, and become the candidate that should be popular but somehow – just isn’t.  Mitt seems to suffer from many of the same problems his father did, he is just too moderate for the average Republican voter.  The saving grace for Romney just might be his 2008 campaign for the nomination when he was the candidate so many Republicans hoped would save the party from John McCain.  Perhaps on the day the nomination takes places in your state, voters will remember that Mitt Romney – the one who was the conservative alternative – instead of the one who now seems so squishy.

Newt Gingrich was once beloved for his Contract with America, then reviled for his disastrous end as Speaker of the House, then he made millions in the private sector.  In this nomination season he has been D.O.A., then been heralded as the conservative savior from Romney, and now he seems to be Romney 2.0.  More Republicans are starting to remember that Mr. Gingrich is much more akin to Mr. Romney than either candidate wants to let on.

Is Ron Paul the candidate who could turn off the average Republican voter?  Poll after poll give the President a fairly strong lead against the longtime Texas Representative and one has to wonder, why?  Electorally, Ron Paul’s strength is his appeal to Independents and even some Democrats… so is his weak polling position due to a lack of Republican support?  While a staunch fiscal conservative, Dr. Paul’s foreign policy planks do little to engender most orthodox Republicans.  With the state of our economy and the passion Ron Paul exhibits for cutting taxes, spending, and reforms could his foreign policy positions keep Republicans from the ballot box?

Governor Rick Perry has endured some trying times over the last few months and yet it seems that one of his biggest weakness within the party is his stance on immigration.  If Perry can move the electorate back into his corner, he may well be able to energize the party to come out en masse on Election Day.  Rick Perry’s problem will have more to do with debating a well spoken and articulate President.  He will have to go face to face with the President and convince Independents that the President is wrong and that the Republican Party is the better bet to fix the economy.  How will that turn out?  Either way, Republicans will come out in droves to vote for Governor Perry.

Michelle Bachmann loves the base and the base loves Michelle Bachmann.  True she may be polling in single digits, but that likely has more to do with primary voters’ ideas about “electability”.  She has made herself into more of a caricature with her dogged attacks on Rick Perry and Gardasil, and Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan .  However, she has also been a punching bag for the liberal mass media and that can do nothing but continue to endear her to the base voter.  A candidate Bachmann would most assuredly not hinder Republican turnout.

I have often been perplexed by the candidacy of Rick Santorum.  On its face this would seem to be a good matchup for the Republican Party as a Presidential nominee, but there may be some underlying problems.  Santorum does not seem to energize the base the way Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Herman Cain, and Rick Perry have.  He has experience as both a member of the House and as a Senator from Pennsylvania.  He won his first election to the House in a District that was heavily Democratic, and throughout his time in Washington proved to be an effective legislator and an even more effective soldier for conservative causes.  While a long-shot Santorum doesn’t hold any views that would be contrary to most Republicans, in fact he is about as orthodox a Republican as they come in this Republican field.  He can count on a healthy turnout if he is the eventual nominee.

The other nominees polling numbers are too low to seriously consider right now, but if there numbers improve it will likely be because the party is becoming more excited about their candidacy.  What seems ironic is that the candidates who may have the most problems getting out the Republican vote on Election Day may actually be the candidate most likely to be nominated!  Between here and Election Day these candidates need to not only, assuage the fears of the base, but actually get them excited about their candidacy.  The key to Republican victory in 2012 is an electrified base and a candidate who is able to convince the Independent voter that our ideas are better.

What about you, dear reader, is there a candidate(s) for the Republican nomination that you just cannot support?  If so, why?

 

 

Print Friendly and PDF
Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
  • Hank is back

    Principled Conservative, Nominal Republican.

    Vote your ideals, not your party.

    If you vote only for Party, more often than not, you will regret your expedient thoughts trouncing your principled thoughts, and later you will feel vindicated in that regret because the guy on the party ticket screwed you.

    • alex

      if you vote republican you have a 50 50 chance of getting a republican if you vote democrat you have a 100%chance of getting a regressive

    • jim letourneau

      Hey champ which year has Obama lost 700,000 jobs I bet you have one so everything is fine. Ask a economist how close we were. fact check

    • scarfacesquirrel

      Average un-employment while Bush was in office 5.1% average un-employment while obama has been in office 9.0% I won’t bother getting into Gasoline prices or any number of other things. Bush made some very bad mistakes, obama is a total failure, always has been always will be…

    • ED Knows

      I am personally fed up with political parties period. Why can we not get rid of a divided ticket?

      How about all canidates running on an open system where you have to state what you believe in every election and do not run on what a previous party promised. This would make every canitate have to make good on what they said during the elections or get voted out next time by a fresh set of ideas.

      There would be a primary to weed down to the best two or three canidates and then a runoff election.

      Anyone have thoughts on this?

    • Bill S.

      You have an interesting idea, but you will never be able to eliminate the political parties until Obama outlaws them under his Marxist regime.

    • Phil

      Hank, what do you suggest, that I vote for Obama. In the debates we see these people’s flaws. Compared to Obama they all look pretty good. I have always voted Republican, not because they’re Republican but because it’s the lesser of two evils. The best people for the job are not running. Of those that are Michele Bachmenn is the best choice and she will do well against Obama in the debates. There is no perfect canidiate.

    • Joan

      I am very disallusioned with both parites. Especially the Rep’s, they don’t seem to have the guts to stand up for the American people. Maybe if we duck tape their wallets and pockets we could get some positive action done. Same for the Dem’s.

    • Bill S.

      I also vote for a candidate for what they claim to represent if they don’t have a political record, but I have been disappointed with that approach in the past. Voting for Ross Perot convinced me that I should be skeptical of third party candidates. I now realize that third party candidates have almost no chance of being elected. whoever the republican candidate is, will be a better president than Obama, and should be supported by everyone who doesn’t want Obama to transform America to the communist states of america(lower case intentional).

    • SC Gal

      I would like to add: Don’t let the media sway your decision. The Liberal stations are 100% Democrat and anti-Republican, anti-Tea Party and anti-anything that doesn’t favor Obama.

      I’m actually upset with Fox News right now. For the past couple of weeks they have made it perfectly clear that they suppoet Romney. The only Fair & Balanced News station has chosen Romney and now all I hear are positives for him and negatives against Newt Gingrich.

      Please turn on Fox News and see if you agree. I’ve even heard them discussing “Newt’s baggage”, which is a line strait from the Liberal news media.

      Even guests on Fox keep equating Newt to the Freddie Mac loan problems and repeating that he took money from Freddie Mac, but they’re making it sound like he did something underhanded.

      Newt was a consultant. Consultants get paid for their work. While he was a consultant he warned FM about their lending praactices. Unfortunately, no one is mentioning that. They are dwelling on the amount of money that he received, but aren’t mentioning that it was paid to him during his 3+ years of work, not in a lump sum. They are implying that he “took money”.

      Fox should be ashamed for their misleading reporting. I would expect that from CNN, MSNBC or NBC, but not from Fox News.

  • fliteking

    I believe in Family, the Constitution, Individual and State Rights and the USA.

    I think that makes me a conservative.

    My wife says it makes me a dinosaur.

    • TJ

      I would think that makes you an ideal supporter of Dr. Ron Paul

    • Hank is back

      No question.

      BTW

      Today is the 220th Anniversary of the adoption of the Bill of Rights into the Constitution.

      Read the first Ten Amendments and then get back to me.

    • Karin

      What’s sad is that Newt’s favorite president FDR wanted to add a second bill of rights that are nothing like the first set. Newt is insane.

    • Richard Moses

      Ron Paul for president and Michelle Bachman for vice-president. Between the two, they could really turn this country around.
      IMPEACH OBAMA NOW!!!!!!!!!!

    • Sally

      I think that makes you a supporter of someone who has the best interests of America at heart. That would be Backman or Santorum.

      Paul unfortunately does not know anything about protecting us against out enemies. And he puts earmarks into bills that he knows will pass and then he votes against them. That makes him look good. But he is so, so sly!

    • http://facebook pat

      sally,,u have said this exact post several times in the last few weeks,,i have looked into what u have posted and what u say simply is not true,,not one word..
      pat

    • Majjohn

      Tell us where you looked? Or did you just make that up? Another Ron Paul junkie!

    • DJW

      Why would anyone even consider Ron Paul the man is 76 years old and has been in congress 20 plus years and has done little for this country. There is no way a man this old can keep the required schedule required. We need someone to defeat the current fake.

    • Texan living overseas (until Texas secedes)

      Ron Paul is the only one on that stage who is AGAINST the wealth transfer operations we call “wars” which are handing trillions of US taxpayer dollars into Iraqi/Afghani hands.

      NO CONSERVATIVE can support REBUILDING Iraq/Afghanistan BACK INTO a threat! It’s so weird to see the same conservatives who understand Egypt/Palestine are incapable of a good democracy to be the ones cheerleading for spending trillions trying to make Iraq/Afghanistan into one?!

      My buddy serving in Iraq said the soldiers he had no doubt the soldiers they were training would turn on us in the coming second Arab vs Israeli war or even if just their local imams issued a fatwa against us.

    • Mary A

      http://spectator.org/archives/2011/08/23/ron-paul-and-the-neoliberal-re/
      The world Ron Paul represents is an anti-Semitic hate-fest founded on the “isolationist” principles expounded by a long litany of left/liberal RINOs through the years. Ron Paul has managed to develop a more cunning rhetoric but he’s absolutely not a conservative or anything even slightly related.
      See the article in the Spectator.

    • LadyLiberty

      DJW…he is ready with all his constitutional knowledge and proof that he is consistant in his Patriot values. Anyone else would be the sameo sameo; and that is one thing we can’t afford for another 4 years.

    • Godisalive

      Not Ron Paul, Michelle Bachmann!!!

    • Marlen

      Maybe your wife doesn’t know the difference between a dinosaur and an elephant!!!

    • Retired Marine MSgt in Marana, Az

      Marlen,

      It’s probably not a well known fact but dinosaurs and birds are related species. Birds, and dinosaurs by default, don’t “pee”.
      Elephants do.

      I think that I’d rather be an elephant.

      LOL

    • pete baird

      Thank you.. now i know what i am,, a dinosaur..

    • Michael in Iowa

      I am neither. I support Individual and States Rights. That makes me an anti-Federalist.

    • Retired Marine MSgt in Marana, Az

      So Michael,

      Where is your “Anti-Federalist” candidate?

    • Curtis boles

      Michael in Iowa needs to consult his dictionary….Someone who strongly supports individual rights and opportunities as well as the rights of the 50 “individual” sovereign states IS A FEDERALIST, as opposed to a STATIST. – I know. those terms are confusing…they mean the exact opposite of what they would seem to be suggesting….either way Michael…do me a favor in your caucus( since I’m in Oklahoma and can’t do it) and put in a big old vote for anyone up there except Ron Paul, Mitt Romney or John Huntsman. A really big favor would be a vote for Michele. She’s the real strong conservative of the bunch.

    • Texan living overseas (until Texas secedes)

      No, he means Anti-Federalist. I, too, am an anti-federalist.

      “Led by Patrick Henry of Virginia, Anti-Federalists worried, among other things, that the position of president, then a novelty, might evolve into a monarchy”

      The anti-federalists opposed the constitution, UNTIL George Washington came up with the “bill of rights”. 10 rights that could never be taken away by the government. The irony of the bill of rights, which so many don’t know, is that historically, the federalists (Madison) argued that it wasn’t even needed. He later introduced it only because he believed it was necessary to get the anti-federalists on board.

      And a King indeed. The President today can declare war without congress’ permission (Libya), write law (executive orders), interpret law (presidential signing statements), and execute law.

      So in effect, he is the Judge, Jury, and Execution. And with the new bill congress passed if he declares a US citizen a terrorist he can hold them indefinitely without trial.

    • Hank is back

      Here is the whole story.

      Those opposed to the opposed to the unamended Constitution considered themselves Federalists. They were labeled as anti-Federalists by those that wrote the unamended Constitution. Because the Federalists won the debate about the Constitution, they got w=to write history and smear their opponents as ‘Anti-Federalists’.

      This is all in the past though, so someone that labels themselves an Anti-Federalist in the historical context is in fact more of a federalist than even the big-F Federalists were.

      Therefore Anti-Federalists and big-F Federalists are BOTH in reality small f federalists.

      The only people these days that aren’t federalists are the ones that support the federal government every time it tries to take sovereignty from the states. These people, whether they are Democrats or Republicans are Nationalists because they believe the will of the government trumps the intent of the Constitution.

      We are not a Nation. We are a Federation of independent States tied together by a common heritage and roughly similar goals.

    • daves

      Curtis, how do you know that Michele Bachmann doesn’t just talk the talk?

    • daves

      Michele Bachmann falsely claimed that she and her husband “have never gotten a penny” from a family farm that received federal subsidies. But she reported income from the farm in 2006, 2008 and 2009 — the most recent year available — on her congressional financial disclosure statements.

    • daves

      She claimed she had been “faithful” to her pledge not to request federal earmarks. But she requested $40 million in transportation earmarks in the 2009 fiscal year budget after taking the pledge, later claiming such projects should not be subjected to her promise. She withdrew her requests after the House Republicans took a party position in 2010 not to seek earmarks.

    • daves

      She claimed government money received by her husband’s counseling clinics did not benefit the business, because the funds paid for employee training. It’s true the clinics received $24,041 for training, but the business received thousands more in government funds, including money for treating crime victims.

    • Mary A

      I agree, Curtis, but America is not ready for her. Too many are not willing to accept her conservative ways. She would be a great VP running mate.

  • Hank is back

    The author’s definition of Republican Orthodoxy in Foreign Affairs is false. Just because something is superficially popular amongst vocal groups, it does not make it the traditional or correct Republican doctrine. If anything, the Foreign policy of both parties is modeled after the Progressive policies of Theodore Roosevelt (left the Republican Party to head progressive party), Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ, and Clinton.

    Republican Orthodoxy that many influential/establishment ‘Republicans’ hate: Foreign Policy of Freedom (Free Markets, Free trade, and Nonintervention)

    Republican Heterodoxy (a heresy introduced by ‘former’ democrats and east coast socialites) that many influential/establishment ‘Republicans’ love: Foreign Policy of Tyranny (Regulations, ‘Loans’ to Foreign Banks, Sanctions, ‘Agreements’, Mercantilism, Public Debt, Corporate Piracy, Economic Fascism, and Undeclared Wars)

    • Paul

      But the modern/current average Republican would agree with this new “orthodoxy”. Especially now, during the “war on terror”. Just consider that for the average American over the last 10-20 years for a person to be “strong” on defense – means that they are a war hawk.
      I don’t think the author is too far off when he calls it an orthodoxy… at least not in the day and age we live in.

    • Hank is back

      Perhaps, but these guys tend to paint it ‘as the way it has always been’. Some would call that a lie. I didn’t want to go that for, but I felt I should at least speak the truth.

      The hawk should protect its own nest, not that of other birds.

      And as someone else said, “If you were a chuck Bronson character living in a tough neighborhood, where would you keep your guns and ammo? In your safe back at home, or spread across the neighborhood on the kitchen tables of your friends, neighbors, erstwhile neutrals, and potential enemies?”

      It is as simple as that, which is why I oppose the current brand of military interventionism that is one of may things Bush and Obama have in common.

  • dusty

    Conservative…………………………..

  • TJ

    RINOs, RINOs everywhere! I could not possibly vote for either Romney or Gingrich. They are Progressives to the core, and if you take the time to look at their History, it will become quite apparent to you.

    I intend to vote for Ron Paul, I would hold my nose and vote for Bachmann or Perry – Santorum just turns me off.

    • alex

      i would take ron before either mitt or newt but i would take santorum or bachmann before ron

    • Doris Carman

      I like SAntorum but I dont think he could win.Maybe if someone took him on as vVP he would be a good balancing point.

    • rocky

      I agree with you Alex. Ron Paul will be chewed up and spit out by the media, as well as probably the rest, but Ron Paul’s name has been around so much as a quack many people won’t be able to get around that. Bachmann’s message even though I wish she would say it differently or with more compassion has been consistantly the same, conservative. She is for limited government. That’s what we all should want. Santoram the same thing. Perry would be good without the immigration blunder. I believe he thinks this is a indivdual state thing, and I don’t think he is far from wrong, but we can’t have one state doing one thing and the other doing another. I get that. I see him rethinking this. He isn’t pushing this as hard as he first did. I do like his attitude about government. “I want to make it as inconsequential as I can.” I think Bachmann is our best choice is you are a true conservative.

    • Gail Engelhardt

      If Congressman Ron Paul is so wonderful as his supporters think, why is that he has not been able to get any legislation passed or even get co-sponsored himself with his governmental experience in his many years as a career politician??? That tells you that he won’t be able to or most likely won’t have cooperation from both Houses of Congress to get his legislation he wants passed, if he were President. What is he going to do or how is he going to get legislation passed? Will he mandate it? Will be use Executive Orders? JUST WHAT WILL HE DO??? I have yet to get answers from any Ron Paul supporter who knows the answer to these questions.

    • http://ddforliberty.blogspot.com Donna Dawson

      One piece of legislation that Congressman Paul has sponsored and had over 200 co-sponsors was HR1207.
      That was a monumental effort to Audit the Fed.
      Of course the Fed had to be sued to release the limited information they have released, but Congressman Paul did get a lot of support from this bill from Congress and thousands of people/subjects to the Fed’s crown.
      There are other bills Congressman Paul has had success with and you and everyone else can find them in a couple of ways. You can go to the Congressman’s website at: http://www.paul.house.gov
      http://www.congress.gov
      A great book to read to understand how Congressman Paul has always upheld the Constitution is: “A Foreign Policy of Freedom, Peace, Commerce and Honest Friendship”. This book is a history of his addresses before the house for over 20 years. In the book you will find his prediction of war with Iraq, Afghanistan, the Balkans, Georgia, etc. etc. etc. As well as the housing bubble and implosion and many other government plans to steal our tax dollars in order to enrich the industrial military complex and the politically well connected.
      He has been warning us about losing our liberties via endless wars and bad economic decisions for several decades.
      It is rather difficult to get much support when you are all alone in upholding your oath of office in DC. We can all see that or we would not be or have been part of a Tea Party.
      Hopefully others are finally waking up to the truths he has been telling.
      I am actually cautiously optimistic that he can win the nomination, although it will be without the help of the MSM for sure.
      Have a great day.

    • cmvbih

      Ron Paul has been up against marxists, RINOs and neocons his entire career; how can you expect his proposals to get anywhere with all those enemies of the USA shaking their fists at you? But Ron Paul was still brave enough to submit and fight for them and one of them was FINALLY enacted upon as there was a partial audit of the FED. And you do know what they found, right?

    • Hank is back

      Why?

      Because he refuses to compromise with evil. Because he won’t toe the line. Because he is an independent thinker. Because very rarely is a bill proposed that does not violate the Constitution. because others refuse to be as principled as he. Because tools like you refuse to back this great man. Because YOUR Congressman that YOU elected is a spineless coward. Because he refuses to give a BJ to every lobbyist in town.

      That’s why, you sad sack!

    • Mary A

      Gail, you said it better than I did and I totally agree with you. Thanks.

    • cmvbih

      Bachmann for limited government? Have you been sleeping? She’s PRO unPatriot Act and voted for it! PRO the unlimited power of the DHS and voted for its creation! Voted for the Military Commission Act which allows FEMA camps to be built! And she wants to legislate morality!
      She’s about as pro limited government as the rest of the neocon RINOs.

  • AlleyOops75

    A conservative is someone who believes in moderation in all things..a government that is not intrusive…a government that is fair to all of the governed…a government that lives within its means..a government that protects our borders from invasion by our enemies…a government that provides for those things that private citizens can’t provide for themselves..Roads, Highways, National Defense, Police protection, Fire protection…A conservative is not one that gets on a blog site and unmercifully criticizes another ‘conservative’ for not believing as he does. With that having been said, that would eliminate most of us on this wire as being conservative.

    • Hank is back

      I hate to be unmerciful, but roads, highways, and fire departments can all be run more efficiently by private individuals. Same goes for the Post Office.

    • AlleyOops75

      That’s what’s wrong with conservative thinking…roads, bridges, national defense, fire and police protection are all necessary functions of government…the private sector doesn’t have the capital, and, without a profit motive, the inclination to perform these services…As for the post office…if the same obsolete business practices to run this giant remains as the status quo, private enterprise wouldn’t touch it.

    • alex

      but state govt. not federal govt.

    • AlleyOops75

      The various state governments would have built our interstate highway system…Hello, I don’t think so.

    • Hank is back

      Ever heard or Lysander Spooner or Benjamin Franklin? UPS? FedEx?

      Profit ‘motive’. So what?

      No Capital? That is a self-fulfilling prophecy because the government uses it all. Capital is more efficient and more proficient than government at just about anything. Including roads, energy, nuclear physics, and aerospace.

      If a government can maintain roads by taxing people, there is no reason why private individuals and associations can’t do the same. Profit incentive would increase efficiency.

    • Karin

      These are state functions. The feds have no business in these areas. Unfortunately, today they are all in our faces, our wallets, and our homes. When the feds get a hold of these there is no freedom because they will do what they want to. Take a look at TSA. Look at the xray machines. Look at the Internet snooping. Republican or Democrat – these progressives are taking over your life and most people bow to the comfort of safety. It’s sad.

    • http://facebook pat

      if ur that much in love with socialism alley,,i have a few countries i could point u towards,,

    • AlleyOops75

      Thanks for your offer…I’ve been to most of the countries around the world…how about you?

    • Hank is back

      Maybe that is why you are so brainwashed. Like most ‘men of the world’.

    • Retired Marine MSgt in Marana, Az

      AlleyOops75 and Hank,

      You both make valid points, as far as they go:
      Hank points out that “roads, highways, and fire departments can all be run more efficiently by private individuals.”
      AlleyOops75 asserts that “a government that provides for those things that private citizens can’t provide for themselves, “Roads, Highways, National Defense, Police protection, Fire protection, etc.”.

      The problem with all “essential services” is that they must be provided for all citizens, equally.
      Private enterprise is most assuredly best able to provide those services in the most cost efficient manner. However, private enterprise doesn’t have the ability, or right, to collect the funding necessary to pay for those services. That’s where the government comes in; they have the ability, through taxation, to collect those funds.

      There’s the rub, even if private enterprise could effectively fund and execute all of those services I don’t think that we would be satisfied with the results. Why? Because they ARE essential services and whoever controls both the funding and the provision of those services can threaten to withhold them, to exercise control of the public. The same problem exists with the government being in charge.

      Simplistically speaking, I believe that, ideally, the government should only be involved in the defense of the country and the funding, through equal and fair taxation, of universal essential services, and the reasonable regulation of private enterprise to prevent situations, like the housing bubble, from occurring. It should also encourage, enable, and foster private enterprise to excel. All else should be the purview of the individual states.

      Oh, and by the way AlleyOops75, a moderate is someone who believes in moderation in all things, not a conservative. A moderate is someone who sits on the fence and is either unable, or unwilling, to commit to anything.

    • Donald

      Previously known as a “Mugwump”. His mug on one side of the fence, his wump on the other!

    • Hank is back

      Actually, those historically derided as mugwumps were more conservative and more principled than either of the two parties. They left the corrupted Republican Party in the 1880s to vote for Democrat Grover Cleveland. Many of their descendants stayed Democrats until they became fed up with Wilson, and then FDR. The mugwumps abandoned their party AFTER their party abandoned them. Kind of like Ronald Reagan, who might be seen as a modern day mugwump, in reverse order.

    • AlleyOops75

      Thanks for the clarification…I suppose I’ve never seen a moderate drunk:)

    • Hank is back

      Healthcare is essential. Do you want the government to control that too? I doubt that you do, which is why you should revise your argument on the whole.

      Roads can and were maintained by the states and contracted to private construction companies. There might have been waste and fraud, but not on the level that now occurs with federal involvement.

      The assertion that when the states were in charge that roads were poor is true. But the assertion that the Federal government was responsible for the improvement in the roadways is spurious at best. Technological innovation (which would have occurred on the state level in spite of Federal efforts anyways) and the free market were responsible for the improvements. The Federal government was responsible only for the funding (which was inefficient because ventures tend to be with no profit incentive) and the uniformity. And while uniformity looks nice and might make it easier to obey one federal law than to obey fifty state laws, it is not an essential service.

      The Commerce clause in the Constitution was twisted by the FDR, Truman, and Eisenhower administrations to justify the road way in the EXACT same way Obama twisted it to pass his ‘healthcare’ plot.

      If a law is twisted for bad, we must still hate it equally when it is twisted for the supposed good. Every ‘good’ twist can and will be turned around and used for bad.

    • Independentrd

      You need to separate out Federal from State governments. Police and fire are local and state, not federal. Roads? They exist at the local(city, county and coop), State, and Federal level.

      The constitution severely limits the Federal government’s functioning and rightly so. That not given to the federal government is reserved for the states if not prohibited.

    • Retired Marine MSgt in Marana, Az

      Independentrd,

      Exactly!

    • Hank is back

      The Commerce clause only gives the Federal Government the right to regulate commerce between the states. we can argue all day what was meant by ‘regulate’, but the word ‘between’ should be simple enough.

      The Highway system is a waste of money, not because it exists, but because people with no profit incentive (a liberal would call it profit motive), i.e., the Feds, are in charge of it.

      Even state and local road regulations are pressured by the Feds.

      If we care about origin al intent and words meaning what they say, the Federal government would only have the ability to regulate and maintain those roads that cross borders at the point where they cross.

      Another sickening example of the commerce clause being twisted: Guns aren’t allowed in school.

      Back when guns were allowed in school, shooting were almost unheard of.

      But the Supreme Court made this argument: If a gun is in school, it might scare the children. If the children are scared, they might not be able to concentrate. If they are unable to concentrate, they might not learn as much. If they don’t learn s much they might become unproductive citizens. If they become unproductive citizens, commerce might diminish.

      Therefore, as per the Commerce Clause, the Supreme Court decided, the Federal government has the ability to pass laws and pressure states into passing laws that forbid guns within a certain range of schools, extending up to 3000 feet, and prohibit anyone with a gun from entering the building.

      To bad ‘outlaws’ are ‘outside’ of the ‘law’ and could give a rat’s behind about what the Supreme Court thinks.

    • rocky

      Being a conservative doen’t mean I don’t have the right to freedom of speach. Right now we conservatives need to let it be known that our vote no matter how hard it is to vote for the candidate that is left standing is better then what we have today. So vote people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Michael Brown

    Constitutional Conservative. I cannot support Dr. Ron Paul because of his stance on Israel and Iran. Allowing Mahmoud Ahmadinajad possession of a nuclear arsenal is ludicrous. MJB

    • Willy

      We might luck out and they blow themselves up

    • Old Eagle

      Michael Brown-Constitutional Conservative? Give me a break. What’s the Constitution say about defending Israel or Iran? Only that we should maintain a military for our own defense. Let Israel and Iran rise or fall on their own merits. Ron Paul is correct in that we need only support Israel or attack Iran if our own interests are diredtly threatened. The neocons thrive on keeping the altercation going.

    • cmvbih

      It’s apparent Michael Brown never read the constitution.

  • foxfan

    There is not an ideal candidate out there. I cannot support Ron Paul because of his lack of understanding of radical Islam and its threat to our existence. Rick Santorum always seems mad. There is a persona about him that does not draw people in regardless of his positions. Michelle Bachmann is a true conservative but the people are not ready for a conservative woman, especially against Obama. Romney just appears too plastic and Ginrich seems to still think highly of himself and is not truly a conservative. Where does that leave us? Hopefully not with another term with a Marxist President or we are doomed.

    • http://patriotupdate Kay Ferguson

      Obama is a marxist, muslim criminal and shouldn’t even be a factor in 2012 if he get jail like he deserves.He, Holder, Pelosi, Hillary and czars are enemies of the state and should be hung for treason. They are all totally unAmerican and a disgrace to this country.

    • Gail Engelhardt

      Finally, the truth of what should be done with Obama and his ilk. However, I consider myself as an Independent Conservative, who will vote for the candidate who will take Obama down. In my estimation that is Newt even with all his flaws. I do like his 21st Century Contract with America that he has signed, and I will hold his feet to the fire if he deviates from it. However, if Newt is not the GOP nominee at the end of the Primaries,I will accept and vote for whomever is the Republican nominee who wins because WE MUST DECISIVELY BEAT OBAMA IN 2012. Anything else is unacceptable and will only result in Obama being re-elected for 4 more years. That would result in disaster, and I will not be part of it.

    • Donald

      Huntsman would probably be the best candidate but for some reason is dismissed out of hand!

    • Hank is back

      He would certainly bring in some independents and democrats, as would Paul, but a lot of people would stay home.

    • Mary A

      I still think we should give Rick Perry another look. He reminds me of Reagan and I like what he says.

  • http://espionageaction-actionadventure.blogspot.com stephen russell

    Conservative.
    Liberal Living BUT not in Voting.
    Pro Gun, business, Defense, Innovation.

  • Lynn

    Constitutional conservative, anti-progressive.

  • death to non believers

    when i was in my early teens i figured out what the real political meaning of the word “progressive” was. it wasnt the dictionary meaning. i am a constitutionalist and conservative. democrat or republican, unfortunately, are just words for polital parties with a leftist agenda.

  • TurboX

    Party trumps person, always! If we have a Republican in the White House, even though he may not be your favorite person, then we have many advantages: Supreme Court justice appointments, Federal judge appointments, cabinet appointments, veto power, etc. The same is true for the House and Senate (committee appointments, etc.). So, hold your nose and vote for the person, even if he is not your first choice. DO NOT VOTE FOR ANY OTHER PARTY. We saw what the results are when that happens! Not good! Party trumps person!

  • Independentrd

    I am neither a Liberal or Conservative although Either would probably consider me the other. I am more Libertarian than any other.

    Both parties have campaign issues which I oppose. I normally refuse to vote for any one using a negative campaign, but that becomes much more difficult each election cycle. Neither party has anyone I really want to vote for, but I do stand with the conservatives in that I’m for “any one other than Obama”.

  • Charles Martel

    My answer is easy, CONSERVATIVE!!!

  • Tarheel

    conservative to the core

  • Charles Martel

    That being said, i will absolutely vote for the Republican nominee even if not my pick, to not do so is insanity!!

  • FRANK

    ALL I REALLY CARE ABOUT AT THE END OF THE DAY IS TO BEAT OBAMA. I COULD CARE LESS WHO CAN BEAT HIM, JUST GET RID OF THE SOB. WE HAVE TO IN ORDER TO SAVE AMERICA. WHAT DOES THAT MAKE ME? A LOYAL, PATRIOTIC AMERICAN .

  • Jeff

    AMEN Frank. God loving, patriotic American.

  • Liberty59

    Conservative…this is why I am concerned with our choses in 2012. I will vote Republican but that doesn’t mean I will be happy about it. Goodness, does John McCain come to mind…pulled the lever for him too what a disaster that would have been! Better than Obama thats for sure but surely there must be a hero out there to save us from the mess our great nation is in. Remember folks, all of them who don’t support and agree that our constitution is the “law” of the land, will balance our budget, cut spending to the bone and entitlement programs, guard our borders, uphold our military to the highest standards, and send the illegals packing just aren’t spit! We don’t need to settle…not now not ever! We The People need to take back our “rights”!!! Pray first and then demand that America be restored!We all should be pretty angry by now…I know I am sure am!!!

    • rocky

      I am where you are at Liberty59. I hope a lot of other people out there feel the same way.

  • Joy

    I still think at the end of the day that Newt would be the best Candidate. Yes he has Flaws but everyone does. You need to go back and see what he accomplished while he was in the House. Yes, he was young and hard headed but he had successes, at the time he served if you really read upon it, there were a lot of know it all young hot heads i the House, but the accomplishments of Newt as a speaker were great. Again, I am not saying he’s perfect but he has accomplished much. His multiple marriages has caused a lot of gossip and a lot of its untrue. Grade him for his accomplishments and don’t down grade him on Gossip. Ron Paul has so many negatives that I am beginning to think he’s off the deep end. Michele is in way over her head and just is not accomplished enough to even be running leave off being President. Not sure what happened to Rick Perry but whatever it was he just doesn’t seem to be Presidential. Rick just is not impressive. I truly believe Newt can win t and I think he could straighten out the mess we now have.

    • Jerry

      Good thought Joy! Simultaneously our comment came across a 8:51! That should tell our fellow constituents Conservatives that we know what we are talking about! It is just true! Newt does have flaws but I would rather put up with flaws than a dick tater ship!!!!!!

    • MH

      Newt is a progressive he will continue with obamas plan only at a slower rate so we won’t notice til it’s too late that we have lost our country and our FREEDOM.

    • rocky

      I was a sucker for Newt’s tongue but now I recognize what he is. He is a white Obama with a R behind his name. He has big ideas. Why in the world do we need a president with big ideas? So he can move the country progressively toward what? We need someone with a conservative idealogy. With the same pharase Perry uses “I want to make government as inconsequential as I can.” That is what we need. That doesn’t mean I want Perry, it just means that’s the attitude we need in a President. Get the Feds the hell out of the road so we the people can live our lives. Protect us, and bind us as a whole country, but get your dang thumb off of our lives. Quit regulating everything and taxing everything, you aren’t making anything better, you are making it worse. Inforce the laws that are on the books and stop the corruption now. Support prayer, family, true history and traditions and this country will be strong again.

  • Jerry

    My fellow conservatives –you all have good answers! What I like most is vote for party this time because we do not need a third-grade prez and third-grade congressmen on the prowl! No more reports of FM & FM is OK when the dims had the housing situation in shambles and they thought it was hidden!Im trying to cover a lot of ground here! I had to hold my nose when voting the RINO John Mc in’08! I never left my party! NEWT is not a bad pick so is Michelle but vote party to get rid of all-l-l-l-l-l-l the trash!

    • MrInterpid

      WHAT is FM??? Other than being frequency modulated I never heard of it. I also had to hold my nose when casting a vote for the RINO McCain. No matter who the rep nominee is they will get my vote as any other course of action will get us four more years of the obamination.

  • Karin

    All but one of these people would have my business shut down at the drop of a penny. I work in the adult industry. I am NOT a Democrat. I am NOT a socialist. I would never vote for either. I’m not big on Ron Paul because of his stance on Israel and the middle east, but all the rest of them would shut me down if Congress and the Supreme Court agreed. I have no one to vote for and yet I want that socialist creep in office right now to leave yesterday.

    • cmvbih

      So you belive that Irsael can’t take care of herself and needs Nanny America to take care of her? When did Israel become the 51st State? America is BROKE!!! We can’t afford to take care of sovereign nations anymore. You like that we give Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, the Palestinians – meaning HAMS – money?
      Have you forgotten that during the 6 Day War Israel bombed and nearly sank the USS Liberty? Israel knew darn well it was an AMERICAN vessel.
      http://www.uss-liberty.com/2010/04/27/lyndon-johnson-ordered-cover-up-of-israeli-bombing-attack-on-uss-liberty-in-1967-six-day-war/
      Why don’t you try defending America. I’m pretty tired of so-called ‘patriots’ putting Isreal before America.

  • Karin

    Newt is against free speech and campaigned with the greenies for eco-fascism. NO THANK YOU.

  • American Patriot

    I agree with a lot of the sentiments that were shared here! Now, I’ll share mine. As to be expected, while looking at the range of GOP candidates, there are a few that I prefer doesn’t make it through the primaries and a few that I prefer would! NO MATTER which candidate is chosen to represent the GOP in the presidential election, that candidate will have my support and vote! I am getting sick of the snipes back and forth between the different camps of GOP hopefuls! I am especially fed up with the people that have the attitude of “if my candidate isn’t chosen then I’ll vote for anyone but GOP to teach them a lesson”, this is not only childish but very dangerous!

    This may be our last chance of saving this country, if we don’t pull together and get it working correctly, we may never have the chance again!

    Our best hope is that we put most of our effort into electing as conservative of a Congress as possible. Preferably ones with the needed backbone to stand up for their electors! A strongly conservative congress should be able to keep the president solidly going in the right direction!

    • Retired Marine MSgt in Marana, Az

      American Patriot,

      Oh My Gosh! (OMG!)

      OMG! Are you really asking for some of the posters to this web-site, who in many cases are a bunch of illiterate, intolerant, bigoted, religious wing-nuts, to put aside their differences and do what is best for our country?

      OMG! Newt has been married three times; he has the ability to compromise with his adversaries; he has experience in dealing with the political insiders; therefore he must have an evil agenda.

      OMG! Herman Cain, who was probably the most fiscally savvy and the most educated candidate, MIGHT have harassed a few women several years ago. Those are allegations which have not been proven and come from highly suspicious sources. Oh yeah, and he’s a BLACK man, and you know that they all lead suspicious lives and cannot be trusted; therefore he must have an evil agenda.

      OMG! Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is a woman and she won’t be able to deal with the Arabs, etc., etc…

      OMG! Mitt Romney is a Mormon, which we all know isn’t a Christian Church, it’s just a Satanist cult; therefore he must have an evil agenda.

      OMG! American Patriot, I think that your expectations for some of these people are just too high.

      Just get to the polling places in November 2012 and VOTE for the candidate who, at that time has the best possibility of ousting the incumbent Communist-in-Chief. If you don’t, OMG! you will live to regret it, as will your children and your grandchildren. LAST CHANCH!!

  • Winston

    Conservative, yet before even that, I am a Bible believing Christian in every aspect of my life.

    • Mary A

      Me too! God first then all else will fall into place. He is greater than our imaginaion or what we learn about Him in the Bible.
      II Tim 1:7 For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and love and discipline.
      I Peter 5:7 -casting all your anxiety on Him, because He cares for you.
      Jer 17:5 Thus says the LORD, “Cursed is the man who trusts in mankind and makes flesh his strength, and whose heart turns away from the LORD.
      “When we stop being a nation under God, we will be a nation gone under.” Pres. Reagan

  • Ann Wilson Kingsley

    If Republicans do not like Ron Paul’s foreign policy, then they are Globalist New World Order corporatizers. The American people do not need to be paying for the U.S. as world-wide policeman. The fact that international businesses want the U.S. to be the international policeman, protecting their enterprises all over the world, does not mean that Americans need to do that. As a matter of fact, Bill Gates would like you to pay to protect Microsoft’s operations in Africa where Windows goes for $1.00 per copy, while you subsidize his African operation by being strapped with a price 100s of dollars higher in the U.S. (Bill Gates does the same thing in China.) Maybe I am not a Republican any more. Maybe Republicans are just for a foreign policy that aids “Big” business. Most Republicans are little guys, so why would they want aggressive foreign policy that costs the U.S. tax payer a fortune?

    • Ann Wilson Kingsley

      Replying to my own post, if Ron Paul is not on a ticket, I may find it difficult to get to the polls because the other candidates do not look like “active” conservatives. They look more like business as usual “Do Nothing” Republicans. We want our economic and fiscal problems solved; we want state’s rights. Ron Paul is the only one who is independent enough to do the job.

    • EagarBeez

      Then you would rather see Oliar have another 4 yrs. If your a true republican, you would hold your nose and vote. We all can’t have who we want, but, we can show our support. No votes or 3rd party vote, is a vote for O

    • cmvbih

      Both parties have been taken over by progressives, that’s why there are no real dems or repubs in office anymore.
      Perhaps we need to look to George Washington who was very much opposed to party affiliation.
      From his Farewell Address:
      “I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally. This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
      The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

      Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

      It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

      There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.”

      Maybe it’s time to ditch all parties and seek politicians who actually adhere to their sworn oath of office.

    • LS

      So you really want Obama back in for another 4 !

    • AlleyOops75

      It’s this kind of post that turns people away from the GOP…so many far out statements, innuendos, and half truths that spoil the genuine efforts of others to correct the sails of our government…Corporations are not the ugly ogres that you make them out to be…Most all businesses are incorporated to protect themselves with limited liability…We even have sub chapter S corps for those businesses with ten or less stock holders..Being Anti business will cost us lots of votes.

    • Hank is back

      We don’t need to fix the sails. We need to turn the ship around.

  • ConservativeRedneck

    Conservative 1st and Republican 2nd here

    Marsing, ID

  • MrInterpid

    The whole structure on the republican side needs overhauled. The RNC is a dinosaur. To leave them in charge of picking our candidates is stupidity. Republican candidates should be selected from the bottom up not the top down. They always pick a centrist loser: Dole, McCain, Romney etc. I don’t send the RNC a nickel. All my donations go directly to the candidates reelection fund.

  • littlerocker

    I agree with most of what was said above. Romney and Gingrich ARE progressives and would do harm to the nation. Perry is out and out dumb, and could never carry the day against Praise-be-Obama. I fear Paul has failed to make an effective libertarian argument about the government’s primary role — national defense, not world domination — and will be rejected by the Republican base, even though he is correct. That leaves Bachmann and Santorum. Bachmann lost me with her argument against the vaccination of 12-year-old girls in Texas and her harping of being a mother. I’m looking for a leader and will be voting for Santorum in my state’s March primary. I consider myself a conservative independent who has voted libertarian in the past, and will do so again if the Republicans make the mistake of nominating Romney, Gingrich or Perry, which appears to be what the media and voters in Iowa and New Hampshire have in mind. Hopefully South Carolina and Florida will get it right before it’s too late.

    • cmvbih

      Littlerocker, who is this Republican ‘base’ you speak of? Do you mean the ‘establishment’? Because, really, who cares about them? Should, God willing, Ron Paul be nominated as the Republican candidate, do you honestly believe they would refuse to give him the money they’ve collected from We, The People? They’d never receive a dime again. They would be wiped out, finished.
      The RNC is a joke anyway. People don’t give much to it anymore and mostly give their money straight to the candidate – as it should be. Once the RNC sees that registered Repubs mean business and ARE voting for ron Paul, they will have to surrender their elitism and succumb to public demand.
      Santorum is going no where in this election cycle and if he should drop out already. Bachmann doesn’t have a chance because no one is confident she would win in the debates with Barry.
      There is only one candidate that stirs the fires in the hearts of people across all the political parties – that man is Ron Paul.
      Please don’t waste your vote. Vote for Liberty before it’s gone for good.
      Presdident Ron Paul 2012

    • Donald

      Huntsman would be the best candidate!

  • Stanley Lehigh

    Hi, All , some pretty good comments thankyou. Well I think we are a constitional republic and I like to think that I am a conserative republician . I for one would vote for porkey pig before I ever vote for the tar baby in the w. h. I guess for now Newt g. is a good choice and I am sick of the communist in chief. thanks, stan

  • PapaLee

    I am a conservative Christian who believes we can only have one candidate run against BO. We also need to get every conservative and every anti-BO to vote. We are going to need all the votes we can get. BO and his cronies will do everything (legally & illegally) to steal this one from us. We must get the vote out. Drive the needy to the polls, whatever it takes.

  • R.Cook

    anybody I repeat…..anybody but Obummer.

  • Texas Granny

    I like Michelle Bachmann, but she doesn’t have a chance. We need someone who can knock out Obama with little effort and we don’t have it. I don’t trust Newt or Mitt and Santorum doesn’t have a chance and Paul just gets too far out there for me. I am without a doubt a Christian Conservative. May God help us to rid ourselves of Obama.

  • Travis

    Why are all the negative views of the economy associated with Democrats? I highly doubt any of the GOP candidates could’ve done any better than Obama did.

    • LS

      They probably would not squandered away so much stimulus on things because they were obama supporters. They probably would rely more on the private sector like the pipeline obama has delayed for political reasons. The pipe line cost NO taxpayer money. They probably would have considered jobs as first priority instead of instead of launching into class warfare and trying to fundamentally to change the country before even considering any job creation .

  • Dean

    I’m a conservative, so Ron Paul is the only choice! There’s nothing radical about getting back to the way it’s meant to be!

  • Sheri in Houston

    I am absolutely horrified at the prospect of “The Great Pretender” being reelected
    through a fraudulent election. In my opion he is a liar,non-citizen,disreputable, dispicable,etc. I am a Conservative Republican, however I will vote for whomever wins the nomination. Any one of the people running for nomination would, if elected President,be decisively better for this country than b.o. This country is being governed by a White House innner circle who wants only to weaken and do harm this country. That was the goal of b.o.’s handlers when b.o. won election and that remains the goal. Our country has been deeply wounded by this administration and now the knife is being driven deeper.

    Again, in my opinion,the person who could best debate (chew-up and spit out) b.o. is Newt Gingrich. N.G has baggage and is not considered to be a true Conservative,but I feel he would handle himself more effectively in debates with b.o. than ANY other of the candidates. Truth be told b.o. is afraid to debate N.G. and that is why controversy,perpetuated by the left,is in the wind regarding N.G. If N.G. receives enough bad press the left feels Romney will receive the nomination. Romney has a lower threat level than N.G. Therefore the left is on a destroy mission to destroy N.G.

    I have never understood why the Republicans won’t give as good as they get. Republicans who campaign for office should get down in the trenches with the dirty democrats and sling some mud of their own. ARRRGH!

  • EDMAN V. CHIN

    a real republican. korean vet and a newyorker. cant stand anything else.

  • sherman4040

    Naturally, I would be a (C) conservative! Nothing else makes sense! Both of the mainline parties are the same, except for their pet projects, which mainly are lying to the American people and taxing and spending! Only Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum are possible as for as I am concerned! Both principled, limited government, and strong on the Constitution!
    All the others have too much baggage!

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYYzUQmcuUM Gas Passer

    I’m just an independent conservative.

    I’m registered as an independent.

    I’m sick and tired of having to vote for RINO’s that are slanted to socialism. I see a number of them running against Obunga.

  • Nick

    Michelle Bachmann is the best candidate of all those running, yet all I hear is that she is unelectable! Those words are being drummed into peoples heads so they tend to think that, instead of really promoting her and saying positive things about her. I’m so tired of the media and celebrities forcing who they want, on the rest of us.

    • AlleyOops75

      At the outset and even through the Iowa straw poll, I was a backer of Bachman…yes, with my money as well…Bachman made the mistake that lots of amateurs make, she thought that winning the Iowa straw vote gave her a mandate…so, rather than continuing to tell us what she would do as president, she began knocking her opponents instead…this did her in..not only with the ‘establishment’ but the voters and media as well…a rookie mistake.

  • Klaus

    I would love to see Michele Bachman as the choice for President. However, I will enthusiastically support any Republican over Obama. I despise Communism or Socialism, which is what we are heading for. Voting for any third party candidate is just plain stupid if you are a conservative or libertarian, because it would guarantee another 4 years of a Marxist President. The damage that would cause could not be repaired in my view, it may already be too late.

    • http://ddforliberty.blogspot.com Donna Dawson

      So far the only person out there claiming to run third party is Donald Trump.
      The MSM keeps insisting Ron Paul is going to run third party but I don’t think he will need to run third party.
      He already has the crossover support the other candidates can’t get and to win the presidency as a Republican, at this point, on will have to garner those crossover votes.
      At least that is my opinion.

    • cmvbih

      Actually, what you wrote wasn’t really opinion but fact!
      Fact: Trump said he will run if ‘his’ candidate wasn’t the nominee
      Fact: Ron Paul attracts supporters from many different political parties – Repubs, Dems, Indys, Tea, Libertarians

  • John C. Stewart

    I am Conservative and vote for the person, not the PARTY!!!!

  • enough

    The ONLY candidates that can save our republic are Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. The rest are big government anti constitutional RINO’s.
    The rest support big government, big spending and have been shown to walk all over our constitutional rights.
    If they supported bailouts, or the patriot act or the assault on civilians in the latest defense budget, they are not fit to be called American, much less President.

  • EagarBeez

    I consider myself conservative. I am an AMERICAN. I will hold my nose if I have to and VOTE. We need to save our country. Any one of our candidates is better then who we have now

  • http://www.americagonestupid.com nvrpc

    I can’t really define myself as any particular party but I will say one thing for sure, I am not a “socialist democrat” and will spend my life trying to put these S-O-Beaches in their graves a fast as possible. I have absolutely no use for their vile liberalism and special protected species rights they grand to freaks of nature and foreign national who hyphenate their name or fly any flag other than the stars and stripes. I think clicking on my name, scroll to the bottom and click on the words next to the international peace sign is a good start to figure out my stance.

  • Charles Willard

    I cannot support Ron Paul. His weak stance on Iran will lead us into another war. His good intentions will lead us down the road of no return.

    I fully support Bachman and Perry is a close second. Santorum has the right idea as well and I would vote for him as well. The rest of the field I would vote for as a last resort, because they are better than Obama.

    Obama has destroyed this country and taken away the American spirit to do their best. We are a country with great people that are willing to do what is necessary to make this country great again. GOVERNMENT JUST NEEDS TO GET OUT OF OUR WAY AND LETS US “AMERICANS” do what we do best, Lead the world in innovation, values, and work ethic. Time for the American people to take out the trash by starting with OBAMA. I still think Cain would do a great job as well….

    • http://ddforliberty.blogspot.com Donna Dawson

      Respectfully, Ron Paul has been the only Congressman in over 20 years that has been trying to get Congress to “get out of our way” and let Americans do what we do best.
      We will be at war with Iran long before the election, we are already invading them with drones and have CIA presence there.
      We are already spending money and spinning wheels to engage Iran.
      We are already bankrupt and borrowing money to wage our endless wars in the name of security, and expanding the police state in America that will guarantee we are unable to use our own minds, bodies and property to innovate anything.

    • The Enemy

      Donna: Respectfully, if Dr. Paul is the GOP nominee, Obama will surely win. Dr. Paul’s foreign policies are wrong and, frankly, archaic in today’s world.

    • The Enemy

      Charles Willard: I think the most powerful, viable and conservative would look something like this: Rick Santorum/Allen West

  • http://adrianvance.blogspot.com Adrian Vance

    In truth the party no longer matters. When they get to Washington, DC they become THEM and fleece US. Did you ever see one come back poor?

    The Two Minute Conservative at http://adrianvance.blogspot.com for political analysis, science and humor. Daily on Kindle.

  • http://ddforliberty.blogspot.com Donna Dawson

    I suppose I would call myself a classic liberal in the same way our founders thought of themselves. I am a fiscal conservative and Christian. There are two reasons I do not agree with or support the Republicans and Democrats endless war management of foreign policy.
    I believe in Constitutional government and the Bill of Rights. Everything else is anathema to liberty.
    America is indeed bankrupt. We are morally and fiscally bankrupt.
    I cannot support another candidate that will not rescind previous president’s executive orders and restore the form of Government the framers gave America.
    Government should not be involved in providing programs that are not authorized in the Constitution.
    The only candidate that most closely matches my beliefs is Ron Paul and my conscience will not allow me to vote for anyone else.
    Thankfully the MSM is lying through their teeth, several polls have found Ron Paul is the only one that can beat Obama and my money and time are going to take that chance.
    Ron Paul 2012

  • The Enemy

    The words “conservative” and “Republican” are no longer synonymous and haven’t been for many decades. If the TEA movement influence in the GOP continues, perhaps they will be once again.

  • Rose

    I am a conservative and a Ron Paul supporter. Newt and Romney should go away. Newt is a career politician and Romney is a flip-flopper. Either one would be business as usual. Nothing but the same old BS. I’m tired of holding my nose and voting for the best of the worst. Because Ron Paul puts America before Israel is one big reason he is not respected by all those Rinos and politicians. I see Paul as a true statesman, conservative patriot and defender of the constitution.

  • Bruce

    I have been observing the comments on this forum for the better part of two years now. I haven’t commented up until this point because I completely agree with most of points of discussion. However, day after day I come to this forum and other forums like this one and day after day I have to ask these questions. The number one question is. Why aren’t there millions of subscribers, instead of hundreds or thousands in some cases? Are the masses so blind and ignorant that they cannot see what lib’s and the progressive’s are doing to this country? Or, are they so hypnotized by the main stream media and believe the B.S. that everything is just peachy? I am sure that most of you find this as frustrating as I do!

    The other day I received an email from a “like minded” group of conservatives like us. They had a lot of great ideas and solutions. What if there was a way that we as individuals could actually make a difference in a Huge Way? It would connect, organize, educate and fund our conservative cause so that we could beat the crap out the enemy using their own game. What if I told you that by TAKING ACTION right now and become involved you could be financially compensated for your efforts!

    http://www.wakeupamerica.com/usa

    Or we could just sit here and wait for HOPE AND CHANGE!

  • Doc

    You know, you just get sick of people’s
    opinion’s and the media and also people just
    take things at face value and heresay, rather
    than research the truth. In regards to Newt,
    he is being lied on just like the machine of
    liberal democrat’s & republicans intend to do
    no caring about the truth. People need to back off and listen & learn, then privately weigh out the way they should vote.
    America is in a mess and YES it is the
    illegal Obama who has brought in all his
    cronies just like him and his false religion and the ideas of making the USA a 3rd world
    country for him to be a king. He needs to be removed like now or should we say, he should have never been elected, & that was
    by fraudulent voting and pay offs.

    • mickey2

      Slowly the voter fraud is being revealed. Indiana found obama didn’t even have enough signatures to get him on the ballot the last time. Then in Marion County, they exposed more votes than voters.

      Urge your states to make public what the involvement of ACORN did in the last election.

  • ConservaDave

    Where’s Ronald Reagan when you need Him? I like and dislike each candidate to varying extents and for various reasons. What do your examples: Wilkie, Dewey, Dole and McCain have in common? Answer: they all lost. America cannot not survive a second Obama term so we do need a fighter. I love Santorum but Newt is probably the best suited to go toe to toe in battle (and I mean battle!) with the fraudulent anti-American president. Unless Christie can be drafted… Just not enough contrast between Romney and Obama: some non-thinkers might just stick with “the devil they know.”

    • Tom B

      Ronnie is probably signing into law the bill authorizing abortion while Governor of California.

      Ronnie was first and foremost a Dimocrat.

  • Gloria Wedemeyer

    I have changed my mind several times. I like most of the things all of them say. I agree with Bachmann completely but for some reason, she doesn’t seem to have a chance.
    I liked Perry until I found out his stance on immigration. I like Ron Paul, but think safety from domestic and foreign terrorists is important and I liked Herman Cain. Right now I am backing Newt Gingrich. However, I will vote for any one of them who can beat Obama.

    • Tom B

      Gloria, if elected, Newt will do more damage than Barry Obama and Dubya Bush combined.

      Read up on Newt.

    • USAF VET

      Over all, Newt is a lot better pick than Romney. Mitt Romney, as I have said before, is cut from the same political cloth as Obumski. 3 or 4 days ago I heard him say that he was a moderate. That alone puts him into the more liberal column, like John McCain. Then he said he was more progressive than some of the other candidates. That comment right there puts him over the fence and right into the liberal camp. I’ve never trusted Romney, and I have even less reason to do so now. The only one we can really trust to keep Conservative values and have a good handle on foreign policy is Michele Bachman. If you will notice that a lot of the Liberals have been saying that they though Mitt was the best one to go up against Obumski the Zero. Well that right there should tell you just what a RINO he is.

    • The Enemy

      Tom B: So, you’re overlooking all the good things Newt got done back in the 1990′s? You forgot how he steered Clinton to the right? You don’t like balanced budgets? What is it about welfare reform that is not good? Every candidate except maybe Bachmann has some past baggage. But Newt got a lot accomplished and would have gotten a lot more done if he hadn’t had a liberal President. And he alone has the best qualities to defeat the illusionist-in-chief.

    • mickey2

      ummm this is a little eye opener for you on Newt (other than Pelosi will blackmail him now and through any term)

      http://www.jbs.org/birchtube/viewvideo/923/conspiracy/the-real-newt-gingrich–libertynewsnetwork

    • Lover of Freedom

      Thank you for posting this essential video. Every lover of freedom should see it.

    • 1948

      TOM B IS A MORON. HE LIVES IN OBAMA BLACK BUTT WORLD

    • The Enemy

      Gloria: Have you noticed how the Newt-bashers only focus on his negatives? His positives far outweigh his negatives. He is a statesman in the like of Benjamin Netanyahu and we sure need a real statesman in the White House! We’ve had enough limp noodles.

    • Lover of Freedom

      Please watch the video posted by mickey2. It takes about 1/2 an hour. Here is the link:

      http://www.jbs.org/birchtube/viewvideo/923/conspiracy/the-real-newt-gingrich–libertynewsnetwork

    • mickey2

      I could go on and on about RP and his foreign policy but just think about it, who is reaping the economic rewards? China. And China is not involved in a lot of wars, has soveignty, nukes, and a whole bunch of other things. China is going from communism to capitalism.

      Who went broke with endless wars? Russia. And what does their economy look like?

      So just on the surface, which foreign policy should we emulate? Russia or China?

      Oh, and lest we forget–gee, our Constitution of “non-intervention”.

  • Tyrannosaurus Rex

    If it’s not Santorum/Bachmann I will stay home. I am done with republicrats.

    • USAF VET

      I would prefer a Bachman/Palin ticket. Santorum will turn off a lot of voters.

    • Lover of Freedom

      Every vote not cast against Obama is a vote for him. We are responsible to vote for the person who can defeat him.

  • paul

    I just read the Eonomist 2012 issue.
    they suggests that your ideal president
    is the combination of the previous
    four presidents, namely Teddy roosevelt,
    ronald Reagan, george washington and
    abrahma Lincoln. However, you need to
    get their dna from their grave and take
    them to biological laboratory to mix it
    up to create your permanent ideal president. there is about one year to go. you got time.

  • Sergeant Major U.S.M.C. Extreme Far Right Conservative TEApublican

    Extreme far right conservative TEApublican.

    • The Enemy

      Sergeant Major: You are right-on, Sir! The TEA movement is an effort to get the power back where it belongs…in the hands of THE PEOPLE….conservative people. Many folks don’t seem to understand how Constitutionally correct that is.

  • Brandon

    I have trouble seeing Newt as something other than another right-wing NeoCon…Mitt looks like a wolf in sheep’s clothing…and he more than any other candidate really makes me think that nothing in Washington will change if he is elected.

    Ron Paul is refreshing and totally different than any other politician. What excites me about him – even if he is not elected – is the fact that his polling numbers show that the masses are slowly realizing that the political system can and should change.

    I like that.

    • The Enemy

      Brandon: How does a Rick Santorum/Allen West ticket sound to you?

  • Mike W

    I am not a Republican, Democrat, Conservative or Liberal. I am an individualist as apposed to a collectivist!

  • The Enemy

    The establishment members of the GOP have not been conservatives for a long time. The “Party of Lincoln” bears little resemblance to what it originally was and the establishment abandoned its conservative roots long-ago. By infiltrating the GOP, the TEA movement, a movement of The People, seeks to re-establish conservatism in the GOP.

    • Texas Patriot

      Enemy, I completely agree with you regarding the GOP and the TEA Party. But if the GOP succeeds in nominating another RINO and we are subjected to another four years like the last four, a third political party is assured. Problem is will the Republic be capable of ressurection?

    • mickey2

      It’s going to take all of us to keep this Republic together. Just as we have 50 different little state powers that united in a common cause, we need that support now, to put aside differences, really look into the candidates and vote wisely.

  • mickey2

    I fail to see how anyone is more conservative than standing up for the Constitution.

    Look at the stage. Everyone of them stumbles every time anything relating to the Constitution is mentioned. Slowly, they adapt RP’s stance on issues–the Fed and states rights, but lol, they didn’t until RP brought them up. They don’t even have a clear enough knowledge to talk about it.

    OTOH, RP is the leader as they are beginning to shift their talks to the Constitution.

    We are fighting for that raggedy piece of paper. If we don’t vote to back it, give our financial support to keep it in force, then we deserve what we get.

    RP’s donations are small. $5 contributes and that is a small donation to keep us free.