Which republican are you or are you not supporting?

[edczxcvbnm]

This is pretty much a spin off of the other thread but for the republican side of the political spectrum.

So with different winners everywhere, there still isn't really a front runner. But I think we can all agree that Giuliani is a douche and is going down in flames XD Okay seriously...here we go.

State, First, Second, Third
Iowa: Huckabee(34%), Romney(25%), Thompson(13%)
Wyoming: Romney(67%), Thompson(25%), Hunter(8%)
New Hampshire: McCain(37%), Romney(31%), Huckabee(11%)
Michigan: Romney(39%), McCain(30%), Huckabee(16%)
Nevada: Romney(51%), Ron Paul(14%), McCain(13%)
South Carolina: McCain(33%), Huckabee(30%), Thompson(16%)

So that is the current breakdown of states that have already voted. Thompson is out as is Hunter. Looks like Ron Paul has no chance in hell at this point. Giuliani has been staying out of everything to focus on Florida and the big states come super Tuesday and in a race where it seems like the true front runner is questionable, it isn't a bad strategy...but he is falling hard and fast in Florida now but is still banking on Feb. 5th. I think he has no real shot as well.

Having said that I don't really care for any of them and I am putting them all in the poll anyways :D


Like...so I forgot to click the option to make a poll so now I can't add one. Please add the following to the poll

Romney
McCain
Huckabee
Giuliani
Ron Paul
Thompson
Hunter
Other

Thank you

[leeza]You're welcome. :)[/leeza]

[Quindiana Jones]

I'm proud of you, ed.

[Tavrobel]

McCain, please. Guiliani is dead in the medicare water, as it were. This has got to be McCain's bread and butter, here in Florida.

[Flying Mullet]

I'm not too fond of any of them, but of the front-runners, I can't stand Romney and Huckabee. Romney has no backbone and won't take a stand on any issue, changing his story and opinion regularly to appease whichever constituency he is speaking to at the moment (more so than your average politician). Huckabee, while a nice guy, lives in la-la land has no grasp of reality and tries to view everything in black-and-white where Christianity and everything in the Bible is correct and cannot be wrong. He makes Bush look like a balanced person who considers the liberal and non-conservative Christian opinion.

[Avarice-ness]

McCain, I think if anyone can handle the war situation that we have gotten ourselves into, it'd be a man who's been through being a POW in vietnam.

I normally support democrat but I'll be supporting McCain because I believe he is the best overall, where as other canidates have some ideals that are really great, then some that just suck.

[Madame Adequate]

Paul, ideally. In practice, McCain.

Guiliani, whatever his policies, could be playing a dangerous game. If he were to become the Republican candidate, he's risked alienating voters in these early states. I guess a lot will still go with him on principle, but the swing voters - and those are the ones you want to court - could be turned off by his apparent neglect.

[Tavrobel]

Not just that, but he's rather risked alienating members of his supposed party. The only real thing about him that is GOP is his stance on terror; half of his platform is 9/11. He's liberal on immigration, isn't quite exactly what one could describe as having "Christian values," and is a city boy. Not to mention that he ignored the early states, which are purely used for momentum.

Florida's electoral slate is greater than all of the previous states combined (at least, it is for the Dems), and is winner-take-all if I recall it so. It was ca calculated risk on Guiliani's part, and I would say that he's lost the gamble. McCain's win in SC could possibly have been what spelled doom for him, because McCain, who is closer to independent (McCain-Feingold, anyone?), won in what is probably the most right of all of the formerly Solid South. In the past several elections, those GOP members who won SC did not fail to get their party's nomination.

[Breine]

Not supporting any of the republicans :P

[Bolivar]

If he didn't drop out, Fred Thompson, off the strength of how much Law & Order I watch, even though we probably disagree on quite a few things. I would be able to sleep at night knowing DA Arthur Branch was in charge of our country.

Ron Paul is the only one who acknowledges some of the things I do, but his political views on what should be done on each individual issue is not what I would agree with. Foreign Policy, for the most part I would agree, but not really with anything else. Oh wait, legalization of certain things, too.

At first I liked Romney (making healthcare work in MA), Huckabee (aware of him for a few years now, seems like a reasonable guy), McCain (a pragmatist), and even Giuliani (I'm a leftist, but in NJ we know he's not as crazy as alot of the rest of the country is making him out to be). So I wouldn't have a problem with any of them, but in the debates they're all talking about Ronald Reagan, alot of ignorant things on the war, and too much immigration (any political scientist will tell you this is always brought to the popular level from covert or blatant racism). So now I wouldn't want any of them to win. However, it's the moderators who are molding the scope of their arguments so who knows what they would really do.

I'm still voting for a Democrat either way.

[Heath]

Florida's electoral slate is greater than all of the previous states combined (at least, it is for the Dems), and is winner-take-all if I recall it so. It was ca calculated risk on Guiliani's part, and I would say that he's lost the gamble. McCain's win in SC could possibly have been what spelled doom for him, because McCain, who is closer to independent (McCain-Feingold, anyone?), won in what is probably the most right of all of the formerly Solid South. In the past several elections, those GOP members who won SC did not fail to get their party's nomination.

McCain-Feingold would certainly be an interesting ticket that I'm sure would turn the heads of a few Democrats as well as Republicans.

Anyway, of the Republicans, the only one I like at all is McCain. Otherwise, I'm simply more interested in the Democrat race.

[rubah]

I think it would be neat for ron paul to jump ahead, but aside from that, I guess I favor mccain and huckabee. McCain because he's not a total dumb, and huckabee because he's much less of a dumb than I percieve the others to be.

I don't really know about hunter or thompson or anything, but guiliani is below them. (i.e. the bottom)

[Martyr]

I'd love to consider Huckabee because he's a huge Christian backed by Chuck Norris or maybe Romney, but McCain's a better candidate and he's getting my vote.

Alas.

Edit: Right, the Raoul Duke thing. I can't remember how to edit that. Slashes or something?

[Shiny]

I don't support Huckabee. Almost everything he supports and opposes I'm completely against. For instance, he supports the right to bear arms whereas I'm for gun control. He opposes gay marriage and I'm all for it.

[Martyr]

I practice gun control. I use both hands.

No, seriously, I've been ganged up on in college to many times to count when I talked about maintaining that humans should be able to protect themselves from weapon wielding criminals.

I still don't even understand the argument against guns.

But I know better than to assume that we all don't want to get murdered. Now.

[rubah]

supposedly if no one has guns, no one needs to be protected from them.
but then you have people who don't care about the laws and have them anyways.