This thread is for those BGP members who typically vote Republican. What I'm interested in hearing is what you're looking for in a presidential candidate. This is a discussion thread, not a debate thread.

 

Be warned! If you make a post in this thread that attacks another member's opinions, if you attack the Republicans in general, or any other spiteful post, your post will be deleted.

I personally look for a stereotypical conservative. One who is pro-life, pro-second amendment, and pro-small government. I want a person who is for a strong military, and wants to protect the US from criminals, foreign and domestic. If I could make the perfect president he would also be honest and command respect. Also, a person who is a good orator, such as Ronald Reagan, who can express him self in a professional manner and unify the people.

 

Disclaimer: When I used masculine nouns such as himself, I was not saying the president should be a male. I would vote for a female if I thought that person would make a good president, ie: Condoleeza Rice.

I look for someone who is strong on national defense. My number one issue. I also look for someone who can control spending, while holding the line on taxes, if not decreasing them. I look for someone who can control our borders and curb the mass illegal immigration. I look for a president who keeps a focus on the economy by increasing jobs and creating opportunities for all who wish to pursue them. I want a president that is pro-life...

I want someone who will appoint judges who will rule based on written law, not what their opinion the law should say.

 

I want someone who will enforce our borders BEFORE even thinking about any amnesty for illegals that are here now.

 

I'm not actually a Republican though, my registration is Democratic although I am more likely to vote for Republicans. Should I move this to the Democrat thread???

While a pro-life candidate is my primary concern I would also like to see a candidate who will be for a strong military, protect our borders (no amnesty or work programs for illegals, etc.) a fiscal conservative, small government as well as the ability to communicate. Not much to ask, right?

I personally look for a stereotypical conservative. One who is pro-life, pro-second amendment, and pro-small government. I want a person who is for a strong military, and wants to protect the US from criminals, foreign and domestic. If I could make the perfect president he would also be honest and command respect. Also, a person who is a good orator, such as Ronald Reagan, who can express him self in a professional manner and unify the people.

 

Disclaimer: When I used masculine nouns such as himself, I was not saying the president should be a male. I would vote for a female if I thought that person would make a good president, ie: Condoleeza Rice.

 

What he said.:thumb:

Put my disclaimer up first: This is what I look for in a Presidential candidate whether it is Republican or Democrat. I don't really care about the letter after their name but rather they represent my values. That is the same for almost any election. Local is a little different.

 

That said.

 

Pro-life first and foremost.

 

From that point, fiscally conservative (my biggest disappointment in GW) and putting clampers on the pork spending.

 

Strong military presence and not afraid to act decisively when it is called for.

 

Look for a President who wants to put money in my pocket and let me spend it to help keep the economy strong. They need to be about creating jobs and let the wages be determined by the private enterprise system.

 

They are a committed Christian meaning they look to put the practices of their faith 24/7 and not just showing up on a Sunday morning.

Need to add this:

At the same time have a heart that wants to help those who need help while clamping down on those that just want to use the system to not work.

I want a man who understands and appreciates the functions and limitations of the executive branch, and has an appreciation for the history of the office.

 

I prefer a man who is gifted in debate.

 

I want a man who is very serious about his role as the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, keeps up with emerging military tactics and technology, supports it with the country's wallet, and either grasps tactics in battle time himself or follows closely the reins he has turned over to his generals.

 

I don't want a policy wonk. I want the President's closest advisor to be a policy wonk.

 

I want a man who has been married and has raised children. I want a man who is physically fit (that excludes me). I want a man with an advanced degree in some area. I prefer a man whose educational credentials are impeccable. I prefer an Academy graduate above all others. I want a man who has spent a considerable period of time working in the private sector, preferring a law or finance background above others. I then prefer a man whom has also had at least some administrative government experience.

 

I prefer a man who has suffered loss and dealt with it.

 

I want a man who is well-versed in etiquette and protocol, both domestic and foreign.

 

I want a man who has a demonstrated leadership background. In my walk through life, I am still defining what that really means.

 

I want a man who is tough enough to win an election.

 

I want a man who acts the same way when noone is looking. I want a man who commands respect through the force of his voice and gaze. I want a man who starts the conversation, and gets others to end it.

I want a man who understands and appreciates the functions and limitations of the executive branch, and has an appreciation for the history of the office.

 

I prefer a man who is gifted in debate.

 

I want a man who is very serious about his role as the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, keeps up with emerging military tactics and technology, supports it with the country's wallet, and either grasps tactics in battle time himself or follows closely the reins he has turned over to his generals.

 

I don't want a policy wonk. I want the President's closest advisor to be a policy wonk.

 

I want a man who has been married and has raised children. I want a man who is physically fit (that excludes me). I want a man with an advanced degree in some area. I prefer a man whose educational credentials are impeccable. I prefer an Academy graduate above all others. I want a man who has spent a considerable period of time working in the private sector, preferring a law or finance background above others. I then prefer a man whom has also had at least some administrative government experience.

 

I prefer a man who has suffered loss and dealt with it.

 

I want a man who is well-versed in etiquette and protocol, both domestic and foreign.

 

I want a man who has a demonstrated leadership background. In my walk through life, I am still defining what that really means.

 

I want a man who is tough enough to win an election.

 

I want a man who acts the same way when noone is looking. I want a man who commands respect through the force of his voice and gaze. I want a man who starts the conversation, and gets others to end it.

 

A lot of what you require is found in one Democratic candidate. This should be an interesting election.

A lot of what you require is found in one Democratic candidate. This should be an interesting election.

 

Which democratic candidate are you referring to?

!. A candidate who is at least as concerned with civil responsibilities as he/she is with civil rights.

 

2. A candidate who is dedicated to nominating individuals to the federal judiciary who are strict constructionists rather than broad interpreters who "troll" for new meaning (ex. Scalia and Thomas types instead of Ginsberg and Souter types).

 

3. A candidate who will govern with a philosophy formed from traditional Judeo-Christian standards.

 

4. A candidate who not only believes that life begins at conception but is also willing to govern with this unwavering belief as his/her hallmark. He/She would be "prochoice". However, that choice is to refrain from causing the creation of another human being by acting responsibily.

 

5. A candidate who will govern with a goal to help the truly needy but will take the necessary steps to cut off the parasites and the con artists.

 

6. A candidate who realizes that, if it weren't for the haves producing jobs, there would be little work for the have nots. Contrary to what some seem to believe, capitalism requires that some have more than others.

 

7. A candidate with backbone to stand up for what he/she believes regardless of what may be said in the media. Bush has really stumbled in this respect.

 

8. A candidate who makes every attempt to avoid armed conflict but who is willing to do whatever is needed to protect our country. He/She, if forced to fight, must do so to win and to do whatever it takes to win regardless of how it is reported by the media. Can anyone imagine how D-Day would have been reported by CNN and MSNBC? Quite possibly, we would have all been speaking German.

 

9. All in all, I suppose I would like a candidate who is a combination of Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan with a little more emphasis on the latter.

 

 

Caveat: While it is unlikely that there is any Republican who can measure up to what we want, it should be remembered, particularly by the fundamentalists, that a quarter of a glass or a half glass will quench our thirst somewhat while an empty glass (Rodham-Clinton, Gore, Breck Girl, Obama) will be a disaster. If you "punish" the Republican Party by not voting or by voting for the Democrat just because you don't find the Republican candidate "pure" enough, you will be cutting your own throat. It wouldn't be a very smart move for furthering your mission.

Which democratic candidate are you referring to?

 

John Edwards

 

Hearsay's points where I see the similarity most:

 

 

 

I want a man who has been married and has raised children. I want a man who is physically fit (that excludes me). I want a man with an advanced degree in some area. I prefer a man whose educational credentials are impeccable. I prefer an Academy graduate above all others. I want a man who has spent a considerable period of time working in the private sector, preferring a law or finance background above others. I then prefer a man whom has also had at least some administrative government experience.

 

I prefer a man who has suffered loss and dealt with it.

 

 

Several others of his points (Hearsay's), I personally feel that Edwards meets, but realize that there may be some legitimate room for debate regarding.

 

Overall, Hearsay's post exhibits what I personally feel is important in a candidate of any party.

I have said before that John Edwards is an admirable candidate in many respects. There are others here who do not, which appears to reflect their general view of lawyers as much as anything else. That unfortunate reputation is earned, albeit misinformed. I question Edwards' ability to be an effective Commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and his toughness to win an election. I admire him for effort, though. If I were a Democrat, he would be the most attractive choice to date.

Incidentally, and with all due respect to the fairer sex here on our board, I used the word "man" for a reason. It would take a woman of extraordinary strength and mental toughness to meet my requirements. I have not yet met such a woman, not even Margaret Thatcher. From my reading of history, Joan of Arc might have given me reason to pause, or perhaps Boadicea, Queen of the Celts, but certainly nobody current.