Who would you vote for?

Who would you vote for?

  • Rudy Giuliani

    Votes: 6 2.5%
  • John McCain

    Votes: 12 5.0%
  • Fred Thompson

    Votes: 185 76.4%
  • Newt Gingrich

    Votes: 17 7.0%
  • Hillary Clinton

    Votes: 2 0.8%
  • Barack Obama

    Votes: 7 2.9%
  • Al Gore

    Votes: 7 2.9%
  • John Edwards

    Votes: 6 2.5%

  • Total voters
    242
Status
Not open for further replies.

glockman19

Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
3,700
of the major leading candidates in the two leading parties Democrat & Republican, Who do you feel will be the biggest supporter of the Second Amendment?
Candidates That have absolutely NO chance of winning pary's nomination are omitted.

Democrats:
Hillary Clinton
Barack Obama
Al Gore
John Edwards

Republicans:
Rudy Giuliani
John McCain
Fred Thompson
Newt Gingrich

Here is a list of polls already taken:

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm
 
Last edited:
I plan on voting for Ron Paul, but for whatever reason you've chosen to leave him off of your list. Of those you have listed I chose Fred Thompson.
 
Check Mc Cain and Ron Paul both sorry as a conservative



LETTER FROM WASHINGTON
Obama more liberal than Kucinich, analysis reveals
By Steven Thomma
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON _ The most liberal member of Congress running for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination isn't Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio.

It's Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.

And the Republican candidate who's grown less conservative over his years in Congress? Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

Those are among the interesting findings in a recent analysis of votes by all the members of Congress who are running for president.

They cut to the heart of debates going on among activists in both major parties: Can a liberal Democrat win a general election? Which Republican is ideologically pure enough to win support from conservatives?

The study, released this month by the National Journal, a respected inside-the-Beltway research report, will help voters cut through the spin and hype of TV sound bites in coming months and judge these candidates for themselves.

Unlike TV commercials that focus on a single vote, these rankings are based on comprehensive voting records. The 2006 scores, for example, were based on as many as 95 votes on such issues as federal spending, tax cuts, the war in Iraq, embryonic stem-cell research and border security.

On the Democratic side, the analysis of "lifetime" voting records shows Obama with the most liberal ranking with a score of 84.3 after two full years in the Senate. Under the National Journal's ratings formula, that means Obama's record was more liberal than 84.3 percent of his Senate colleagues. Kucinich's lifetime record, meanwhile, was more liberal than 79.2 percent of House of Representatives members.

Editors at the National Journal note that they don't compare Senate voting records directly to that of House members because the votes often differ. Nevertheless, the ratings show that Obama's Senate record is more liberal than Kucinich's in the House.

On the Democratic side, the analysis of "lifetime" voting records shows Obama as the most liberal with a score of 84.3 after two full years in the Senate. The most liberal score possible was 99. The lifetime liberal scores for the other Democrats, in their respective chambers:

- Kucinich, 79.4

- Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, 79.2

- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, 78.8

- Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, 76.8

The rankings differ if you look only at their 2006 scores. That year Kucinich's House record edged Obama's Senate record by one point as the most liberal, and Clinton was the least liberal, as she sought re-election and prepared to launch her presidential campaign.

Their ideological purity also varies by issue areas. Obama, for example, is more liberal on economic and foreign policy issues and slightly less liberal on social policies. Clinton and Dodd are most liberal on social policy questions, less so on economic and foreign policy votes.

Biden is most liberal on economics, much less so foreign policy. The most conservative member of Congress seeking the Republican nomination - based on lifetime voting records - is Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, with a score of 82.5. The most conservative score possible was 99.

Lifetime scores for the other Republicans:

- Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, 81

- Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, 75.9

- Sen. John McCain of Arizona, 71.8

- Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, 71.5

- Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, 51.7

The year-to-year scores can reveal consistency or change. McCain, for example, grew increasingly less conservative in recent years. He started with annual conservative scores consistently in the 80s when he first went to the Senate in 1987, dipped to the 70s during the mid- 1990s, into the 60s in the late 1990s and into the 50s starting in 2004.

The GOP candidates' votes also reveal big differences issue to issue.

Brownback, for example, got a score of 53 on social issues for his 2006 votes and a 92 for votes on economic issues.

Hagel, too, got lower conservative marks for social issues and higher conservative scores for economic and foreign policy votes.

McCain got a 46 for social issues - left of center - and more conservative grades for economic and foreign policy issues.


For more on the National Journal scorecard, http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/


For comments or questions: www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/special_packages/election2008/qa_forum.htm


Steven Thomma is chief political correspondent for the McClatchy Washington bureau. Write to him at: McClatchy Newspapers, 700 12th St. N.W., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20005-3994, or e-mail [email protected].


_krdDartInc++; document.write('');
_krdDartInc++; document.write('');
_krdDartInc++; document.write('');

if (typeof(krd_topix_property) != 'undefined') { document.write('var topixcats = new Array();');
 
The question of the poll was and still is... Who listed do you feel will be the biggest supporter of the Second Amendment?

Ron Paul is not listed

Ron Paul has absolutely NO chance of winning. He may be the Libertarian candidate but He'll get about as many votes as any 3rd party candidate. The reason he was left off as a choice is there is NO chance he will become president of The United States. Sorry guys.

As for the competing poll. It's bacause Ron Paul was left off of this one. This poll is only for candidates that have a serious chance of becomming President. Ron Paul is not one of them. I'd go as far to say I'll cut my nuts off if he becomes the next president. I'm that sure he won't. I bet he won't get more than 3-5% of the vote if he goes all the way as the Libertarian Candidate. I'll even go so far as to say he won't get as many votes as Ralph Nader.

LawBot5000, Bill Richardson is a good guy but too far behind his counterparts in the party. Also you didn't read the question. Again it is Who listed do you feel will be the biggest supporter of the Second Amendment?
 
Personally, I prefer Thompson, because to date of the available possible options he seems the best compromise of Good and Electable.

Ron Paul might be arguably better, but doesn't have near the chance of actually making it to the Oval Office.
Rudy Guiliani has a better shot of winning, but would sell us out so fast that there wouldn't be any point to the victory.

So it's still Fred for me, unless he stands up and says "never mind, I ain't getting in this fight" or someone better comes along.

-K

as to the "biggest supporter of the 2A" - well.. far as I remember Thompson and Gingrich are the only of all those listed that haven't either spoken against it or actually worked against it.
 
Paul

Another write in. I don't care if he does not win. All of the candidates you have posted are too extremist and I will not vote for them.
 
"Ron Paul has absolutely NO chance of winning. He may be the Libertarian candidate but He'll get about as many votes as any 3rd party candidate. The reason he was left off as a choice is there is NO chance he will become president of The United States. Sorry guys"

I sincerely hope you are wrong, I believe there is hope.
I will be voting for Ron Paul, as will a great many other Americans.
 
There's only no hope for Ron Paul if everyone writes him off like that. What if the British fought WWII with that mentality? (enh, we already lost so who cares).

Besides, with all the "main stream" candidates that the media has already hand-picked being absolutely worthless, I'm fairly certain that one of the candidates that "have no chance of winning" will gain more attention as the campaign continues. Just wait until the debates. Once voters hear the same old recycled garbage from the front runners I think they're going to be looking for someone else.
 
None of the above. The only one that has a chance for my vote would be Obama, and he has the classic liberal illness when it comes to certain issues...cough cough....2nd...cough...and it really sours my liking for him.
 
I'd have to go with Thompson - the conservative with the best chance of winning. He may not be as great theoretically as Ron Paul, but he's much better than the other GOP candidates, and he's got a much better chance of being elected.

He polled third place in a list of GOP - that's name recognition, and he's got charisma. Higher than Mitt Romney, and he's not even said he's in the race!

CR
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top