Could any original signer of the Constitution win today's Republican 2012 Presid

1. 85

   My Esotericposted 13 years ago

   Could any original signer of the Constitution win today's Republican 2012 Presidential Nomination?
   
   Could any original signer of the US Constitution win today's Republican 2012 Presidential Nomination? If you think so, can you suggest which ones?

   replyreport
2. 79

   Rock_njposted 13 years ago

   Alexander Hamilton is probably the original signer of the US Constitution that could win today's Republican 2012 Presidential Nomination.  He was quite a conservative businessman who thought little of workers rights or other distractions that got in the way of making profits.

   replyreport
3. 65

   RKHenryposted 13 years ago

   What an awesome question.  Smart, I have to admit.  Very smart.  No.  No.  They were for liberty back then.  Religion did not have a place there back in 1776.  They made sure of that.  The fact that the Federal government is now able to give gov. grant money to faith base organizations- every one of those men would have been appalled.  That was a Republican agenda that a Republican Pres. passed.  So that doesn't fit any of our founding fathers.  They were about colonizing, but, they were also for preserving the land.  So that outs any Conservative candidates.  Not too long ago the Republicans were the naturalist party.  But happened to that?  Greed.  Their own Teddy Roosevelt would die all over again, if he could see the miss and industrial pollution of Wyoming and Utah today.  Over mining, natural gas cooperations poisoning the water ways and killing people.  Yeah, John Adams, Ben Franklin, John Hancock, none of them would have stood for that.  That was something the Royal crown would have done, and would have behaved like.  Those men were adamantly for and about protests and protesting injustices, hence the Boston Tea Party ousting the tea and sugar taxes.  Which brings up another point, today it really does not matter what side you're on the aisle, the politicians are all about raising taxes.  That is something they were dead against at first- dead against.  So that takes them out of the Republican corner.  Associating health rights as in what can be donated to medicine and what medicine could or could not do, or what people could or could not abort, take out, donate, etc..., would have put them at odds with the Republican party.  In essence, the Republican party of today, is the epitome of King George the III's rule over the colonies.  So no, there is not one single Republican candidate that even remotely resembles a founding father, and vice versa.  Disgusting- I know.

   replyreport
4. 0

   Old Empresarioposted 13 years ago

   I believe many of them would fit very well into the current political arena. The main difference is that the politicians in those days were usually a bit smarter and understood the world in its proper context. They were thinkers, not raw competitors looking for sport in politics. Hamilton was an immigrant from the British West Indies and thus was not, nor would ever be, eligible for the presidency.

   replyreport
5. 68

   Rogochuksposted 13 years ago

   No; they would not have any clue as to what the issues are, and what all the fuss is about.

   replyreport
6. 66

   HSanAlimposted 13 years ago

   To my mind, certainly George Washington, Samuel Adams or Benjamin Franklin could win a nomination. As for what party, there really were no parties formed, as we know them, at that time.

   replyreport
7. 85

   My Esotericposted 13 years ago

   I guess I might as well go ahead and give my answer, it looks like, these have had their run. 
   
   No, not in my opinion.  All of the original signers believed in a strong central government.  They all believed that a Bill of Rights wasn't needed because it was inherent in the rights of American's and to include such a "bill" would instead limit American rights.  In the end, James Madison found a clever way around this problem in his formulation of the Bill of Rights.
   
   They all believed in a strong executive and a judiciary independent of the other two branches of the government as well as being superior to the States.  The signers also believed that religion tests should not be required to hold office as well as a House that represents the people and a Senate that is more stable and represents the "aristracy", as it were.  They believed in all of these things because their study of history told them it was this formulation of a government that would have the most chance of success. 
   
   These were liberals, by today's standards, and revolutionarys, so no, the signers of the Constitution and, if fact, the Constitution itself, is antithetical to all that today's set of Conservative Presidential candidates believe in and would not be supported by today's conservative movement.

   replyreport