U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-22-2009, 10:32 AM
 
45 posts, read 97,067 times
Reputation: 19

Advertisements

Go To Her Website And Then Click The Immigration Issue And Read Say How You Like Her Then.

Nightingale for Governor

 
Old 07-22-2009, 11:10 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,783,008 times
Reputation: 4539
Didn't Meg Whitman also announce an anti-illegal immigration stance?
 
Old 07-22-2009, 11:12 AM
 
45 posts, read 97,067 times
Reputation: 19
yes!
 
Old 07-22-2009, 11:51 AM
 
Location: Up in the air
19,126 posts, read 25,830,966 times
Reputation: 16226
There is NO WAY IN HELL I will EVER vote for anyone who is in constitution party. They want to enact a theocracy, take a look at their website.

This candidate doesn't have a chance.
 
Old 07-22-2009, 01:59 PM
 
Location: CITY OF ANGELS AND CONSTANT DANGER
5,409 posts, read 11,082,934 times
Reputation: 2244
exactly!!! just like the meg chick.

these one trick ponies find a candidate that shares their view on the immigration issue, but dont look beyond that to other issues.

who really votes or subscribes to a party based on ONE issue?



Quote:
Originally Posted by JetJockey View Post
There is NO WAY IN HELL I will EVER vote for anyone who is in constitution party. They want to enact a theocracy, take a look at their website.

This candidate doesn't have a chance.
 
Old 07-22-2009, 02:08 PM
 
Location: Up in the air
19,126 posts, read 25,830,966 times
Reputation: 16226
Quote:
Originally Posted by the one View Post
exactly!!! just like the meg chick.

these one trick ponies find a candidate that shares their view on the immigration issue, but dont look beyond that to other issues.

who really votes or subscribes to a party based on ONE issue?
I just spent a little more time browsing through her website and found this gem on the 'supporters' tab:

he can become the "Sarah Palin of California" and so much better that Americans will say: "We need more Governor Chelene Nightingales". This will make all women proud to say that "the best ever elected is a woman!"
 
Old 07-22-2009, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Where laws can be ignored due to political correctness
1,111 posts, read 1,583,813 times
Reputation: 267
I'd prefer Meg Whitman not just because she's anti-illegal but I happen to agree with her on many of her positions.

On the other hand, independents win on rare occasions.
 
Old 07-22-2009, 02:33 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,783,008 times
Reputation: 4539
Meg Whitman is a Republican, not an Independent, correct?
 
Old 07-22-2009, 03:57 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
85 posts, read 121,107 times
Reputation: 55
No way. The person I would vote for, should he run, is Republican Tom Campbell. He is honest, and has already signed on to the "anchor baby" legislation, among other things. And I'm a Democrat (in name only) who subscribes to a fiscally responsible conservatism.
 
Old 07-22-2009, 05:42 PM
 
Location: Earth
17,449 posts, read 23,003,704 times
Reputation: 7246
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClarissaM View Post
No way. The person I would vote for, should he run, is Republican Tom Campbell. He is honest, and has already signed on to the "anchor baby" legislation, among other things. And I'm a Democrat (in name only) who subscribes to a fiscally responsible conservatism.
I'd vote for Campbell if he was running against Newsom in a heartbeat (and would think about voting for him over Brown although that would be a tougher choice), but his stance on immigration issues has nothing to do with why I would prefer him to Whitman or Poizner (much less this whacko woman). I wasn't even aware of his stance on immigration issues. In my case it is because he advocates responsible fiscal conservatism combined with opposition to the War on Drugs, support for abortion rights, and a pro-gay stance.

My dislike of Newsom has to do with having to live under his rule and seeing for myself how he's screwed up a great city, combined with CA's current crisis meaning that glamour boy politicians who should've gone into acting should not be in charge when the state is facing one of the worst periods in its history. CA needs a responsible adult in charge not a pretty boy. Campbell is a responsible adult and so is Brown. Newsom and Whitman are not.

Besides, a Constitution Party candidate has about as much chance of winning anything as a Socialist Workers Party candidate, and their ideology is just as repulsive as the SWP or Workers World imo. Greens and Libertarians are one thing, the Constitution Party, SWP, Socialist Party USA (which is a Marxist-Leninist group unrelated to the old Socialist Party), etc. are sheer nutjobs with no chance in hell of winning anything other than perhaps dogcatcher (and that's stretching it)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top