Bring Back Pat Buchanan and the Reform Party!

[Perky]

I am quite sure that Dubya would lose 15% of his base if Pat ran on the Deficit, Isoloationism and Abortion/marriage amendment

[cubsfan6969]

1. Please no!

The guy is a raging anti-semite. In his last campaign he had a bunch of white power nuts working in his campaign. His dad was also a racist and an anti-semite. Hmmm..Sounds a lot like Mel Gibson.

[Perky]

2. So what!

If he takes votes away from Bush let him scream all he want to.... He is not electable.. but he hurts Bushin the GE.

[hippiechick]

3. But yes, it would split the GOP

... and the far-right fundies would leave the corporate whore wing of the party to vote for Pat.

It just might work !! :shrug:


:hippie:

[anti-NAFTA]

11. I don't think that's fair.

The anti-Semite stuff has been blown out of proportion. There are two things that define Buchanan's politics: anti-immigration-ism and protectionism. Sure, he's not too pro-Israeli either; but at least he doesn't want this country outsourced all over the place.

edit: And he's not running. He's spending this year working on a book about the death of conservatism, which I will gleefully purchase upon its release.

[Catholic Sensation]

12. explain how

Gibson is a raging anti-semite. Making a movie using the gospels of Jesus Christ isn't anti-semitic

[MurikanDemocrat]

19. Good! He'd get the far right and bigot vote from Bush!

Just makes chances better for the Democratic candidate.

[SangamonTaylor]

4. it'd balance out the nader loss

if he runs.

though I cannot stand P. Buchannon.

[MurikanDemocrat]

20. Nader will be lucky if he gets 1% this time

I hope he does run so we can finally put that argument and that asshole to rest.

[library_max]

5. Yes, wouldn't it be loverly.

Not likely to happen, though. Too bad.

[knight_of_the_star]

6. It could

It WOULD be nice if he could be convinced to jump in. THAT would be the nail in Bush's casket.

[Iverson]

7. Buchanan killed the Reform Party

I thought people knew that.

[library_max]

8. Yes, we know.

It's still a nice fantasy, having a well-publicized right wing challenge to Bush in the general election.

[Iverson]

9. in that case

I think that most theocratic wingnuts will find something for the in the Constitution Party, which may have been previously named the U.S. Taxpayers Party. I'm not 100% sure about that.

I think that with mainstream party candidates Kucinich and Sharpton being made invisible by the media, no third party will get much exposure. Democrats and Republicans might not even need to join hands to exclude them from debate grounds this time. Coverage is that narrow.

[library_max]

10. Like I said,

just a fantasy. The splinter parties we always have with us. They don't make enough of an impact to help. By the way, if Buchanan did run and did get as much exposure as, say, Kucinich has received in the Democratic primaries up until now, it'd help us. I don't know how much, but it'd help. Kucinich supporters managed to find him, hear about him, and vote for him. Buchanan supporters would do the same. The media blackout on Kucinich and Sharpton has been somewhat exaggerated, although of course the frontrunner(s) get most of the attention. Just for example, one didn't hear or read much more about Kerry than about Kucinich or Sharpton, before Iowa.

[elperromagico]

15. I would be happier if someone would challenge Shrub in the primaries.

Yes, I know Bush is facing opponents in the primaries, but they aren't major opponents, and Bush is garnering 85%-95% of the vote in most primaries. If he were losing 40% of the vote to an insurgent, it would be clear to everyone that the Republican Party is in the Winter of Its Discontent.

[elperromagico]

13. Hell, bring back PEROT!

That guy did wonders for us in '92 and '96.

[mzmolly]

14. Perot got 50/50 from Dems/Pubs from what I hear?

:shrug:

[anti-NAFTA]

16. Because both Dems and Pubs are afraid

of outsourcing. Vote Edwards.

[elperromagico]

17. In '92, yes. Not in '96.

In '92, I'd say the split was more 55 Republican/45 Democrat. Perot was the voice of apathetic voters in that election. By 1996, that had changed. Almost all of Perot's support in '96 came from conservatives.

[HereSince1628]

18. Paleo--nuf said