A Sea Of Red

I was just curious to see if I could get an opinion on a candidate. I have been having a discussion about this and I want some opinions.
Say you have a candidate that is running in a Republican primary for the House. The district is currently being “represented” by one of the most liberal members on congress who is also being groomed personally by Nancy Pelosi.
This candidate’s platform is as follows:
They support extending the Bush Tax Cuts while reducing all around spending,
They are against the new healthcare legislation,
They are supportive of an aggressive immigration policy including a variation of the Arizona law and ending the “Wet-Foot-Dry-Foot” Policy currently in place for Cubans.
They believes in exploring renewable energy sources while vamping up domestic oil production
They are a strong supporter of National Security Measures (yet believes some measures may have gone too far towards encroaching on our personal liberties)
They are a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment,
And they are very much Pro-Israel.

The only thing about this woman is she used to be a man. Would that fact alone disqualify this person from consideration or would that fact not play a role? Or even should it play a role? Just curious. Thanks!

well i take into consideration all things. obviously he isn't mentally stable so i'm probably not going to vote for him.

I am personally against that sort of thing, but as a candidate, I'd vote for her. Most Republicans don't even have the huevos to take some of those stances and we all know the Dems don't.

I'd be more likely to vote for her than a woman who has those viewpoints that has always been a woman

That sentence takes too many readings to finally comprehend.

Because she used to be a man. And men are better than women. Get it? It's hilarious.

WinterIsComing wrote:Most Republicans don't even have the huevos...

Neither does she...........................now.

why do you guys keep calling him a she? its still a dude. just a dude who retardedly got his balls cut off. that judgement alone is enough to get a no vote.

None of the above

RubberMallet wrote:why do you guys keep calling him a she? its still a dude. just a dude who retardedly got his balls cut off. that judgement alone is enough to get a no vote.

Exactly

It depends on how good of a transition heshe made. Does heshe sound like the cop from South Park? Don't vote for himher.

blwall1416 wrote:

WinterIsComing wrote:Most Republicans don't even have the huevos...

Neither does she...........................now.

She's definitely in the running for ultimate flip-flopper. But I will say I like her politics (the ones given here at least) even if I disagree with her decision. Sounds like some early life trauma if you ask me.

Sounds like a pervert if you ask me, and we have enough of those in Congress. As a Republican, this person is just asking for trouble down the road. They will be a laughingstock with a big target on their back.

Schfourteenteen wrote:It depends on how good of a transition heshe made. Does heshe sound like the cop from South Park? Don't vote for himher.

You mean Mr./Mrs. Garrison, the teacher? Pretty sure Officer Barbrady still has his twig and berries.

Is this a real candidate who is actually running for Congress somewhere and has a chance of winning the primary or just a hypothetical situation?

A real candidate, and she finished second in a 3 way primary yesterday.

vastrightwinger wrote:A real candidate, and she finished second in a 3 way primary yesterday.

What were the views of the person who won?

And no, it does not disqualify her.

The person is a real canidate, she was third out of three canidates in last tuesday primary here in florida. Could a canidate like this a transgender canidate ever win in a republican primary?

Here's a question to ponder before 2012 rolls around:

A religious man is running for office. He is a conservative and an effective leader / legislator. He is liked by the red states and has a significant blue state appeal, something no other candidate can boast. He is the most electable of the candidates. He is, however, a Mormon.

Would you vote for him? Because guys like James Dobson say, no way.

Liberty4Life wrote:Here's a question to ponder before 2012 rolls around:

A religious man is running for office. He is a conservative and an effective leader / legislator. He is liked by the red states and has a significant blue state appeal, something no other candidate can boast. He is the most electable of the candidates. He is, however, a Mormon.

Would you vote for him? Because guys like James Dobson say, no way.

Are you talking about Mitt Romney? Hypothetically, I'd vote for a guy like that. Mitt Romney I'd have to do more research on.

Former LU kicker & benefactor Mark DeMoss led the Evangelical charge for Mitt the last go around. Romney has received quite a bit of flak from the right the past 12 months. But he is certainly somebody to continue watching.

Pop Quiz #2:

You have two candidates: You live in a blue state that has voted for a Democrat presidential candidate every election cycle since 1992. In 2008, your state voted for Obama by a 2-to-1 margin.

There has only been one Republican candidate to find success in your state -- a wildly popular, down-the-middle moderate Governor, who has received 60+% support every time he is put on a state-wide ballot. He is running for Senate this year. He has bucked the GOP a few times in his career, most notably when he came out in support of embryonic stem cell research.

So is a Tea Party favorite, who isn't so popular state-wide.

Which one do you vote for?