Wow. For whatever reason, the conservatives in the Republican party sure haven't been strategic in how to get a conservative in the White House. I don't understand Huckabee's candidacy at all -- it's obvious he has no chance of winning, it looks like he's in it to split the Romney vote and deprive Romney of a realistic shot at McCain. Way to go Huckabee -- you've all but ensured we won't have a true conservative candidate.

There's no way I'd vote for Clinton -- so if she's the democrat nominee, I'll vote for whatever Republican they put up against her. But if it's Obama, I'd seriously consider switching over, assuming it's versus McCain. Obama may be a democrat, but he at least appears to have some dignity and principles. We need some fresh air in the White House -- and the only fresh air the parties are offering are Obama or Romney.

Romney will bring fresh air to the White House? In the debate Mitt said that by invading Iraq, Bush proved that you can't attack America without us hitting back. Explain that to me and I'll think about voting for Willard.

At this point the only fresh air we can expect is currently in the void between Mitt's ears.

I've heard a lot of GOPers saying that there is no way they would vote for Clinton - but maybe for Obama. OK Why? Obama's and HRCs policy positions are indistinguishable. And HRC clearly would be more able out of the gate.

So what is it about HRC that makes you react so viscerally? It doesn't make any sense to me so I'd appreciate an honest thoughtful response.

When this campaign began I was definitely not pro-Hillary. I have now come to admire her more than I ever did when she was first lady. Even so, she seems to be driven more by her own raw political ambitions than by the desire for public service. I think a lot of people sense that. Perhaps, this explains why so many react to her "viscerally", as you put it.

Do we really need the Clintons back in the White House? Did you really like a President having sex (sorry, he says he didn't) with an intern no older than his daughter, inside the Oval Office? Did you really approve of the President lying under oath? Is it really Ok that the President's conduct was impeachable? Should we still support Hillary Now, please give me an honest thoughtful response.

degsme:

I've heard a lot of GOPers saying that there is no way they would vote for Clinton - but maybe for Obama. OK Why? Obama's and HRCs policy positions are indistinguishable. And HRC clearly would be more able out of the gate.

So what is it about HRC that makes you react so viscerally? It doesn't make any sense to me so I'd appreciate an honest thoughtful response.

It's called principle.

Obama is (in my opinion) wrong about a lot of things. But he has character. He at least appears that there are certain things he would not do, even if it means he cannot win.

The Clintons do not seem to have core principles. I am convinced that Hillary would become pro-life if she thought that would win her the nomination.

Obama is wrong on the issues, but at least he believes that there is such a thing as right and wrong and is willing to stand by those principles come hell or high water.

Degsme -- I think you make a valid point. Yes, I would agree that Hillary has more experience politically than Obama. I definitely think she is intelligent and capable enough to lead the country.

Hillary appears, at least to me, to have unbounded ambition and a "win at all costs" mentality. Maybe all politicians have this, but for whatever reason, it really stands out about her. I'll have to think about why I think that -- is it because she's a woman? I hope not. I hope that has nothing to do with it, because it would obviously be a double-standard.

Basically, HRC seems insincere. I didn't believe her Whitewater defense, I don't agree that you should stay with a husband who publicly cheats on you because it's better for your political career, I don't think she became the senator of New York because of her long-standing roots in that state, and I don't think she's alone on the ballot -- we all know getting HRC in office is a way to get Bill back in office. I am not a fan of political dynasties, and that is exactly what we are inheriting if she becomes our president.

So yes, it's a character vote for me. If Obama and HRC are the same, I take Obama, because he at least seems to be principled, dignified, truly concerned, and sincere. Maybe he isn't -- maybe he's just doing a better job of looking honest. But I do want a President who leads the country on what is right, not what will make him look good in history books. If I voted for Obama, I think I'd have a better chance of getting that than if I voted for Hillary.

I hope that was an honest answer to your honest question. I appreciate your open-mindedness, degsme.

Perhaps the republican wing of the rebublican party is tired of being \

dictated to by highly vocal extremists. We hope that the Iraqies

can overcome extremism through "principle" in their country. Perhaps

America is showing them how.

Conservatives are so full of fear, full of hate for those that aren't with them, that it makes them full of Donkey-Doo........

I guess there is no republican candidate that you would support, since they also seem to switch their beliefs if it gets votes.....

McCain switched on Bush's tax cuts & on his opinions re: Dobson, Robertson et. al.

Romney has switched on so many issues that I don't even need to begin listing them here.

Huckleberry has switched on tax increases vs tax cuts on at least two instances....and he still isn't sure what he wants to say about Iraq.

Hate is the glue that binds the Republican Party together.

With us, or against us is the mantra of fear they use to keep their power, not to make the USA a better country, but to keep the POWER squarly in the hands of those who will make their wallets bigger.

As a member of the 25-34 demographic, I can only speak for myself, but as a younger conservative from an emphatically red state (think square), I find myself rallying to Obama.

The past 20 years the White House has been occupied by Bushes and Clintons. What has that gotten us? Nepotism. Cronyism. Trillions in overspent budgets. Sex scandals. Corporate greed. Impeachment proceedings. Cover-ups. Distractions. Two wars in the Middle East. Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. Partisan, political team voting of unparalleled tenacity. Republicans behaving like liberals. The loss of civil rights and privacy. Dashed dreams of families, especially us younger ones, ever owning a home. The loss of hope.

You're asking us to commit to eight more years to this potential 28-year family legacy? Stake an entire generation and a half of the presidency on two families? Get real.

Hillary and the establishment are up against an America ready to wager its bottom dollar for something new and better. That is, if America has a bottom dollar left to wager. And guess what? We've already played the Clinton spot on the board.

Right now, it's Obama or nothing.

There are no candidates on the GOP side that I am completely happy with.

Yep. And Negroes are lazy, Mexicans steal, Jews are good with money, Poles are stupid...

"McCain switched on Bush's tax cuts & on his opinions re: Dobson, Robertson et. al."

This is really getting my nerves, why is it the Democrats are pushing us to go and talk to regimes like Iran and Syria but our ready to toss McCain under the bus for talking with evangelicals? You can sit down with a brutal regime that oppresses millions of people but don't you dare,,,don't even think about it you SOB of going to Bob Jones U and giving a speech.

How utterly stupid can you get?........

Oh, you poor repressed conservatives.

not repressed...(that too) but oppressed. Being rich and white isnt what it was like in the good ol' days.......