Mick Mulvaney - Liberty Candidate in SC-5 with a GOOD CHANCE!

[malkusm]

http://www.mulvaneyforcongress.com/

Here are 3 GREAT reasons that Mick Mulvaney should be a TOP PRIORITY around here:

1) Mulvaney ran unopposed in his GOP primary. This means that he didn't have to waste resources to secure his party's nomination. As of the end of the second quarter (beginning of July), his campaign had $472,694 cash on hand.

2) Mulvaney is not a political novice. He has been in the South Carolina legislature for 3 years as a representative. He knows what it takes to run a political campaign, and is experienced enough to avoid political pitfalls.

3) Mulvaney can win. Real Clear Politics (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/house/2010_elections_house_map.html) rates the SC-5 race as a "Toss Up." The district is R+7 on the Cook PVI index - in other words, the GOP Presidential candidate is usually favored by 7 points over the Dem Presidential candidate.

TWO POLLS have been conducted in this race so far.
The first was in January by PPP: Spratt (D) 46%, Mulvaney (R) 39%.
The second was in May by Public Opinion Strategies: Spratt (D) 43%, Mulvaney (R) 41%

Bottom line: This guy should be a high priority on the forums. He hasn't gotten any attention because he ran unopposed in the primary. Consider youself on notice! :)

http://www.mulvaneyforcongress.com/

[CaseyJones]

TWO POLLS have been conducted in this race so far.
The first was in January by PPP: Spratt (D) 46%, Mulvaney (R) 39%.
The second was in May by Public Opinion Strategies: Spratt (D) 43%, Mulvaney (R) 41%


woohoo this guy has a good shot and seems on board with the message :cool:

[Imperial]

Has anybody found anything on his foreign policy yet? He has declared himself to be a libertarian, but in every public appearance I have seen he will not talk about this issue and his website is silent.

[Old Ducker]

.....

[Toureg89]

Has anybody found anything on his foreign policy yet?
this

[RileyE104]

Has anybody found anything on his foreign policy yet? He has declared himself to be a libertarian, but in every public appearance I have seen he will not talk about this issue and his website is silent.

This is the 3rd thread where people have asked about Mulvaney's foreign policy stance. The last one I saw was a few months ago.

NO ONE has found anything.

[messana]

Nothing about the federal reserve either. I like his economic policy but he seems like any old republican to me.

[lx43]

I live in SC-5 and I now refuse to vote for Mulvaney and I will not vote for John Spratt either. He basically lied to me after agreeing to do an interview for RPFs. I don't care how libertarian the man is, you are only as good as your word. Anyway, once I emailed him the interview questions on foreign policy I never heard back from him.

[lx43]

Someone give the LIAR a call or text him on his phone.

Home: 803-547-0525 (Please don’t call after 8:30 at night…we have triplet 9-year-olds who go to bed early!)
Cell: 803-246-1001 (Usually the best way to get me; texts are great, too)
e-mail: MickMulvaney@mac.com
e-mail: Mick@MulvaneyforCongress.com

If you will get him to answer the interview questions on foreign policy I emailed him I will donate $100 to Rand, Schiff, or Amash. Send me an IM if your going to do this and I will forward you the questions.

But I want him on video tape, I don't trust this man.

[Stary Hickory]

Well I am all for him because he will support overturning HC and is for small government. I kinda get disgusted when people will leave a hardcore state loving POS, a proven POS in office over a new face who says he is for liberty.

As much as I detest the wars I am kinda getting pissed at th people here who are one issue people and support people only on the wars. My freedoms are VERY important to me, keeping government in check and not growing in power is ver important. Wait until government has the people at it's mercy and see what choice you have then in foreign policy.

This guy is a good candidate and I support him. Had the Democracts not acted like tyrannical thugs over the last two years then maybe I would give pause. But at the moment anything is better than a Democrat. ANYTHING. A hot pile of steamy poo would be preferable.

After I am free to make my own HC decisions, when I am no longer under the heel of tyrannical douchebags then we can talk about a DEM getting in office. BUt not after they voted TOGETHER practiacly to the man to violate the rights of Americans in the most personal of ways, against the laws of this country. After that I am done with every Democrat until they are a broken party and come to terms with the fact they cannot do this to the people.

The Republicans got the same treatment for their foreign policy, and they have done a U-Turn or are in the process of doing it more and more. The Dems need to be taught a hard lesson, waging war on Americans is worse than doing it abroad IMO. Even though both are deplorable.

Mick Mulvaney represents my Health freedom, a repeal of harmful legislative take overs, getting rid of bailouts and a smaller, less pwerful and instrusive government. That is worth supporting, we will see how his foreign policy is, the fact he does not advertise support for the wars on his website speaks volumes already.

[malkusm]

"The surprising aspect of Mulvaney's candidacy is the degree of support the national party appears to lend him. The candidate recently declared he is a "Libertarian Republican". He lead the fight against RealID in South Carolina (along with Haley), and he has said that he would vote to repeal the Patriot Act. Interestingly, I and others have been unable to find ANY information on his foreign policy stances. Whether this means he is hiding a closet non-interventionist stance or simply doesn't care about the issue remains to be seen."

I agree that it is disturbing that we don't know his foreign policy position, but there may be a reason that he's purposely avoiding the issue. The fact that he's against Real ID and against the Patriot Act makes him a long way above being just "any old Republican." That's my two cents, anyway.

[Stary Hickory]

I agree that it is disturbing that we don't know his foreign policy position, but there may be a reason that he's purposely avoiding the issue. The fact that he's against Real ID and against the Patriot Act makes him a long way above being just "any old Republican." That's my two cents, anyway.

Yes and I imagine he is MUCH better than the current proves POS that is in office. I swear sometimes I wonder, we have this guy who seems all abut liberty and we have a proven statist POS.....I'll take my chances at this point.

[lx43]

Well I am all for him because he will support overturning HC and is for small government. I kinda get disgusted when people will leave a hardcore state loving POS, a proven POS in office over a new face who says he is for liberty.

As much as I detest the wars I am kinda getting pissed at th people here who are one issue people and support people only on the wars. My freedoms are VERY important to me, keeping government in check and not growing in power is ver important. Wait until government has the people at it's mercy and see what choice you have then in foreign policy.

This guy is a good candidate and I support him. Had the Democracts not acted like tyrannical thugs over the last two years then maybe I would give pause. But at the moment anything is better than a Democrat. ANYTHING. A hot pile of steamy poo would be preferable.

After I am free to make my own HC decisions, when I am no longer under the heel of tyrannical douchebags then we can talk about a DEM getting in office. BUt not after they voted TOGETHER practiacly to the man to violate the rights of Americans in the most personal of ways, against the laws of this country. After that I am done with every Democrat until they are a broken party and come to terms with the fact they cannot do this to the people.

The Republicans got the same treatment for their foreign policy, and they have done a U-Turn or are in the process of doing it more and more. The Dems need to be taught a hard lesson, waging war on Americans is worse than doing it abroad IMO. Even though both are deplorable.

Mick Mulvaney represents my Health freedom, a repeal of harmful legislative take overs, getting rid of bailouts and a smaller, less pwerful and instrusive government. That is worth supporting, we will see how his foreign policy is, the fact he does not advertise support for the wars on his website speaks volumes already.

Honestly, I would have supported the man even though I may not have agreed with him on foreign policy because of his other stances and some of his voting record. But I will not support someone that lies to me directly no matter if I agree with them 100%.