Question for Ronnie Raygun
 

So Ronnie, I posed this question to you in another thread, but you either missed it or ignored it.

Justice Roy Moore is considering a third-party run for the presidency with the Constitution Party. With proper coalition building, and the development of a platform that appeals to social conservatives and economic libertarians, Moore could potentially do some harm to Bush.

You have stated previously that Bush has "NO domestic policy." You hate his healthcare spending. According to you, he is acting like a Democrat.

Would you support the candidacy of Roy Moore??? Are you truly a conservative, or are you more so a Republican...?

I like this question, so even though it's not for me I'm going to answer it.

I heartily support the candidacy of Roy Moore because he doesn't have a chance in Hell of winning and any votes he gets are going to be from the Republican/Bush-leaning side.

Even though this is a little off topic I'll say it anyway...

A lot of people give Nader a lot of shit for stealing votes in 2000. But The thing is if Buchanan didn't run it is quite possible for Bush to have won Oregon, Iowa, Wisconsin, and New Mexico. Which if he did win those states he wouldn't have even needed the Florida victory.

My point is that what the selfish, whiny liberal democrats need to realise that when you run from president you are not entitled to votes, you EARN them. If Gore would have payed more attention to these so called "3rd rate" issues, Nader probably wouldn't have much of a reason to run in the first place.

Or, maybe Gore wasn't so much a candidate as the puppet of the democratic party.
You don't seem to realize that Republican and Democrat candidates aren't candidates that run or support issues based on any sort of decision that they themselves have actually made.
Karl Rove has been behind every republican president in my lifetime. I'm not sure who's got his hand up the Democrat's proverbial asshole, but he could take lessons in focus from Rove.

HI, RONNIE!!!!!!!!

Nadlo, how come you're not interested in this thread?

Last I hear, Roy was considering a run for the governorship of Alabama...which frightens me as Alabama probably has enough morons supporting him to put him in the governors mansion. Every other day, some other fuck nozzle is filing a lawsuit to get him reinstated to the suppreme court. I hate Alabama and I've lived here all of my life.

I'LL BET RONNIE IS A BIG FAN OF ALABAMA. SO RONNIE, WHAT DO YA SAY? SHOULD HE CONTAIN HIS HORRID BELIEFS WITHIN THE ALREADY CRUMBLING LIBERTARIAN UTOPIA OF ALABAMA, OR SHOULD HE THROW HIS HAT INTO THE NATIONAL RING....? WHERE WOULD YOUR SUPPORT GO???

Are you on crack, or something?

I wouldn't touch Alabama with a 5' pole.

Like your pole is 5'.

Like your pole is 5".

Like your pole is 5'".

sorry i'm gonna leave this forum now

Sorry Kevin, I didn't see this until now....

To answer your question.....I don't know anything about this guy and I doubt he'll be on the ballot.

We'll have to wait and see.

You don't know anything about Justice Roy Moore!?

Alabama. Ten Commandments monument. Kicked out. Serious dickhead.

Oh! Yeah!

That guy......

Well, that's all I know about him....

Well, you can probably go to www.politics1.com and do some research on him if you so wish.

You're right, he may not be on the ballot in every state, particularly running on the Constitution Party line. However, the C.P. has "affiliate" parties, such as the U.S. Tax Payers Party in Michigan, which would essentially be the ground troops for getting him on the ballot in those states.

And clearly, it wouldn't necessarily matter if he got on in every state. Nader didn't get on every state in 2000, and I'm not certain whether or not Perot got on every state in 92-93.

He'd probably get on the ballot in every state that would most directly hurt Bush, INCLUDING your home state of Georgia, and THAT'S all that matters for the sake of my question....

EDIT: On the point of ballot access, I found this on the Constitution Party's website. It's a status statement from the Party's national chair from last month.

From http://www.constitution-party.net/news.php?aid=61:

"But the best news I have is this:

On November 7th, at our National Committee meeting in Detroit, Howard Phillips proposed the nomination of my good friend, Michael Anthony Peroutka, Chairman of the Constitution Party of Maryland, as our stand-in Presidential candidate for ballot access purposes. Support was unanimous. I was confirmed as the Vice-Presidential candidate for the same purpose.

Of course, the final decision on our candidates won't come until our National Convention in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania to be held June 23 - 26th, 2004. But I couldn't be happier that Michael is seeking the nomination of the Constitution Party."

TRANSLATION: "WE REALLY WANT A HIGH PROFILE CANDIDATE LIKE ROY MOORE TO BE OUR GUY, AND WE'RE ALREADY SECURING BALLOT STATUS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY TO MAKE A RUN AS OUR CANDIDATE MORE ATTRACTIVE."

http://www.worldmagblog.com/archives/000850.html

This is an interesting blog write-up on the potential presidential run of Roy Moore. If you are a believer in the conspiracy of the liberal media (as I know you are Ronnie), then you should buy the argument that Moore would get a lot of press, simply b/c the liberal press has an axe to grind with Bush, right Ronnie? And apparently the GOP is already trying to stomp this little brush fire by getting Moore to campaign throughout Alabama for Bush and the GOP. To my understanding, he has failed to do this, and instead makes regular appearances/speeches at Constitution Party events. Take that for what it's worth.....

I don't know......I just don't think there's anything here to talk about. So far it just seems like a lib's wet dream.

Does anyone else think it would be insanely humorous if he got elected? :lol In a sickening, stab-in-the face kind of way

Stop tap dancing around my question.....

You don't know who the guy is, you didn't know he's concidering running, you don't voice an opinion...

I guess since you call it 'a lib wet dream' (and while I'm a lib, my political dreams are rarely 'wet') you are not in favor of his doing it, but you can't offer more than that?

At least when I was prompted to say what I thought about Nader running I said it was sadly irrelavant.

I just don't know enough about the guy......it's really not worth commenting on unless he's on my ballot.

We'll see how it plays out....

Maybe I'm Naive, but I imagined this guy would be something of a hero in the born again community.