Poll: GOP has no clear leader

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by gibbz, Jun 10, 2009.

  1. gibbz macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    #1
    From Gallup

    A new poll indicates that Republicans see no clear leader for their party. I have to qualms saying that I voted Democrat in the last election, but this is no way an attack on the GOP. I just find it very interesting that such a strong party seems to be a house divided. Any thoughts as to why they seem to be in such disarray?

    CNN:
     
  2. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #2
    Intriguing that so the top identified person is Herr Limbaugh. Considering that he's "just an entertainer", and all...
     
  3. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #3
    Seems to me that generally, a leader has to be known for some particular political philosophy. "This is what I believe." That, to me, was one of Bush II's problems; I couldn't see that he really had any philosophy.

    Gingrich and Limbaugh have repeatedly stated their base principles. However, they're far more in the position of being advisors, not leaders.

    Palin? You have to work backwards from her politics to figure out just what is her political philosophy. Sure, we have a handle of Cheney's views on foreign affairs, but what are his views on the internal affairs of the nation?

    The objection by many to McCain is that he's all over the place, politically, with no apparent fundamental core beliefs. No political philosophy.

    IMO, nothing to worry about. Both parties at one time or another have been declared dead and done. Then, somebody new shows up and the disparate groups coalesce around the Phoenix...

    'Rat
     
  4. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #4
    They haven't for a long time. I certainly wouldn't consider Bush a leader. Limbaugh is a drug addict serial divorcé, and Gingrich- don't even get me started. I'm surprised they haven't suggested Trent Lott yet.
     
  5. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #5
    "Talk tough, kick ass and take care of your buddies" isn't a philosophy? I mean, it's a philosophy better suited to a pool hall than the Oval Office, but that's why we elected him, right?

    Gingrich, on the other hand, does not have a philosophy. He has an act. He is every bit as much an entertainer as Limbaugh. Gingrich's act is to stick his nose in the air and say very moralistic sounding things when his party is out of power. A leader might actually try doing some of them when his party is in power. I see more actual leadership potential in Newt from Aliens.

    Limbaugh's philosophy is Limbaugh. It's never been anything more or less.

    Palin's easy to figure out. She's the redneck-royalty cheerleader cum homecoming queen who always got her way in high school by developing a singular talent for turning on phony charm like a spigot to convince those who can give her a leg up that she is cute and charming and virtuous, while people with nothing to offer her know she's actually a manipulative amoral bitch. Anybody who grew up in any Crapsburg, USA knows at least one of these. It's statistically inevitable that one of them would eventually ooze into an improbably high position before people figure out she's an empty shell.

    Even laughably assuming Cheney could somehow procure and drink the blood of sufficient children to survive long enough to assume another high office, he's almost become a parody of himself. Cheney's media appearances are starting to take on the tone of receiving another tape from Osama bin Laden.

    He's been VP, he won't get any farther, and he's realized he doesn't have to care. What he can do is use his former position as an excuse to borrow a soap box he can leap upon from time to time to sow chaos for which he hopes the Democrats will eventually take the blame.

    His views on the internal affairs of the nation? Allow me to paraphrase: "f*** 'em."

    I am certainly one of that "many." I regarded McCain as a Republican I could potentially vote for for a great many years, but over those years I saw him blow around like a plastic shopping bag on a windy day. He's got an impressive backstory, but where the rubber meets the road, he's resting on the laurels of a legendary toughness he apparently ceased to actually possess long ago. If he were the "maverick" :)rolleyes:) we were supposed to vote for, he would have stepped up, taken control of his campaign and run it his way. Instead, he let the campaign run him. Politically, he is spineless.

    If I may suggest a strategy, they might want to try conservatism.

    It'll be quite a shift for them. It would require actually focusing on what to do and how it might benefit the nation instead of chasing the philosopher's stone that perfectly balances cronyism and pandering to maximize both high-value donations and ignorant votes to keep them wallowing in power for its own sake.

    I've said for many years, I don't strictly have a problem with conservatives. I just hope I live long enough to see one.
     
  6. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #6
    GWBush was a compassionate Reagan conservative, as I recall.

    Amen to that.
     
  7. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #7
    Rush,Newt and Cheney, all draft dodgers. They represent the republican party. No wonder Palin is still working on it.:D
     

Share This Page