Thread: Who should we vote for to get rid of illegal alien invaders?

Originally Posted by BearFlagRepublic

Don't believe the hype. That is exactly what they want you to believe. Thompson is a complete insider beltway boy. He used to be a lobbyist for God's sake.

I'm well aware of his lobbyist background.

My plan is to vote for Hunter or Tancredo if either survives until the primary election. Hunter will be my first choice. If neither makes it, I'll stay home election day. I doubt very seriously I'll skip the general election, even though I anticipate a nominee not to my liking. I'll vote for whichever Republican wins the nomination, as I believe Hillary will be the Democratic pick, and I feel very strongly she must be defeated. ANYONE(except maybe John McCain) is better than Hillary. I have a very close friend who works for the Clinton Foundation, and he says he will not vote for her. The traitor in the Clinton ranks will be crossing to the dark side and voting for Romney.

I don't trust Thompson. I saw a clip from awhile ago where he said he supported a "pathway" (i.e., amnesty) for illegals in our country.

IMO, we need candidates to specifically say that the best way to deal with illegal aliens currently in the country is by a strategy of attrition through enforcement. Any candidate (such as Giluiani) who spouts rhetoric about "pathways," "shadows" or the usual nonsensical euphemisms for amnesty, should NOT receive our support.

Originally Posted by Saki

My plan is to vote for Hunter or Tancredo if either survives until the primary election. Hunter will be my first choice. If neither makes it, I'll stay home election day. I doubt very seriously I'll skip the general election, even though I anticipate a nominee not to my liking. I'll vote for whichever Republican wins the nomination, as I believe Hillary will be the Democratic pick, and I feel very strongly she must be defeated. ANYONE(except maybe John McCain) is better than Hillary. I have a very close friend who works for the Clinton Foundation, and he says he will not vote for her. The traitor in the Clinton ranks will be crossing to the dark side and voting for Romney.

I will be voting Third Party (probably Constitution Party) if one of our guys don't take the nomination. I understand what you are saying about Hillary, but just voting against her is the same mentality that landed us Bush. We really need to get out of the 2 party mind-set. If the Reps nominate another OBL puppet I am at my witts end. I will be done with them. I encourage EVERYONE to register independent or Constitution --and vote that way -- if our guys don't get the nomination. I know this will kill the Rep Party, but IMO it needs to be killed as the precursor of establishing a real patriotic party. Otherwise we can expect more Chamber of Commerce puppets, and Carl Rove brainwashed morons with the "Hispanic Strategy."

Originally Posted by BearFlagRepublic

Originally Posted by Saki

My plan is to vote for Hunter or Tancredo if either survives until the primary election. Hunter will be my first choice. If neither makes it, I'll stay home election day. I doubt very seriously I'll skip the general election, even though I anticipate a nominee not to my liking. I'll vote for whichever Republican wins the nomination, as I believe Hillary will be the Democratic pick, and I feel very strongly she must be defeated. ANYONE(except maybe John McCain) is better than Hillary. I have a very close friend who works for the Clinton Foundation, and he says he will not vote for her. The traitor in the Clinton ranks will be crossing to the dark side and voting for Romney.

I will be voting Third Party (probably Constitution Party) if one of our guys don't take the nomination. I understand what you are saying about Hillary, but just voting against her is the same mentality that landed us Bush. We really need to get out of the 2 party mind-set. If the Reps nominate another OBL puppet I am at my witts end. I will be done with them. I encourage EVERYONE to register independent or Constitution --and vote that way -- if our guys don't get the nomination. I know this will kill the Rep Party, but IMO it needs to be killed as the precursor of establishing a real patriotic party. Otherwise we can expect more Chamber of Commerce puppets, and Carl Rove brainwashed morons with the "Hispanic Strategy."

I agree with you completely about the need for a viable third party. My main concern is that we don't have enough time to accomplish that before Nov.08. The Republican party deserves/needs to die, and I say that as a former Republican of many years. If we're going to have any impact on the election via the Constitution or other independent party, we need to start now. I have little hope for that Unity08 enterprise since they don't seem to have a solid platform. The only thing binding them is a disillusionment with the two-party system.

I voted third party here in California, for Art Oliver instead of the global socialist Arnold. Although Art didn't come close I do feel that I made the right decision. Especially when Arnold pushes for an Austrian health plan that insures anchor babies and young illegals.

Will ALIPAC endorse a presidential candidate? I know ALIPAC endorses congressmen and senators why not presidential candidates?

Originally Posted by tinybobidaho

If I thought Duncan Hunter could be elected, I'd vote for him. However, I don't hold out much hope for him or Tancredo. I know you'll think I'm nuts, but I think Mitt Romney may be our man.

I agree with you but not for the same reasons. The only reason the likes of Hunter, Tancredo may not get elected is because of money. Isn't it true that the candidate who raises the most money generally gets the nomination?

People seem to be misinterpreting some of Ron Paul's actions on certain immigration related bills as as signal that he is weak on illegal immigration, or that he is actually for it! And that's a real pity because it couldn't be more further from the truth.

One thing that I've discovered in all these months I've been researching Dr. Paul, is that unlike other legislators, he actually READS the bills that come before him! And he's a stickler for the finer details to make sure that no additional tax burdens are placed on American taxpayers in paying for things that are superfluous.

Here's a brief excerpt from one of Dr. Paul's articles:

December 19,Â* 2005Â*Â*


Congress passed an immigration bill last week that takes some small steps toward asserting control over our nation’s porous borders.Â* I supported the bill despite its lack of substance, in the hope that it will move America in the right direction on the critical issue of illegal immigration.

Some measures in the bill sound good, but are in effect superfluous. Do we need new legislation requiring the Department of Homeland Security to achieve “operational control of the bordersâ€