Reply #5: You know, the best man never gets the job.

[Luke_R]

The best man would be a mixture of the two parties, somewhere in the middle. Unfortunately, the middle third on the liberal/conservative spectrum is split so that no one (save Perot) could gain enough votes to be competative.
So, I always look for someone in each party that I can be optimistic about. In the Republican party, it was Ron Paul, but that's being way to naive. Then, when I heard about Thompson, I was kinda excited. Just the other day, I finally got around to looking at his ideas, and learned that he feels that Bush is doing the right thing in Iraq.
So, I'm back to being naively optimistic about Paul for the Republican candidate.
Naive as it is, I can't imagine any presidential candidate supporting the war, let alone voting for someone who does. There are only two logical things I can come up with.
1. Most Republican cadidates are F**kheads
2. The candidates think the voters want someone who supports the war, and the voters support what the candidates think. Kinda a cycle.