BLS writes: I would respectfully suggest you distill your political beliefs down to the two or three most important to you, then decide which candidate you think is most likely to support them after actually being elected. It’s a two-part process: who can win, and of those, which is better….
No difference between JFK and GWB is a common theme on this blog. It may indicate lack of clear thinking.
I’ve distilled my hot buttons down to five. In fact, this is precisely why I am totally indifferent as to who will win in 2004, just as I was in 2000. I understand that some people believe that it matters greatly if one person is willing to commit 10 percent less fraud than another, as for me, I don’t care to support anyone who embraces the concept. We can agree to disagree, of course. I’m throwing ideas, not rocks.
1. Ending the Federal Reserve and inflation paper.
JK=O
GB=0
GN=1
2. Protecting private gun rights
JK=0
GB=.5
GN=1
3. Leaving the United Nations and all organizations infringing on national sovereignty
JK=0
GB=0
GN=1
4. Respecting the American Constitution.
JK=0
GB=0
GN=1
5. Responding to the petition of We The People.
JK=0
GB=0
GN=.5 (based on his negative comments about income tax, I believe he would at least investigate the claims.)
I believe Gary Nolan of the Libertarian Party – the only Libertarian candidate I’ve interviewed thus far – is by far the best candidate for the Presidency. Management of the undeclared war on method isn’t even in my top ten, especially since I am increasingly of the opinion that Bush is bungling the war that the global jihad has declared on America. So, I’ll cheerfully vote for Gary Nolan, assuming he wins the Libertarian nomination.