Thread: Just Saw Ron Paul on ABC News Sunday Morning

Sure would be nice to elect some new Senators. One President or another can not get much accomplished without a Congress to support this or that.

I do indeed like what I see with Paul, and Tancredo, but, can you imagine either or both with the current Congress.

Send some bums home. Severe some strings. Get rid of the head librarians.

"Absolute power corrupts absolutely." even in the Congress

TheOstrich wrote

Perhaps if none of them gets the Republican nomination, some combination of them could run as Pres/VP on some sort of independent ticket. Not sure if they would do that, or run as independents, but stranger things have happened.

Ron Paul is saying he will NOT run as a third party candidate I don't know about the others.

MW wrote

I agree that having the three of them running for the same nomination is a serious problem. I think ALIPAC alone proves that point, just look at how divided we are on who to support.

Unfortunately, Hunter, Tancredo, and Paul are still politicians and each of them have the goal to sit in the Oval Office. Unfortunately for us, I don't think two of them will willingly bow out and throw their support behind the one left standing (nice thing to hope for though). Nope, it's not going to happen by choice, but it could happen if one of them can outlast the other two on the campaign trail. My hope is that there will only be one left when the primaries roll around. Furthermore, it would be better if two of them were forced to drop out sooner vice later. Of course by now everyone knows who I hope the one left standing will be.

Maybe those of us here on ALIPAC could have a separate section here in the forums to discuss the pros and cons of each for a bit, and then we could do a straw poll to see where we stand. It would really help any one of them if ALL of us could throw our efforts behind ONE candidate! MW is right though, we are awfully divided at present, but I would hope that many feel as I do, that I would rather have any one of these three instead of ANY of the others running. Right now Ron Paul is my favorite, but I'd much rather see either Tancredo or Hunter in the Oval Office than Guiliani, Romney, McCain, Billary, Obama, etc.

As for voting out the Senators, obviously many of them need voting out anyway. Besides, if the people are disgusted enough to elect one of our three, I bet they'll be throwing out a lot of the sitting Congress as well.

I respect Ron Paul, but I still would go for Tancredo and Hunter on one ticket.

Originally Posted by zeezil

I agree. It looks like either Hillary or Obama on the other side. They are really one and the same. Hillary is Obama in a dress, Obama is Hillary in pants. And both are salivated over by the big money special interests and the ethnocentric groups, like La Raza.

Don't count out Gore, he says he's not running but i think when the time is right he will declare his candidacy. Deep down I'm not sure that the Democrats think that Billary or Obama are electable. And the thought of either of those two or Giuliani being elected scares the hell out of me.

If we are all divided on Hunter, Paul and Tancredo, Mitt Romney will win the nomination unless we agree on one candidate. I still think Hunter is the most logical.

tinybobidaho wrote:

If we are all divided on Hunter, Paul and Tancredo, Mitt Romney will win the nomination unless we agree on one candidate. I still think Hunter is the most logical.

I couldn't agree more, Hunter is the most logical choice to serve as President of the United States!

I won't begrudge anyones their choice of Tancredo (he's my #2 choice). However, I find it very difficult in understanding the logic behind backing him over Duncan Hunter. Tancredo may be a vocal leader to our cause, but Hunter has a reputation of getting things done. That's probably because Hunter is much more tactful in dealing with his peers. It's my understanding that Tancredo has practically alienated his peers with his hostile demeanor and showboating. Furthermore, I don't think there is any question as to which of the two is more qualified to sit in the Oval Office. Hunter and Tancredo are almost lock-step on the border security and illegal immigrant issue, however, it's Hunter's experience and knowledge in other areas that sets him apart from Tancredo when talking about the future leader of our country. Tancredo talks a big game and I appreciate his candor, but Hunter knows how to play the game and gets things done. Hunter's a doer, not a showboat.

I know most of us on ALIPAC have chosen to make border security and illegal immigration our number one issue. However, we must be realistic and understand that our country faces other problems too. The terrorist issue isn't just going to go away and our trade policies with China is something that is going to have to be dealt with. Now, since Tancredo and Hunter share the same ideology on almost all issues - it stands to reason that Hunter's experience is a strong tie-breaker.

Both Hunter and Tancredo want to secure our borders. Tancredo talks about it, but Hunter has actually done something about it. He wrote the bill that extends the San Diego border fence 854-miles through N. Mexico, Arizona, California, and Texas.

As for their personal lives before working in Washington, DC. Hunter dropped out of college during the vietnam war and volunteered his services as an enlisted man to the U.S. Army. He won the Bronze Star for 24 helicopter assaults in Vietnam. Furthermore, he was attached to the 173rd Airborne and 75th Army Rangers. Sadly, more than 1,600 names of 173d soldiers are inscribed on the Vietnam Memorial Wall. Hunter saw a lot of action in both unites. In other words, he risk the ultimate sacrifice for his country. Remember, he wasn't drafted - he was a volunteer!

Like father, like son. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Duncan D. Hunter quit his job and joined the Marine Corps, graduating as a 2nd Lieutenant from Officer Candidate School in March of 2002. Lt. Duncan D. Hunter completed his second tour in Fallujah, Iraq in 2004 serving in Battery A, 1st Battalion, 11th Marines attached to Regimental Combat Team 1, 1st Marine Division. Both, father and son, were not afraid to answer the call to duty. Interestingly, Rep. Hunter's father served his country as an artillery officer in the South Pacific during World War II. The Hunter family is full of patriots who obviously care a great deal about our country! Also, no liberal can say Duncan Hunter didn't send his son off to war.

When Rep. Hunter finished his service he reentered college and worked in farming and construction to supplement his income. The man knows about hard manual labor and sacrifice.

Tancredo's early life is less colorful. He was a History teacher at a junior high school. During the Vietnam conflict, he received a mental health deferment after telling doctors during his physical that he had a history of mental illness and had been treated for depression. I don't hold that against Tancredo. Does this make Tancredo any less of a man than Hunter? No it doesn't, but in my opinion it does strengthen Hunter's position as our next Commander-in-Chief.

Remember, Iran, North Korea, and China are still our enemies. Personally, I would feel much safer with someone at the helm who has experienced war. Hunter has actually seen the devastating effects of war first hand. I also believe he would be much more tactful than Tancredo in dealing with these enemies (avoiding war when possible, yet standing his ground when necessary). Unfortunately, Tancredo has a reputation for being a bit of a hot-head. That can be good on occasion, but probably no such a good trait when facing the prospects of war.

I highly encourage everyone to do their own research on Hunter and Tancredo before making a final decision on who they want to support. For those that have done a thorough investigation of the two - I respect your choice - regardless of who it is.

Tancredo talks alot and puts on a great show for the press, but what has he really done in comparison to Hunter?

Hmmm........figured I'd get blasted by the Tancredo and Paul supporters for my above post.

Originally Posted by MW

Hmmm........figured I'd get blasted by the Tancredo and Paul supporters for my above post.

Nah MW, you were too long-winded. Didn't bother to read it

BearFlagRepublic wrote:

Nah MW, you were too long-winded. Didn't bother to read it

Gee thanks. I'll have you know, I put a lot of effort in identifying Duncan Hunter as a great American worthy of your consideration !

Originally Posted by MW

BearFlagRepublic wrote:

Nah MW, you were too long-winded. Didn't bother to read it

Gee thanks. I'll have you know, I put a lot of effort in identifying Duncan Hunter as a great American worthy of your consideration !

I'll read it when I get a chance