Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mcrain, Jun 9, 2011.
Stick a fork in Newt's campaign... it's over.
He never had a chance in the first place. There are so many skeletons in his closet, it's ridiculous.
He is only in this to raise money. Tiffany's aint cheap.
He never had a chance. The only one so far that is plausible is Romney.
Yeah, guy's dangerous.
Yep, I think you're right.
Most likely, this clarifies the field if only by eliminating Newt as a candidate--although I don't think he was ever a viable candidate for the GOP nomination.
What the Democrats should be concerned with is the possibility of 1992 playing out on the GOP side--that one of the Seven Dwarves will come out of nowhere and win the Presidency, just as Clinton did. Unlikely, but possibly the GOP's best chance to unseat Obama.
I think he entered the race just to break the ice.
IIRC....McCain was written off as "finished" at some point during the summer of 2007 but look what happened.....ultimately he got the nomination and gave us Sarah
I love how he's not right wing enough to get the primary vote, but he's the only one not *******e insane enough to attract any of the middle in the actual election race.
It'll be AMAZING to see how the GOP can possibly trend to the center for the actual race when they haven't been this crazy far right in a long long time.
Then again, they are more aware than anyone that this country has the political memory of a guppy. Just look at their outcry at Wiener, it doesn't matter the string of even more disgusting and illegal events they've had in their own party over the last few years, they know the public doesn't care for history.
I don't know enough about any of the Grand Old Party candidates but I don't think I'll be voting for Obama again.
You and me both.
I'm looking for someone with progressive ideas to pull this country out of the 20th century mindset, not a glossy version of the status quo with a pleasant demeanor.
I've heard good things about Romney and Ron Paul (Paul was a darling of Maher back in '06 I think, or maybe '09, I forget). Apparently because Mitt Romney is a Mormon he's highly unlikely to win in a head to head against Obama.
What a pity.
So far, the only person running I would consider over Obama is Ron Paul. Not because I like Obama, but because I can't see myself voting for any republican besides Paul.
Knowing a bit about both those people, Mormonism will be just a small sideshow as to why he won't win.
You can add Huntsman to the shortlist when he declares/ files.
I'm not big on any religion, but Mormonism is just plain weird.
Then again they all are, huh?
Romney may be Mormon, but he looks and acts presidential, something Gingrich was never able to pull off. Were he to secure the nomination, I don't see him having any more problems than Kennedy did being Catholic.
Romney also looks like the man who stands the best chance of making Obama a one hit wonder - link (pdf).
He's at the bottom of the list actually. At least Nate Silver seems to think so.
Nate is pretty good at analyzing data and unless you can show me polls stating otherwise, Huntsman's not going to make it out of the gate.
[URL="http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/80074,news-comment,news-politics,romney-shocks-obama-but-will-us-vote-for-a-mormon]According to this article Romney may not have enough support if it came to a head to head with Obama.[/URL]
Romney has to turn into a pretzel in order to rationalize his past achievements in healthcare reform in Massachusetts with the current, stringent platform of the GOP seeking repeal of national healthcare reform.
Not that Romney couldn't manage this with a massive sum of money and a zillion ads and a perfectly ruthless campaign manager. Coming up with the money could be very very tricky. Wall Street was not sure about Romney the first time, what's different now, just a worse second and third tier?
I dunno. The GOP seems really out of bench to me. They did this to themselves by constructing their base out of potentially unreconcilable segments, the social hot button types, the right-leaning side of Wall Street and the so-called fiscal conservatives who were mostly interested in conserving the status quo on tax breaks and defense earmarks. Talk about pretzels.
It didn't matter in the boom times. Then the GOP platform was constructed for consumption by the social conservatives, signed off on by the others with a wink and nod and a don't worry, life will go on as usual, who cares what the platform says, just get the votes. And the base dutifully lined up and voted against their own interests one more time. Now it's all up for grabs: the GOP segments loathe each other and all are jousting to carry the banner of true conservative, while none really merits the tag.
It's interesting that Huntsman seems to be looked on with so much suspicion by the right. He could probably make it tough for Obama because he gets Obama, and in some ways he's a lot like Obama. But he is unlikely to get the nomination, not least because the xenophobes will come out of the woodwork in the primaries. They won't like the idea of having a prez who can speak Chinese. Who knows, a whole new birther movement could ensue.
I'm old enough to remember people who would not vote for JFK because they feared he'd let the Pope run the country. It's not a far jump from that to people fearing a Chinese-speaking President would sell the USA down the river every time he welcomed a Chinese dignitary to the USA with a few Mandarin phrases to be polite and show respect.
The GOP might have done better to get Haley Barbour to rethink and run. The guy may be a hack but he can count votes and talk down-home turkey. Honestly that's what the GOP needs during the primaries, not some exotic fiscal wizard, and not these Tea Babes. I think that base is looking for comfort food. They're tired of the anger and tired of all the numbers being thrown around about debt and deficit and mediScare and so forth. They're ripe for another morning in America gig. They might have gone for Huckabee. But Huckabee probably figured he couldn't take Obama. Maybe Barbour figured that as well. Plenty of people are so busy dissing the Prez that they have forgotten something that professional pols never forget: it takes a lot to dislodge an incumbent President.
Appreciate your insight. Interesting and fun to read. Thanks.
LizKat, I agree. At some point, the billionaire financers of the GOP will either have to bend to the pressure of the social conservatives and support a candidate they can't control, or the social conservatives will stop voting for the pro-billionaire/establishment candidates.
Yes, I've read all the polls/ data/ etc.. that say Huntsman will never 'make it out of the gate'. However, all the reasons Republicans dislike him are largely the same reasons that I like him as a candidate.
There are still a ton of unknown and unforeseeable factors still at play given we're still roughly a year and half out from the election.
Exactly correct. While places where that base is strong can elect Representatives and a few Senators, it is too scattered and divisive to win a national election.
Also exactly correct. The last time it happened was when a sitting President went back on his most famous quote: "Read my lips . . . " The fact that there were very good reasons for turning on his back on that pledge, and that it took an enormous amount of political courage for him to do so, didn't mean a thing to muchof the electorate.
Their bench is pathetic at this point. They've resorted to floating Perry and Giuliano this week. No serious Republican candidate is looking to run against Obama, they have their eye on 2016. If the Reps are to field an eectable candidate, they need to shed the *******e.