Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by rdowns, Oct 25, 2011.
Pat Robertson thinks so. Really shows you how *******e they are.
Whoa! You know you've gone too far when Pat Robertson says you're extreme.
Well, the question is...does he think they are too extreme, or is he telling them to stop talking so extreme in order to get votes?
Sounds like the latter.
True enough. But at the same time, what are they supposed to do? these candidates all want the nomination. And the extreme right is driving them to be as extreme as possible. If they don't agree to their demands, they lose the nomination.
Ron Paul has my vote
I would encourage you to look at Dr Paul more closely. He is not moderate in any sense of the word.
^^I don't understand the vocal support that Ron Paul gets on the internet. Nobody I know in real life supports him, or at least will admit to it.
I love when people act like he's a viable candidate. He's completely unelectable.
With the right fractured the way it is right now, I really wouldn't be surprised to see a far right spoiler candidate on a third party (Tea Party, perhaps) ticket. If Romney takes the GOP nomination, the right wing will see him as much too close to center, and there may be a big void waiting to be filled. A candidate like Paul, Perry or maybe Cain could take, say, 8, 10, maybe 15% on the right. Just enough to ruin the GOP candidate's race. There's certainly enough anti-establishment sentiment out there.
I really hope you're right. These people are scary.
It's either Ron Paul or Obama.
Mr. Paul is the only viable candidate
Romney is the only one of the group who has sufficient gravitas to win. If I were a betting man, I'd put money on him to get the nod right now.
2000 is still recent enough for the GOP and the Tea Party to remember how Nader split the D vote between himself and Gore. I don't think they'll want to attempt that error. I'd guess on a Romney-[some Tea candidate] ticket to appease the Tea Party crowd. Or possibly Gov. Christie from NJ as an alternate VP choice.
You assume them to possess the wisdom to learn from history... an assumption not supported by their outlandish positions of late.
Put your money to far better use, amigo. I hear Vienna is lovely this time of year.
You know. Obama would have got a lot more done had it not been for the republican obstructionism.
Any of these candidates. I don't see them winning in a general election unless the republicans are successful in changing voter registration requirements in key states.
So the republicans are going to either have Romney and a tea-party candidate as VP or Romney stays as mainstream as he can and a tea-party candidate runs on a 3rd party ticket just out of principle. If that happens Obama is assured re-election.
but honestly the presidential election isn't my main concern. The congressional election is. That's where the real bills start and end up.
So unless the democrats take back congress we are screwed even if Obama wins re-election.
Your personal preference aside, Paul has not a chance in hell.
At this point in time I'd certainly agree that Romney is most likely to get the nomination. That said, I don't think a lip-service-to-the-tea-party running mate pick is going to work any better than Palin worked for McCain. These people showed that they want their candidates in office, not the GOP establishment, and that they can mobilize votes.
The traditional organizers of the Republican bloc (Karl Rove et al) are scared. The issues the Tea Partiers stand for and their uncompromising attitude prove their shortsightednessall it takes is a candidate vain enough to flatter her/himself with an independent candidacy, and they will take a good number of votes. In fact, I could see a candidate emergingwith resulting grandiose ideas of a 'mandate'by popular demand, much the way Christie was recently begged to run.
Enter Sara Palin
I tend to think that Republicans are unhappy with Romney (he's beginning to look like the GOP's Kerry), but will hold their noses because of his electability.
I also think you're right about using a Tea Party candidate (an attack dog like Cheney was), who can carry the flag without scaring the larger electorate. This balancing act might work, though it could ultimately backfire like Palin did for McCain.
Your personal preference aside as well, I very much disagree with that. Look at his support base and tell me he doesn't have a chance.
He had 2 of his 3 years so far with no Republican obstructionism. They had all the power they could have ever wanted in his first 2 years.
And Ron Paul isn't getting the republican nomination. But keep throwing your time, money and support in the black hole that is the Ron Paul campaign.
He doesn't have a chance.
Libertarianism is largely an internet hobby for young males.
Romney's big issues are that 1) he supports ideas like global warming, 2) ObamaCare is just a nationwide rehash of RomneyCare, and 3) and that he's Mormon. #1 and #2 can play to the center for him; and if JFK could overcome being Catholic, Romney can overcome being LDS.
Had HRC not been running in 2008, I'm willing to bet that no one outside of Alaska would know who Sarah Palin is today. If he can find a running mate who can reliably string three sentences together without sounding like a complete maroon, then he'll do fine.
I don't think the LDS thing is such a big deal, although I think this is the part where some kind of "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy" paraphrase is necessary.
As for Robertson, I think a shingle is being hung up for the "How to Dress in Sheeps' Clothing School for Wolves."
What Congress are you looking at? Even when the Democrats had 60 Senators to break the GOP's filibuster, the GOP managed to scare the public enough where they got the Democrats worrying about reelection not to vote for measures Obama was pushing.
They managed to obstruct even when they shouldn't have been able to obstruct with the Dems having a supermajority.
Do you think it's fair to place no blame on the Democratic party for this kind of cowardice? If you're the President and I dress up in a demon costume, stand at your shoulder, and keep whispering, "Boo, scary scary!" in your ear, that isn't an excuse for you to start a war....
Just goes to show that not all the Democrats are Marxist, just most.