What Would Happen If Pat Buchanan Ran In 2008?

[Fat_Sunny]

Let's Say That In 2008 The Dems Nominate Hillary, And The Repubs Nominate McCain. They Have Similar Views On Immigration, On A Number Of Social Issues, And On Globalization.

Then Let's Say Pat Buchanan Jumps In With Say Tom Tancredo As His Running Mate As The Isolationist, Anti-Immigrant, America First Ticket.

Buchanan Would Pull Not Only Some Conservative Republicans, But Also Blue Collar Democrats. Would Buchanan Pull Enough Votes From The Dems In Michigan To Throw The State To McCain? Would He Pull Enough Votes From McCain In The West To Throw Some Of Those States To Hillary?

How Would A Strong Buchanan Campaign Shake Up The Election?

[cupcakelove]

I know he'd be able to win Florida.

[Dudeman]

"There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as was the Cold War itself." -PB, 1992

[crb1]

Didn't he run once before on a third party ticket, or am I confusing him with someone else?

[badorties]

he still a papist, and that's just one of the few reasons he'd have a snowball's chance in hell in making a dent in the two party system

[Fat_Sunny]

Didn't he run once before on a third party ticket, or am I confusing him with someone else?

Yep, He Ran In 2000. Remember, All The Old Jewish Ladies In Palm Beach County Punched His Name On The Butterfly Ballot!

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Didn't he run once before on a third party ticket, or am I confusing him with someone else?

Ross Perot ran for Pres in 92 as a reform party candidate. You might be referring to him

[epo]

Yep, He Ran In 2000. Remember, All The Old Jewish Ladies In Palm Beach County Punched His Name On The Butterfly Ballot!

The butterfly ballot fiasco will never happen again. The lesson has been learned.

That being said, the greatest gift that Pat Buchanan could give the Democratic Party is for him to run for President on a third party ticket. The immigrant issue is enough to splinter republican voters, but after eight years of Bush, democrats are voting for their party. There is too much at stake for Democrats, not at the least of that front is the next 20 years of the Supreme Court.

Fuck, if Pat wants to run, I as a liberal would probably shit in the pool and write him a check.

[FUNKMAN]

i think if he ran 10 feet he would have a heart attack... fat bastid

don't like e'm

[ChimneyFish]

I predict the arrival of the Antichrist.

[Yuppie_Scum]

His hypothetical campaign would go absolutely nowhere.

Who would give him money? Remember, Ross Perot spent his own money.

[Fat_Sunny]

That being said, the greatest gift that Pat Buchanan could give the Democratic Party is for him to run for President on a third party ticket. The immigrant issue is enough to splinter republican voters...

Don't Be So Sure About That. Remember That George Wallace Won The Democrat Primary In Michigan In 1968. Working Class Joe-6-Pack Is More Anti-Immigrant Than Any Country-Club Republican.

In The Electoral-Vote-Rich Old Industrial Heartland That Has Lost Jobs To The Far East, States Like Michigan, Ohio, And Pennsylvania, This Could Be Big Trouble For The Democrats, While In The South And West, Probably More Of A Problem For The Republicans.

Unlike A Ralph Nader, Who Pulled Votes Only Away From The Dems, Buchanan Would Pull From Both Parties. Depending On Which States, And How Much, It Could Be Enough To Sway The Election.

[Yuppie_Scum]

I really don't think there is any comparison between Wallace in 1968 and Pat Buchanan in 2008.

George Wallace ran as an anti-civil rights/ states rights "outsider" for the Democratic nomination with minimal success. Are you proposing that Buchanan run as a Republican or as a third party candidate? If he's running as a third party candidate, then there would be no primary. If there's no primary, he would have to jump into the general election directly without the opportunity to build any sort of momentum (as if that's even possible anymore with the condensed primary schedule).

[Fat_Sunny]

Are you proposing that Buchanan run as a Republican or as a third party candidate? If he's running as a third party candidate, then there would be no primary. If there's no primary, he would have to jump into the general election directly without the opportunity to build any sort of momentum (as if that's even possible anymore with the condensed primary schedule).


Dude, F_S Is Not Proposing That He Run. He Is Asking YOU PEOPLE What You Think Would Happen If He Ran As A Third Party Candidate On A Protectionist America First + Anti-Immigrant Platform.

He Would Not Be Able To Raise the 100 Miillion To Be A Truly Competitive Candidate. But He Would Throw A Monkey Wrench Into The Election In Two Ways: (1) By Siphoning More Votes Away From One Party Or Another, And (2) Forcing The Dems To Be More Protectionist And The Repubs To Be More Anti-Immigrant.

If You Don't Think A Candidate Who Gets 5% Of The Vote Has An Impact, Ask Al Gore What He Thinks Of Ralph Nader!!!

[DarkHippie]

he runs just about every year and the only reason that he runs is to keep the republican candidate sucking the religious right's holy cock

[Bulldogcakes]

I think ol' Pat is done running for president. He's been there, done that. He's not as young as he used to be, and there's not even a Bush to run against.

[Fat_Sunny]

I think ol' Pat is done running for president. He's been there, done that. He's not as young as he used to be, and there's not even a Bush to run against.

What If Another Hot-Head Took Up The Cause. Say........Michael Savage? Could He Get 3%-5% Of The Vote In Critical States?

[DarkHippie]

What If Another Hot-Head Took Up The Cause. Say........Michael Savage? Could He Get 3%-5% Of The Vote In Critical States?

no, cause the kind of people who would vote for savage wouldn't vote for a jew

[Fat_Sunny]

no, cause the kind of people who would vote for savage wouldn't vote for a jew

Oh Yeah, The Michael Weiner Thing.

F_S Would Have A Hard Time Voting For A Weiner...And That Includes John Edwards!

[Bulldogcakes]

What If Another Hot-Head Took Up The Cause. Say........Michael Savage? Could He Get 3%-5% Of The Vote In Critical States?

I dont think Pat's a hot head. I disagree with his take on immigration, but I think he's just being a patriot in his view. He's also a great guy to have in a foxhole with you. Very loyal and very tough. Type of guy you hate if he's on the other team and love if he's on yours.

[Bulldogcakes]

no, cause the kind of people who would vote for savage wouldn't vote for a jew

Was that a joke? Savage is Jewish.

If it was a joke, it was a good one. Very twisted.

[DarkHippie]

Oh Yeah, The Michael Weiner Thing.

F_S Would Have A Hard Time Voting For A Weiner...And That Includes John Edwards!

who really wants a weiner in the whitehouse? its hard enough keeping out the dicks

[Midkiff]

How Would A Strong Buchanan Campaign Shake Up The Election?

http://www.wizards.com/magic/expert/apocalypse/apocalypse1_1024x768.bmp

[Bulldogcakes]

who really wants a weiner in the whitehouse? its hard enough keeping out the dicks

Right now we have the perfect combination, a Dick and a Bush. And hasn't that just worked out peachy.

[Fat_Sunny]

Right now we have the perfect combination, a Dick and a Bush. And hasn't that just worked out peachy.

Well, That's What You're Gonna Have Again, If Hillary Gets Elected!

[Yerdaddy]

http://www.failuremag.com/images/hindenburg.jpg

The Republican candidates aren't pro-Jesus/anti-Jesús enough? He's not going to run. He already ran three times and got pummelled like Al Dukes at a 50 Cent concert. What would be the point?

[Fat_Sunny]

What would be the point?

The Point, Yerdaddy, Is That A Signifocant Part Of The Populace Will View McCain And Hillary As Tweedledum And Tweedledee When It Comes To (a) Immigration, (b) Exporting American Jobs To Asia, And (C) Certain Social Issues Such As Gay Rights.

This Will Invite A Nativist Candidate. If Not Buchanan, Then Michael Savage. If Not Him, Tom Tancredo. Fat Is Not Predicting Buchanan...Just A Buchanan-Like Candidate.

You Heard It Here First...On RonFez.Net.

PS Oh The Humanity!

[Yerdaddy]

So you're saying that this election is like diarrhea - it needs an asshole to run?

[scottinnj]

I'll tell you one thing that would happen-Buchanan would get my vote.

[scottinnj]

So you're saying that this election is like diarrhea - it needs an asshole to run?


Why not? Last election it was two assholes-coming out swinging from both parties.
I was an asshole too, voted for the incumbent asshole. Again, I'm sorry.

[scottinnj]

Ross Perot ran for Pres in 92 as a reform party candidate. You might be referring to him

He ran in 2000 as an independent, after leaving the Republican Party because of the Nomination of George Bush. He was against him then, was against the invasion of Iraq, and continues to criticize the Bush administration over Alberto Gonzales, the constant political screwups in Iraq and his inability to veto spending bills that put our children into crushing debt to Japan and China.

Elect Buchanan, keep Pelosi and Reid, and balance will be brought back to the Force, er, uh, the Federal Government-yea that's what I meant.

[Yerdaddy]

Why not? Last election it was two assholes-coming out swinging from both parties.
I was an asshole too, voted for the incumbent asshole. Again, I'm sorry.

Don't get me wrong, I like the guy on The McLaughlin Group because he's honest and civil. But that's why it's the only political show I actually download the audio from each week - because it brings together people with different perspectives who know what they're talking to but it's a bastion of civil debate that only pretends to be hostile for a laugh. These people, I'd say especially Buchanan, deeply respect each other's points of view and listen to one another. That's why it will never get the ratings of a Hannity and Colmes or The O'Reily Factor.

But when he's in other forums like political campaigns he's extremely dogmatic. I'm not entirely sure he believes what he's saying given his ability to debate issues with an open mind in certain forums and his willingness to oppose organizations and individuals who share his religious and political views but that he sees as unprincipled - the Iraq War and Bush in general for example. But this "culture war" shtick of his is awful. When he's running for office he campaigns on the ideas that anything outside of mainstream Christian and American culture is evil and is out to destroy America. He becomes more of an anti-liberal rather than defending his own values and that's where he loses my respect.

"I will use the bully pulpit of the Presidency of the United States, to the full extent of my power and ability, to defend American traditions and the values of faith, family, and country, from any and all directions. And, together, we will chase the purveyors of sex and violence back beneath the rocks whence they came." - '96 Presidential campaign

Meaning O&A and Quentin Tarantino are what's wrong with America and he should be elected President to replace them with "The 700 Club" and "The Passion of the Christ"? What's his position on Imus? These are the words of a guy who doesn't accept that free speech means living with things being said that you don't like so that you can say and hear things that you do like. This sounds like a guy who wants to impose what he believes on the rest of us.

"Who is in your face here? Who started this? Who is on the offensive? Who is pushing the envelope? The answer is obvious. A radical Left aided by a cultural elite that detests Christianity and finds Christian moral tenets reactionary and repressive is hell-bent on pushing its amoral values and imposing its ideology on our nation. The unwisdom of what the Hollywood and the Left are about should be transparent to all." -1994

Americans are 80% Christian and less than 10% atheist or agnostic. The idea that Christianity is under attack in any meaningful way given the religious demographics of America is absurd. So Buchanan's obsession with the "war" against Christianity is dogmatic pandering for his partisan political aims. O'Riely does the same thing: tell the large majority - Christians - that the small minority - atheists and agnostics, or "seculars" - are out to get them and should be feared. It's good marketing - your target market is 80% of the country and you only alienate 10% - but it's dangerous in my view. Freedom to worship is under no threat in America whatsoever. What is a threat is that powerful religious groups are seeking to impose their views on the rest of us - through school prayer, creationism taught as science, public funding of religious activities and churches advocating certain political parties. All of these are the reason Jefferson advocated the separation of church and state so strongly. So to campaign on the issue of defending Christianity I think jepardizes the very freedoms we hold dear. I think it risks allowing a minority of Christians to take away the freedoms of the non-Christian minority while the majority of Christians sit conflicted but quiet on the sidelines.

Then if you go through Buchanan's positions on individual issues he's an absolutist on just about everything: an outright isolationist economically, politically, militarily and on immigration. If he were to get his way he would undo the very reason that we won the Cold War - intigration with the rest of the world. Our economy would shrink while the rest of the world grew - once they recovered from the recessions our collapse would cause and they re-integrated with Europe and other economic powers. But isolationism, in my view, is the biggest threat to America's well-being in this century.

So while Buchanan is my polar opposite in how I see the world politically, I only think he's an asshole in certain forums. I think he's a principled guy and his perspective is valuable when he's not campaigning for anything. I think his views are valuable in the same way that I think that Karl Marx was a valuable critic of the dangers of unrestrained capitalism but his ideas for a substitute were absolute shit. I listen to Buchanan's criticism of immigration, for example, because he points out some of the biggest problems that need to be dealt with - the number of criminals that come into the country in our current system of encouraging illegal immigration. But to close the borders to all immigrants like he wants would guarantee not only an end to GDP growth in America, but, with our low birth rate and advancing of the babyboomers towards retirement age we would actually have negative GDP growth. We would, in economic terms, be surrendering world leadership to China and Europe. It's crazy.

In short, (little joke there), Buchanan will become an asshole if he joins the election. But if he sticks to the McClaughlin group and his magazines and collumns, he's actually a role-model of independent thinking and political civility. Fortunately there isn't a chance in hell that he will run in this election.

[scottinnj]

As always you are right. I would want him to be President because he is so good at framing the general conservative ideas of smaller government, conservative foreign policy, tax policy. But I would probably be very disappointed if he actually was and just used the bully pulpit to beat up on gays and non-catholics.
I finished up his one book (How the Right went Wrong) and the current one I am saddened to read. He excoriates us conservatives for walking away from the Goldwater values and becoming the Neo-cons.
The new one is about how we as a country are destroying ourselves from within, and makes a shitload of comparisons between America and the Roman Empire at the end of her existence. Pretty much saying America is on the decline as a superpower and as an influence in the world. Sad

[Yerdaddy]

As always you are right. I would want him to be President because he is so good at framing the general conservative ideas of smaller government, conservative foreign policy, tax policy. But I would probably be very disappointed if he actually was and just used the bully pulpit to beat up on gays and non-catholics.
I finished up his one book (How the Right went Wrong) and the current one I am saddened to read. He excoriates us conservatives for walking away from the Goldwater values and becoming the Neo-cons.
The new one is about how we as a country are destroying ourselves from within, and makes a shitload of comparisons between America and the Roman Empire at the end of her existence. Pretty much saying America is on the decline as a superpower and as an influence in the world. Sad

Well... I'm not always right.

http://idontreadyourblog.blogs.friendster.com/photos/thailand/100_6712.JPG

[high fly]

I got a lot of mileage out of Buchannon's prediction before the Iraq invasion that we would be "Taking to ourselves a California-sized West Bank to call our very own."

I think he understated it.

If you find yourself with some time to kill and are near a Barnes and Noble, check out his book, Where the Right Went Wrong

[FUNKMAN]

Andrew Cunanan would be better than Pat Buchanan

and his homely sister



i got nuthin as usual

[Fat_Sunny]

i got nuthin as usual

Don't Be So Hard On Yourself. Fat Don't Know Much About Your Other 20,000+ Posts, But Your Outstanding Suggestion Yesterday On The Starbursts Would Make Up For A Whole Lot Of Nonsense!