It's long been discussed about who the best Candidate is for the Presidential Position. Many Conservatives have been discussing whether or not they should settle for endorsing someone like Giuliani, Romney or even Thompson in order to beat Hillary in the General Election. I would like to tackle these arguments in the most mature way possible, even though those who have endorsed these guys have been very immature. Let's first take a look at Mayor Rudy Giuliani. The man is very intelligent. He is one of the brightest candidates on both sides, and would definitely protect us from terrorism here on the home front. But there is more than terrorism that frustrates me about Giuliani. And no its not his Abortion and Same-Sex Marriage Stance either. It's more along the lines of how he is so against the right for Americans to bear arms. It's also the fact that he is more like Hillary when it comes to separation of church and state, and how he would like to keep us shut up. When asked the question regarding the social conservatives of the party. They asked him what his thoughts were when recent polls said 20% of Republicans would bolt to support a third party or Independent Candidate. He said he wasn't worried. Well Mr. Mayor you should be worried, that's 20% of votes you will loose before you even get a chance to share your "conservative" views.

Now Let's move onto Mitt Romney, the Republican version of John Edwards, (minus the $400 haircuts.) Just like Edwards, Mitt is very polarized. He likes to look the greatest and sound the greatest, but isn't the greatest. Mitt Romney tries to focus on his current speeches instead of his previous records. Mitt Romney is by far in the same category as John Kerry, when it comes to flip-flopping and changing your positions more than I change hair styles. The difference between Mitt and Rudy is really this; Rudy stands up for what he has always believed and doesn't back down. Mitt on the other hand tries to cover up his record with, well conservative folk talk. Mitt Romney is weak on Immigration, probably more so than McCain. These areas and more will definitely be a stumbling block for his candidacy.

Now to good ole' Fred Thompson. Thompson is a different breed of candidate material. He was able to enter later, and make his opponents weaknesses his ultimate strengths. But his late entrance to the race was very costly. Thompson also was unable to justify his Abortion, Same-Sex Marriage and Immigration Issues. Thompson also lied in his entrance to the race stating he never had Abortion Lobbyists campaigning for him. That turned out to be false. Fred's average campaign lifestyle turned southern isn't really being bought. It's been thought for sometime that many of the Bush and Cheney family members and friends are rallying behind Thompson, but its not been confirmed except by a few people who have endorsed certain candidates.

So the question we now have to ask ourselves is this: If We Settle for someone like the candidates mentioned above, simply to beat Hillary or Barack or Al Gore or any other Democrat. What can we expect? You can expect a for sure loss. Maybe not a loss voting wise, but you will loose your strong core base to the Party and the respect of many around the world. To sacrifice our values because we simply can nominate a northerner, (or someone who can relate to them.) Will not help bring victory into Republican hands. If everyone who has "settled" would rally behind a true conservative Republican, the force would be unstoppable and we would win in 2008. I don't represent the 21st Century Republicans, I represent the Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan Republicans. I represent the Franklin Roosevelt, Zel Miller and Woodrow Wilson Democrats. I have traditional values, that happened to be conservative leaning. But the question relates to everyone. If we settle can we really win?