PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Why not these Republicans for 2012?


Direckshun
11-21-2009, 11:31 PM
Here's a few outside-the-box speculations that I like for reasons I'll detail:

Lindsey Graham: Graham is a right-leaning semi-moderate who has become must-see TV every time he grabs a microphone. Ever since the beginning of the Obama administration, Graham has become one of the most serious voices of the Republican Party, tackling Obama on the usual issues but never afraid to take a stand against his party on other issues (Sotomayor, climate change).

John Thune: I've only seen bits and pieces of this guy but he truly stands out when I do see him. He is an aggressive voice for hardcore conservativism, young and attractive, and clearly an excellent debator (destroyed Daschle in 2004) and a solid speaker.

Mike Huckabee: This is easily the least controversial on this list here, but it makes a ton of sense as I think most independents find him to be a more serious version of Sarah Palin. We're all pretty familiar with him at this point. I think his best asset is that he's very easy to separate from a lot of the vitriol directed at Obama. The fact he's a killer speaker doesn't hurt.

John Boehner: I think Boehner would be a much better version of Romney. Boehner has been a shameless attack dog during his entire tenure as House Minority Leader, and has shown endless stamina for it. Typically these positions don't make for very good catapults to the Presidency but I think he could have the tenacity for it. He's clearly had some of the most defiant moments on the House floor and that kind of intensity would really spark the base.

Condoleeza Rice: I honestly thought Rice would have been McCain's best chance in 2008, and if the economy rights itself enough for the wars overseas to become a major issue again, she could be a strong candidate. Rice is essentially George Bush without all the economics baggage -- which is honestly what the Republican Party seems to like.

Sean Hannity: This is a waaaaaaaaaaaaaay outside the box consideration, but why not (other than the fact that POTUS would be a $100 million pay cut)? Who else is more beloved by the Republican base without all the drugs stigma of Limbaugh or Levin's destructive criticism? Virtually nobody in the Republican party possesses Hannity's endlessly clever agenda-setting. Hannity has a nearly 30-year track record of public statements on every topic under the sun, would absolutely ignite the base (talk about a Rovian campaign for the ages), and has authored more than a few books that have earned praises from arch-conservative figures worldwide (including the current Israeli PM).

I think the conservative field is going to be pretty weak in 2012. Not because the qualified people aren't there, but because the most qualified people like their chances better in 2016 running against a non-incumbent. But here are some left-field shots I like for the Republican field.

Thoughts welcome.

Chocolate Hog
11-22-2009, 12:01 AM
Lindsey Graham is a neo-con John McCain jr.

Mike Huckabee is a theorcrat


John Boehner isn't a real leader

Condaliza Rice the lady who supported the biggest blunder in American politics?

Sean Hannit theres already enough idiots in the Republican party.

The best candidate would be Gary Johnson of New Mexico. He represents the new wave of small goverment/liberterian republicans. He cutback the size of government in New Mexico and create a surplus. One of the few Republicans to win in New Mexico.

Thig Lyfe
11-22-2009, 12:03 AM
Palin/Jindal '12!!!!

ClevelandBronco
11-22-2009, 12:17 AM
The closer I looked at Huckabee the more I became convinced that he was actually a socially conservative Democrat.

Frankie
11-22-2009, 12:18 AM
Palin/Jindal '12!!!!

YEAH!!!! I LOOOVE TO SEE THAT. That has my total support.

Taco John
11-22-2009, 12:41 AM
The closer I looked at Huckabee the more I became convinced that he was actually a socially conservative Democrat.


That's what the Republican party is anymore.

DaneMcCloud
11-22-2009, 02:21 AM
YEAH!!!! I LOOOVE TO SEE THAT. That has my total support.

:shake:

NewChief
11-22-2009, 05:47 AM
The closer I looked at Huckabee the more I became convinced that he was actually a socially conservative Democrat.

This. You get sort of the worst of both worlds with Huckabee (although he did do a nice job with Arkansas health care for special needs and children).

BucEyedPea
11-22-2009, 06:06 AM
Here's a few outside-the-box speculations that I like for reasons I'll detail:

Lindsey Graham: Graham is a right-leaning semi-moderate who has become must-see TV every time he grabs a microphone. Ever since the beginning of the Obama administration, Graham has become one of the most serious voices of the Republican Party, tackling Obama on the usual issues but never afraid to take a stand against his party on other issues (Sotomayor, climate change).
He's a warmongering tarpite .

And why is it considered a virtue to stand against one's party? Only when their party is losing its integrity should this be done.

Mike Huckabee: This is easily the least controversial on this list here, but it makes a ton of sense as I think most independents find him to be a more serious version of Sarah Palin. We're all pretty familiar with him at this point. I think his best asset is that he's very easy to separate from a lot of the vitriol directed at Obama. The fact he's a killer speaker doesn't hurt.
He's a BIG govt progressive with a conservative streak. Probably wants ME war for religious reasons.

John Boehner: I think Boehner would be a much better version of Romney. Boehner has been a shameless attack dog during his entire tenure as House Minority Leader, and has shown endless stamina for it. Typically these positions don't make for very good catapults to the Presidency but I think he could have the tenacity for it. He's clearly had some of the most defiant moments on the House floor and that kind of intensity would really spark the base.
Another tarpite. I wonder how real he is right now or if he's just posturing.

Condoleeza Rice: I honestly thought Rice would have been McCain's best chance in 2008, and if the economy rights itself enough for the wars overseas to become a major issue again, she could be a strong candidate. Rice is essentially George Bush without all the economics baggage -- which is honestly what the Republican Party seems to like.
NeoCon

Sean Hannity: This is a waaaaaaaaaaaaaay outside the box consideration, but why not (other than the fact that POTUS would be a $100 million pay cut)? Who else is more beloved by the Republican base without all the drugs stigma of Limbaugh or Levin's destructive criticism? Virtually nobody in the Republican party possesses Hannity's endlessly clever agenda-setting. Hannity has a nearly 30-year track record of public statements on every topic under the sun, would absolutely ignite the base (talk about a Rovian campaign for the ages), and has authored more than a few books that have earned praises from arch-conservative figures worldwide (including the current Israeli PM).
He'd be terrible. Too strident. He's a conservative that drinks NeoCon Kool-Aid.

The republicans are a joke, these days. Neither party has the right answers.

headsnap
11-22-2009, 06:09 AM
A thread full of liberal Dems discussing who they want for a Rep Pres nominee...




el oh el!!!!!

LMAO

Calcountry
11-22-2009, 07:19 AM
Here's a few outside-the-box speculations that I like for reasons I'll detail:

Lindsey Graham: Graham is a right-leaning semi-moderate who has become must-see TV every time he grabs a microphone. Ever since the beginning of the Obama administration, Graham has become one of the most serious voices of the Republican Party, tackling Obama on the usual issues but never afraid to take a stand against his party on other issues (Sotomayor, climate change).

John Thune: I've only seen bits and pieces of this guy but he truly stands out when I do see him. He is an aggressive voice for hardcore conservativism, young and attractive, and clearly an excellent debator (destroyed Daschle in 2004) and a solid speaker.

Mike Huckabee: This is easily the least controversial on this list here, but it makes a ton of sense as I think most independents find him to be a more serious version of Sarah Palin. We're all pretty familiar with him at this point. I think his best asset is that he's very easy to separate from a lot of the vitriol directed at Obama. The fact he's a killer speaker doesn't hurt.

John Boehner: I think Boehner would be a much better version of Romney. Boehner has been a shameless attack dog during his entire tenure as House Minority Leader, and has shown endless stamina for it. Typically these positions don't make for very good catapults to the Presidency but I think he could have the tenacity for it. He's clearly had some of the most defiant moments on the House floor and that kind of intensity would really spark the base.

Condoleeza Rice: I honestly thought Rice would have been McCain's best chance in 2008, and if the economy rights itself enough for the wars overseas to become a major issue again, she could be a strong candidate. Rice is essentially George Bush without all the economics baggage -- which is honestly what the Republican Party seems to like.

Sean Hannity: This is a waaaaaaaaaaaaaay outside the box consideration, but why not (other than the fact that POTUS would be a $100 million pay cut)? Who else is more beloved by the Republican base without all the drugs stigma of Limbaugh or Levin's destructive criticism? Virtually nobody in the Republican party possesses Hannity's endlessly clever agenda-setting. Hannity has a nearly 30-year track record of public statements on every topic under the sun, would absolutely ignite the base (talk about a Rovian campaign for the ages), and has authored more than a few books that have earned praises from arch-conservative figures worldwide (including the current Israeli PM).

I think the conservative field is going to be pretty weak in 2012. Not because the qualified people aren't there, but because the most qualified people like their chances better in 2016 running against a non-incumbent. But here are some left-field shots I like for the Republican field.

Thoughts welcome.Honsetly, I would like to know, why you give so much of a shit about who WE REPUBLICANS decide to nominate? You hope we nominate some warmed over half corpse like we did last time? So that that idiot teleprompter reading dumb shit can get reelected saying, more change more change?

|Zach|
11-22-2009, 08:12 AM
Honsetly, I would like to know, why you give so much of a shit about who WE REPUBLICANS decide to nominate? You hope we nominate some warmed over half corpse like we did last time? So that that idiot teleprompter reading dumb shit can get reelected saying, more change more change?

Everyone deals with "the other side" in different ways.

Seems Direckshun likes to analyze what they are up to and throw out theories. Some people throw their hands up with rhetoric about how they are leaving the country when their party doesn't win.

Different folks make this place interesting I suppose?

Calcountry
11-22-2009, 08:49 AM
Everyone deals with "the other side" in different ways.

Seems Direckshun likes to analyze what they are up to and throw out theories. Some people throw their hands up with rhetoric about how they are leaving the country when their party doesn't win.

Different folks make this place interesting I suppose?Yep, some folks are racist too. Making jokes about ignorant white crackers.

|Zach|
11-22-2009, 08:51 AM
Yep, some folks are racist too. Making jokes about ignorant white crackers.

ROFLROFL

Who knew you "America is too PC" folks would be so sensitive.

- |Zach|
"Hater of White People"

Direckshun
11-22-2009, 08:54 AM
Honsetly, I would like to know, why you give so much of a shit about who WE REPUBLICANS decide to nominate? You hope we nominate some warmed over half corpse like we did last time? So that that idiot teleprompter reading dumb shit can get reelected saying, more change more change?

Who would you like to see run in 2012?

Reaper16
11-22-2009, 10:21 AM
Who would you like to see run in 2012?
Some cracker.

alnorth
11-22-2009, 12:52 PM
Mike Huckabee: This is easily the least controversial on this list here, but it makes a ton of sense as I think most independents find him to be a more serious version of Sarah Palin. We're all pretty familiar with him at this point. I think his best asset is that he's very easy to separate from a lot of the vitriol directed at Obama. The fact he's a killer speaker doesn't hurt.

I will not vote for this man for a couple reasons. #1) He is a complete idiot. #2) This dumbass pardoned a life-sentanced rapist basically for political reasons (He thought the guy wasn't fairly treated when Clinton was governor) The guy went on to kill somebody in Missouri.

edit: correction: Huckabee didnt technically pardon him. I forget about this technicality every time. He lobbied hard for his parole by the board responsible for it. He would not have gotten a parole without this heavy pressure from the governor of Arkansas.

HonestChieffan
11-22-2009, 02:45 PM
Lindsey will be lucky to ever get reelected after the move he has made to the left.

I would expect the field to be pretty strong considering Obama by then will be seen as so ineffective.

Norman Einstein
11-22-2009, 03:15 PM
Honsetly, I would like to know, why you give so much of a shit about who WE REPUBLICANS decide to nominate? You hope we nominate some warmed over half corpse like we did last time? So that that idiot teleprompter reading dumb shit can get reelected saying, more change more change?

What he said!

Norman Einstein
11-22-2009, 03:19 PM
Who would you like to see run in 2012?

I'd like to see someone run that just totally pisses off people like you, doesn't matter who it might be. As for now the most likely to piss off people like you would be a stronger more focused Palin. Besides, the next republican won't have to be real strong to get elected, Obama is paving his road to mediocrity as a president. We just don't know if he is going to bypass the likes of Carter at this stage, the road is not straight but he has plenty of wiggle room to over take that peanut eating goober.

SNR
11-22-2009, 03:25 PM
Lindsey's name is fucking Lindsey

|Zach|
11-22-2009, 06:49 PM
Who would you like to see run in 2012?

CalCountry comes up short when we can't blame democrats for his problems.

irishjayhawk
11-22-2009, 07:03 PM
Here's a few outside-the-box speculations that I like for reasons I'll detail:

Lindsey Graham: Graham is a right-leaning semi-moderate who has become must-see TV every time he grabs a microphone. Ever since the beginning of the Obama administration, Graham has become one of the most serious voices of the Republican Party, tackling Obama on the usual issues but never afraid to take a stand against his party on other issues (Sotomayor, climate change).

John Thune: I've only seen bits and pieces of this guy but he truly stands out when I do see him. He is an aggressive voice for hardcore conservativism, young and attractive, and clearly an excellent debator (destroyed Daschle in 2004) and a solid speaker.

Mike Huckabee: This is easily the least controversial on this list here, but it makes a ton of sense as I think most independents find him to be a more serious version of Sarah Palin. We're all pretty familiar with him at this point. I think his best asset is that he's very easy to separate from a lot of the vitriol directed at Obama. The fact he's a killer speaker doesn't hurt.

John Boehner: I think Boehner would be a much better version of Romney. Boehner has been a shameless attack dog during his entire tenure as House Minority Leader, and has shown endless stamina for it. Typically these positions don't make for very good catapults to the Presidency but I think he could have the tenacity for it. He's clearly had some of the most defiant moments on the House floor and that kind of intensity would really spark the base.

Condoleeza Rice: I honestly thought Rice would have been McCain's best chance in 2008, and if the economy rights itself enough for the wars overseas to become a major issue again, she could be a strong candidate. Rice is essentially George Bush without all the economics baggage -- which is honestly what the Republican Party seems to like.

Sean Hannity: This is a waaaaaaaaaaaaaay outside the box consideration, but why not (other than the fact that POTUS would be a $100 million pay cut)? Who else is more beloved by the Republican base without all the drugs stigma of Limbaugh or Levin's destructive criticism? Virtually nobody in the Republican party possesses Hannity's endlessly clever agenda-setting. Hannity has a nearly 30-year track record of public statements on every topic under the sun, would absolutely ignite the base (talk about a Rovian campaign for the ages), and has authored more than a few books that have earned praises from arch-conservative figures worldwide (including the current Israeli PM).

I think the conservative field is going to be pretty weak in 2012. Not because the qualified people aren't there, but because the most qualified people like their chances better in 2016 running against a non-incumbent. But here are some left-field shots I like for the Republican field.

Thoughts welcome.

LOL @ bold.

Huckabee is as frightening as Palin albeit more "qualified" since being "qualified" has recently been a sticking point (of which I disagree with entirely).

|Zach|
11-22-2009, 07:09 PM
LOL @ bold.

Huckabee is as frightening as Palin albeit more "qualified" since being "qualified" has recently been a sticking point (of which I disagree with entirely).

I disagree. I think Huckabee is a pretty sensible pragmatic guy.

irishjayhawk
11-22-2009, 07:14 PM
I disagree. I think Huckabee is a pretty sensible pragmatic guy.

Perhaps, but his nuttiness in other sectors *cough*religion*cough* overpowers any sensible ideas he may have.

I shudder to think what might happen to scientific offices/divisions/branches.

|Zach|
11-22-2009, 07:16 PM
Perhaps, but his nuttiness in other sectors *cough*religion*cough* overpowers any sensible ideas he may have.

Don't get me wrong, I am not campaigning for the guy or anything but I see him as a good candidate when you look up and town what is now the Republican party. I wouldn't be bothered by Romney.

I just hope people keep backing Palin. She will be the "third rail" for that party.

Norman Einstein
11-22-2009, 08:23 PM
Perhaps, but his nuttiness in other sectors *cough*religion*cough* overpowers any sensible ideas he may have.

I shudder to think what might happen to scientific offices/divisions/branches.

You seem to be hung up on anyone that has a belief in God. It's a shame, if you don't have that relationship you should attempt to find out what it is all about before you brand someone as unqualified because he believes in God.

Brock
11-22-2009, 08:26 PM
Huckabee has a sicko dog torturer for a son.

Direckshun
11-22-2009, 08:28 PM
You seem to be hung up on anyone that has a belief in God. It's a shame, if you don't have that relationship you should attempt to find out what it is all about before you brand someone as unqualified because he believes in God.

Is it all about anything like this:

I'd like to see someone run that just totally pisses off people like you, doesn't matter who it might be.

Is that the inner peace you wish IJH could discover?

Reaper16
11-22-2009, 08:28 PM
You seem to be hung up on anyone that has a belief in God. It's a shame, if you don't have that relationship you should attempt to find out what it is all about before you brand someone as unqualified because he believes in God.
That's not what he's saying. Huckabee is really evangelical. He would rule with an overt Christian sensibility - one that many people think is unsuitable for objective rule over people of all creeds.

Norman Einstein
11-22-2009, 08:32 PM
Is it all about anything like this:



Is that the inner peace you wish IJH could discover?

Not related. I just want to see you squirm, you seem to have a hard on for anyone that isn't a flaming liberal.

Norman Einstein
11-22-2009, 08:36 PM
That's not what he's saying. Huckabee is really evangelical. He would rule with an overt Christian sensibility - one that many people think is unsuitable for objective rule over people of all creeds.

I honestly doubt that Huckabee is going to give up his gig on TV and take a pay cut.

As far as this country being run by someone with an overt Christian sensibility, it's worked before, but that was before the PC crowd determined that God didn't belong in our lives. Live the way you feel best for you, but don't tell me how to run my life? Is that your point of view?

If you study the beliefs and comments of the founding fathers of the nation their intent was to shape this country on religious princiiples. Some were not believers, but knew that there was a power greater than them.

I'd like to see Jesse Duplantis as the President.

irishjayhawk
11-23-2009, 04:58 AM
You seem to be hung up on anyone that has a belief in God. It's a shame, if you don't have that relationship you should attempt to find out what it is all about before you brand someone as unqualified because he believes in God.

Not quite. As Reaper pointed out, it's the fact that he flaunts it and hopes to rule over others with it.

See, if it was just belief in god, I'd be writing off anyone. Mitt Romney, for instance, is a Mormon. On the one hand it's hard for me to see how he can believe in something so utterly insane and then handle the jobs of the President. Yet, I think he can. He's not as overt nor is he as evangelical about it.

Here's my favorite Mike Huckabee video:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/D08Dq_iNMRk&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D08Dq_iNMRk&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

That's fucking scary.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 05:04 AM
What do you find so "insane" of Morman beliefs?

irishjayhawk
11-23-2009, 05:21 AM
What do you find so "insane" of Morman beliefs?

Where do I start?


And no, not going to start here because it'll hijack this thread.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 06:25 AM
Not quite. As Reaper pointed out, it's the fact that he flaunts it and hopes to rule over others with it.

See, if it was just belief in god, I'd be writing off anyone. Mitt Romney, for instance, is a Mormon. On the one hand it's hard for me to see how he can believe in something so utterly insane and then handle the jobs of the President. Yet, I think he can. He's not as overt nor is he as evangelical about it.



That's ****ing scary.

Did Huckabee rule Arkansas with the heavy hand of religion? I don't ever remember hearing anyone complain about him there. What you seem to think is that his personal belief in God will automatically transfer over to the type of president you think he would be due to that belief. I believe him to be more practical than that. His belief will rule his activities as president but he would not press the issue unlike it seems Obama has with his overt type of comments regarding this nation and it's core beliefs.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 06:27 AM
Where do I start?


And no, not going to start here because it'll hijack this thread.

That's not a hijack, it's just a continuation of the OP's intention.

Direckshun
11-23-2009, 08:10 AM
That's not a hijack, it's just a continuation of the OP's intention.

I promise you I did not intend a thread on 2012 Republican nominees to be about Mormonism.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 08:24 AM
I promise you I did not intend a thread on 2012 Republican nominees to be about Mormonism.

You miss the point of your own thread? It was posted to stir up the conservative board population. Adding Mormonism is just another avenue to argue about, and or discuss.

Direckshun
11-23-2009, 08:26 AM
You miss the point of your own thread?

I cannot wait until you get banned again.

|Zach|
11-23-2009, 08:38 AM
I cannot wait until you get banned again.

Yea, he still owes me a letter from his lawyer.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 08:45 AM
You miss the point of your own thread? It was posted to stir up the conservative board population. Adding Mormonism is just another avenue to argue about, and or discuss.

I cannot wait until you get banned again.

Which part of my post was not what you intended?

Your last comment is just dumb.

The Rick
11-23-2009, 09:31 AM
I've been pushing Paul Ryan for a while now. Don't know if he'd run in 2012 because he has small children, but he's young, energetic, and as far as I can tell, pretty well respected in the party. I think he has the ability to be a big player in the future of the Republican Party.

http://www.house.gov/ryan/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Ryan_(politician)

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FmoTtw9794A&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FmoTtw9794A&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

The Rick
11-23-2009, 09:34 AM
Here's a better video:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Trrv26aZWYY&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Trrv26aZWYY&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Direckshun
11-23-2009, 10:56 AM
Hmmmmmmmmmm. Interesting.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 11:01 AM
Hmmmmmmmmmm. Interesting.


You miss the point of your own thread? It was posted to stir up the conservative board population. Adding Mormonism is just another avenue to argue about, and or discuss.

Which part of my post was not what you intended?



Still waiting for a response explaining why.


I promise you I did not intend a thread on 2012 Republican nominees to be about Mormonism.

Mr. Kotter
11-23-2009, 11:11 AM
Thune or Boehner could pull off a nomination, but neither has the charisma that seems necessary to win in the general election these days. Sad, but true.

Direckshun
11-23-2009, 11:14 AM
Still waiting for a response explaining why.

Because this was a thread started to talk about possible GOP prospects.

Not a treatise on Mormonism.

wild1
11-23-2009, 11:16 AM
I laughed and gave up after reading Graham at the top of the list. Picking RINOs like that with no principles and no backbone is why the Republican party is out of power.

Chocolate Hog
11-23-2009, 11:18 AM
Surprised Gary Johnson gets no love. I reckon he'll be 2012's Ron Paul.

ROYC75
11-23-2009, 12:10 PM
You seem to be hung up on anyone that has a belief in God. It's a shame, if you don't have that relationship you should attempt to find out what it is all about before you brand someone as unqualified because he believes in God.


He does !

Besides, even the video he posted is what 's right, it just the left and the liberals that do not see it.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 12:12 PM
Because this was a thread started to talk about possible GOP prospects.

Not a treatise on Mormonism.

One of the republican prospects is a Mormon. There has already been a few posts about Huckabee's beliefs, why not Romneys?

I honestly don't think you want to do more than stir up shit, with that in mind you should embrace the Mormon discussion and let it roll.

patteeu
11-23-2009, 12:14 PM
Here's a few outside-the-box speculations that I like for reasons I'll detail:

Lindsey Graham
Too comfortable with big government for my taste. I don't think he can get the party's nomination in any event. He's the kind of guy who I can really appreciate at times, but who all too often takes positions I can't stand.

John Thune
I like Thune alright, but I don't know him well enough to know whether I could back him. He generally votes the way I'd like him to, but I don't know what he really believes and what areas are nearest and dearest to his heart.

Mike Huckabee
No way. ClevelandBronco said it best. He might as well be a socially conservative democrat. He's pretty much dead to me as a candidate.

John Boehner
He's alright, but I doubt he would ever excite me as a candidate. I'm not even sure he's a very good minority leader. In any event, I think he's peaked as a legislator and see no indication that he's executive material.

Condoleeza Rice
I'm not a fan. While she was NSA, she seriously hindered our foreign policy / war effort with her style of management. She routinely insisted on reaching compromise between the various factions in the executive branch in order to present a melded plan to the POTUS instead of letting the POTUS evaluate coherent competing opinions. I think she was responsible for some of the confusion in the Bush administration, for example the failure to have a handle on the management of post-invasion Iraq. As bad as Colin Powell was, when she moved over to State, things got worse there (with Rice seeming to pick up the banner of the foreign policy status-quo realists). On top of that, she has very little charisma and I'm not sure she's even a conservative.

Sean Hannity
Lots of charisma and he's on the right side on most issues, but I can't see this happening at all. In addition to the experience questions, Hannity would have to defend an endless track record of sometimes controversial statements. Non-starter as far as I'm concerned. I could see Hannity getting into politics, but it would have to start somewhere other than POTUS.

Here's how I'd rank the people you listed:

1. Hannity
2. Thune
3. Boehner

big gap

T4. Rice
T4. Graham
6. Huckabee

ClevelandBronco
11-23-2009, 12:19 PM
Still waiting for a response explaining why.

Just start another thread about Mormonism and government.

Brock
11-23-2009, 12:36 PM
He does !

Besides, even the video he posted is what 's right, it just the left and the liberals that do not see it.

ROFL

irishjayhawk
11-23-2009, 02:18 PM
Lindsey Graham
Too comfortable with big government for my taste. I don't think he can get the party's nomination in any event. He's the kind of guy who I can really appreciate at times, but who all too often takes positions I can't stand.

John Thune
I like Thune alright, but I don't know him well enough to know whether I could back him. He generally votes the way I'd like him to, but I don't know what he really believes and what areas are nearest and dearest to his heart.

Mike Huckabee
No way. ClevelandBronco said it best. He might as well be a socially conservative democrat. He's pretty much dead to me as a candidate.

John Boehner
He's alright, but I doubt he would ever excite me as a candidate. I'm not even sure he's a very good minority leader. In any event, I think he's peaked as a legislator and see no indication that he's executive material.

Condoleeza Rice
I'm not a fan. While she was NSA, she seriously hindered our foreign policy / war effort with her style of management. She routinely insisted on reaching compromise between the various factions in the executive branch in order to present a melded plan to the POTUS instead of letting the POTUS evaluate coherent competing opinions. I think she was responsible for some of the confusion in the Bush administration, for example the failure to have a handle on the management of post-invasion Iraq. As bad as Colin Powell was, when she moved over to State, things got worse there (with Rice seeming to pick up the banner of the foreign policy status-quo realists). On top of that, she has very little charisma and I'm not sure she's even a conservative.

Sean Hannity
Lots of charisma and he's on the right side on most issues, but I can't see this happening at all. In addition to the experience questions, Hannity would have to defend an endless track record of sometimes controversial statements. Non-starter as far as I'm concerned. I could see Hannity getting into politics, but it would have to start somewhere other than POTUS.

Here's how I'd rank the people you listed:

1. Hannity
2. Thune
3. Boehner

big gap

T4. Rice
T4. Graham
6. Huckabee

I know it's the people he's listed, but putting Hannity #1 explains so much. So, so, so, so much.

patteeu
11-23-2009, 02:27 PM
I know it's the people he's listed, but putting Hannity #1 explains so much. So, so, so, so much.

Like what?

Calcountry
11-23-2009, 02:49 PM
Don't get me wrong, I am not campaigning for the guy or anything but I see him as a good candidate when you look up and town what is now the Republican party. I wouldn't be bothered by Romney.

I just hope people keep backing Palin. She will be the "third rail" for that party.You see, you guys are all about what is good for your party and always put the country second. I was in favor of Clinton getting the nomination because she would have made a better President for the COUNTRY, if we had to have a Liberal. At least you could count on her being bitchy enough to not bow down low and appologize to every last lowlife dictator in the world. Certainly she had more experience in the way Washington operates than this fool we have now. An example of this is him saying we must cut spending at the same time the fool is proposing another trillion dollar health bill or stimulus etc.

For the good of the country, as I saw it at the time, given the nature of the political cycle favoring the Democrats, I felt that Clinton should get the nomination. I could care less about my party before the country. I would never say, "Elect Obama, he is going to be the third rail for the Democrats" even if I believed it, and he is.

Calcountry
11-23-2009, 03:13 PM
That's not what he's saying. Huckabee is really evangelical. He would rule with an overt Christian sensibility - one that many people think is unsuitable for objective rule over people of all creeds.You see, this is EXACTLY what you guys don't get. WE DONT ELECT PEOPLE TO RULE OVER US! We don't have phugging kings in this country, we have, or are suppose to have Presidents. The preside over us, the certainly don't rule us, or at least they shouldn't.

Reaper16
11-23-2009, 04:33 PM
You see, this is EXACTLY what you guys don't get. WE DONT ELECT PEOPLE TO RULE OVER US! We don't have phugging kings in this country, we have, or are suppose to have Presidents. The preside over us, the certainly don't rule us, or at least they shouldn't.
I used that phrase for a reason. Huckabee's religious fervor would be kind of oppressive.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 04:57 PM
I used that phrase for a reason. Huckabee's religious fervor would be kind of oppressive.Was he opressive when he was the Governor of Arkansas? That would have been national news if he had been and I don't remember hearing a word about his religious stand when he was there.

Mr. Flopnuts
11-23-2009, 08:16 PM
I could see it now. "America needs a Boehner!" Campaign slogans would be golden.

Direckshun
11-23-2009, 08:36 PM
I could see it now. "America needs a Boehner!" Campaign slogans would be golden.

FUCK.

YES.

Direckshun
11-23-2009, 08:36 PM
One of the republican prospects is a Mormon. There has already been a few posts about Huckabee's beliefs, why not Romneys?

I honestly don't think you want to do more than stir up shit, with that in mind you should embrace the Mormon discussion and let it roll.

The length of this conversation has far exceeded my interest in it.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 08:44 PM
The length of this conversation has far exceeded my interest in it.



The truth hurts and you have been called out for only wanting to stir up shit. Put up or shut up.

Direckshun
11-23-2009, 08:54 PM
The truth hurts and you have been called out for only wanting to stir up shit. Put up or shut up.

I hear windchimes.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 08:58 PM
I hear windchimes.

most likely because you are high on something illegal.

Direckshun
11-23-2009, 09:01 PM
most likely because you are high on something illegal.

That would explain your wolf head.

Reaper16
11-23-2009, 09:02 PM
most likely because you are high on something illegal.
Migrant labor?

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 09:05 PM
Migrant labor?

Never thougth of that, good observaton.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 09:07 PM
That would explain your wolf head.

You are exceptionally lame, not to mention a LWNJ that doesn't have the gumption to face your own falicies. Good job.

When are you going to admit the real reason you started this thread?

Mr. Flopnuts
11-23-2009, 09:23 PM
I could see it now. "America needs a Boehner!" Campaign slogans would be golden.

"Boehner Power!!!"

"America's getting fucked. Fight back with Boehner!"

This could literally be a Letterman's Top ten list.

Chiefshrink
11-23-2009, 09:27 PM
I laughed and gave up after reading Graham at the top of the list. Picking RINOs like that with no principles and no backbone is why the Republican party is out of power.

PRECISELY!!!!!:thumb:

|Zach|
11-23-2009, 10:50 PM
You see, you guys are all about what is good for your party and always put the country second. I was in favor of Clinton getting the nomination because she would have made a better President for the COUNTRY, if we had to have a Liberal. At least you could count on her being bitchy enough to not bow down low and appologize to every last lowlife dictator in the world. Certainly she had more experience in the way Washington operates than this fool we have now. An example of this is him saying we must cut spending at the same time the fool is proposing another trillion dollar health bill or stimulus etc.

For the good of the country, as I saw it at the time, given the nature of the political cycle favoring the Democrats, I felt that Clinton should get the nomination. I could care less about my party before the country. I would never say, "Elect Obama, he is going to be the third rail for the Democrats" even if I believed it, and he is.
Obviously, I don't feel like Palin would be better for the country. I can honestly say if the Republicans ran someone I thought was better for the country I could vote for them. Now, I seriously doubt they have that kind of candidate up their sleeve but I am not married to the democratic party in the least.

|Zach|
11-23-2009, 10:50 PM
PRECISELY!!!!!:thumb:

We haven't gotten an update on the whole birther lawsuit in a while. What gives?

Direckshun
11-23-2009, 11:00 PM
You are exceptionally lame, not to mention a LWNJ that doesn't have the gumption to face your own falicies. Good job.

When are you going to admit the real reason you started this thread?

Did you know the human brain doesn't have any nerves in it? You can stab it repeatedly without feeling anything.

I've mentioned it before on this forum. Just thought we could all use a refresher.

|Zach|
11-23-2009, 11:08 PM
One thing some of you guys have going for you is the fact that it seems Fox news thinks that all 193% of Republicans support Palin, Romney and Huckabee.

http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/193.jpg

http://wonkette.com/412361/all-193-of-republicans-support-palin-romney-and-huckabee

irishjayhawk
11-24-2009, 04:53 AM
Like what?

The bonefide Republican who slurps all propaganda of almost any form.


Hannity, an entertainer, who's batshit insane, beats out those other guys? Really? That partisan a figure is #1 on your list of those candidates?

It just explains so much.

Norman Einstein
11-24-2009, 04:58 AM
Did you know the human brain doesn't have any nerves in it? You can stab it repeatedly without feeling anything.

I've mentioned it before on this forum. Just thought we could all use a refresher.

Now you've explained why you, as a flaming liberal, have suggested potential candiates for the republican party for the next election. You have given yourself a lobotomy. Thanks for the clarification, I hope you stop doing things like that to yourself before it's too late.:rolleyes:

Norman Einstein
11-24-2009, 05:02 AM
The bonefide Republican who slurps all propaganda of almost any form.


Hannity, an entertainer, who's batshit insane, beats out those other guys? Really? That partisan a figure is #1 on your list of those candidates?

It just explains so much.

If you believe the republican party would put Hannity on the ticket, in any manner, you are more batshit insane than anyone on this board.

First, there haven't been any favorite sons that have been preselected for the run like obama was after Kerry lost in 2004. For his last 4 years as a senator he did nothing but campaign for president with the full backing of the money man for the democratic party. How much did Soros pay to have obama elected?

patteeu
11-24-2009, 06:07 AM
The bonefide Republican who slurps all propaganda of almost any form.


Hannity, an entertainer, who's batshit insane, beats out those other guys? Really? That partisan a figure is #1 on your list of those candidates?

It just explains so much.

I haven't made much of a secret out of the fact that, on important issues, I don't think there's much, if any, good coming from the democrat party. Naturally that would make me look pretty partisan even if I'm not a party line guy at all.

Which of those lame candidates that Direckshun proposed should I have ahead of Hannity? Graham because he likes big government? Boehner because he's boring? Rice because she created so many problems for the Bush administration and because she took a stance against the Cheney view when she went to State? No, Hannity wins by default here.

Inspector
11-24-2009, 12:36 PM
I'm still waiting for Pat Paulson to make another run. I always thought he'd be great.

KCTitus
11-24-2009, 06:26 PM
Out of the box? How about anyone who has ZERO Washington experience, or anyone who isnt influenced by a lobbyist or special interest.

Average people off the street...they would make better decisions than many in congress today.

Norman Einstein
11-24-2009, 10:05 PM
I'm still waiting for Pat Paulson to make another run. I always thought he'd be great.

Isn't Pat taking a dirt nap?

At first when he ran for president it was a joke, now the joke is on us and he would have made a better president than the most recent one and the most immediate past one.

BigChiefFan
11-24-2009, 10:31 PM
You all claim to be conservatives and don't even know who the best candidate is for the Republicans. LMAO.

Here's your CLUE...JIM INHOFE.

You guys crack me up.

Norman Einstein
11-24-2009, 10:33 PM
You all claim to be conservatives and don't even know who the best candidate is for the Republicans. LMAO.

Here's your CLUE...JIM INHOFE.

You guys crack me up.

What's your support for him? Expound your beliefs, someone will surely listen to you.

BigChiefFan
11-24-2009, 10:37 PM
What's your support for him? Expound your beliefs, someone will surely listen to you.He actually practices(votes) what he "preaches". He has the MOST CONSERVATIVE VOTING RECORD in the Senate. He has stood up against the global warming hoax. He was against Bush's bail-out.

How's that for a starter?

BigChiefFan
11-24-2009, 10:41 PM
What's your support for him? Expound your beliefs, someone will surely listen to you.You sure got quiet. Huh?

patteeu
11-25-2009, 05:44 AM
You all claim to be conservatives and don't even know who the best candidate is for the Republicans. LMAO.

Here's your CLUE...JIM INHOFE.

You guys crack me up.

:rolleyes: The guy is older than John McCain. No thanks.

Norman Einstein
11-25-2009, 05:55 AM
You sure got quiet. Huh?

Hey Moron, some people actually go to bed because they work and
actually feel they need to be rested to work during the day.

Norman Einstein
11-25-2009, 06:01 AM
He actually practices(votes) what he "preaches". He has the MOST CONSERVATIVE VOTING RECORD in the Senate. He has stood up against the global warming hoax. He was against Bush's bail-out.

How's that for a starter?

I never said I didn't think he was someone that shouldn't be considered, I wanted you to support your point. I guess a little is better than nothing. Got any more?

Your starter is done, what else has he done to make you feel he is the guy that should be nominated? From the Middle of the country, or is it just not from Alaska?

You have shown some real fear of Sarah, but what she brings is more common sense and a better contact with the middle class people in the country.

But I digress, you already know that. You have a hard on for her because she didn't answer questions like a seasoned politician would have. Again I point out that she held her own in the debate with Biden after being in the race, and national politics, for only around 6 weeks when she stood her ground. If she had of been on the minds of those making the selection for VP a few months earlier she would have been up to speed and most likely kicked Bidens ass in the debate.

As for Inhofe, you have to do better.

Royal Fanatic
11-25-2009, 06:15 AM
How the OP could have left out Mitt Romney is beyond me. This guy is infinitely more qualified than anyone on that list. The conservatives refused to embrace Romney because he's not the right denomination of Christian, and now we're stuck with, well, you know the rest.

Norman Einstein
11-25-2009, 06:34 AM
How the OP could have left out Mitt Romney is beyond me. This guy is infinitely more qualified than anyone on that list. The conservatives refused to embrace Romney because he's not the right denomination of Christian, and now we're stuck with, well, you know the rest.

The OP didn't list Romney because he might have too much of a chance to be elected. IMO the OP listed those he felt capable of getting the nomination but no chance of getting elected. The list was shaded for the liberal mind.

patteeu
11-25-2009, 06:39 AM
How the OP could have left out Mitt Romney is beyond me. This guy is infinitely more qualified than anyone on that list. The conservatives refused to embrace Romney because he's not the right denomination of Christian, and now we're stuck with, well, you know the rest.

Direckshun was going for "outside-the-box" candidates. I'm not sure that Mike Huckabee really fits that description, but the others all do. Romney, Palin, Pawlenty, Gingrich, and maybe a couple of others are the regulars (inside-the-box people) that get mentioned in these discussions.

I think Romney would have been the perfect guy for the job during this economic downturn, although I'd be a bit worried about how far he'd go to compromise with the democrats in Congress. He'd have been far better than the guy we ended up with though.

BigChiefFan
11-25-2009, 08:50 AM
:rolleyes: The guy is older than John McCain. No thanks.
So in other words, you don't really support REAL CONSERVATIVES. Inhofe isn't a delirious socialist like McCain, no wonder you don't support him. Conservative Republican, my ass.

BigRedChief
11-25-2009, 08:52 AM
So in other words, you don't really support REAL CONSERVATIVES. Inhofe isn't a delirious socialist like McCain, no wonder you don't support him. Conservative Republican, my ass.
Maybe they can get a Gengis Khan ancestor to run. That would probably be conservative enough.:)

patteeu
11-25-2009, 09:55 AM
So in other words, you don't really support REAL CONSERVATIVES. Inhofe isn't a delirious socialist like McCain, no wonder you don't support him. Conservative Republican, my ass.

:spock: What are you talking about? You never disappoint with the amount of dumb you can bring to a conversation.

FWIW, I don't have any problem with Inhofe other than the fact that his age pretty much removes him from consideration.

KCTitus
11-25-2009, 10:09 AM
How the OP could have left out Mitt Romney is beyond me. This guy is infinitely more qualified than anyone on that list. The conservatives refused to embrace Romney because he's not the right denomination of Christian, and now we're stuck with, well, you know the rest.

And all this time, I thought it was due to his role in the development of socialized medicine in Massachusetts. At least is was for me...I have to admit of the 3 Republican candidates, he was the least bad. All 3 were bad, IMO.

BigChiefFan
11-25-2009, 10:11 AM
:spock: What are you talking about? You never disappoint with the amount of dumb you can bring to a conversation.

FWIW, I don't have any problem with Inhofe other than the fact that his age pretty much removes him from consideration.

Age? Age would be a factor if had dementia, but since he doesn't I fail to see the relevance of bringing it up. You either support real conservatives or you don't. McCain is NOT a CONSERVATIVE and you supported him, but you have a problem with Inhofe's age? Not looking real good for your supposed conservative ways.

Chocolate Hog
11-25-2009, 12:47 PM
How the OP could have left out Mitt Romney is beyond me. This guy is infinitely more qualified than anyone on that list. The conservatives refused to embrace Romney because he's not the right denomination of Christian, and now we're stuck with, well, you know the rest.

LOL, Mitt Romney is a moderate democrat who said he would consult his lawyers before reading the constitution when declaring a war.

BCD
11-25-2009, 01:00 PM
Jesus. I'd rather masturbate with a cheese grater.

Direckshun
11-25-2009, 01:01 PM
Coburn has a reputation as Senator No, so maybe he has a shot instead of Inhofe.

patteeu
11-25-2009, 02:20 PM
Age? Age would be a factor if had dementia, but since he doesn't I fail to see the relevance of bringing it up. You either support real conservatives or you don't. McCain is NOT a CONSERVATIVE and you supported him, but you have a problem with Inhofe's age? Not looking real good for your supposed conservative ways.

I know you really want to land a blow here, but your swings are so wildly inaccurate that you're just making yourself look like a fool to anyone with any intelligence at all.

1. McCain is not afflicted with dementia but age was a constant issue throughout his campaign. Age isn't a problem for me, but it IS an electability issue. I see no good reason to seek out a candidate who is even older than McCain was. There are plenty of younger conservatives who are at least Inhofe's equals as candidates. If you've got a particular love of Inhofe, more power to you, but he won't be and shouldn't be the GOP candidate in 2012.

2. I supported McCain when he became the last GOP candidate standing because I knew that he was the ONLY alternative to either Hillary or Obama. I never gave anyone any reason to believe my support was enthusiastic. If the GOP makes the mistake of nominating Inhofe despite his age, I'd imagine I'd end up supporting him.

patteeu
11-25-2009, 02:21 PM
Coburn has a reputation as Senator No, so maybe he has a shot instead of Inhofe.

That's a much more reasonable suggestion.

irishjayhawk
11-25-2009, 05:30 PM
I haven't made much of a secret out of the fact that, on important issues, I don't think there's much, if any, good coming from the democrat party. Naturally that would make me look pretty partisan even if I'm not a party line guy at all.

Which of those lame candidates that Direckshun proposed should I have ahead of Hannity? Graham because he likes big government? Boehner because he's boring? Rice because she created so many problems for the Bush administration and because she took a stance against the Cheney view when she went to State? No, Hannity wins by default here.

Fair enough. Like I said, I knew it was just based on the list he provided...

That said, I still think you would have categorically ruled him out on principle. Which leads me to believe you think he might actually be a viable candidate. Is that true?

patteeu
11-25-2009, 09:49 PM
Fair enough. Like I said, I knew it was just based on the list he provided...

That said, I still think you would have categorically ruled him out on principle. Which leads me to believe you think he might actually be a viable candidate. Is that true?

What do you mean by viable? If you mean, can he win, my answer is no. If you mean do I think he'd be better than our current POTUS, my answer is yes.

Norman Einstein
11-26-2009, 06:57 AM
What do you mean by viable? If you mean, can he win, my answer is no. If you mean do I think he'd be better than our current POTUS, my answer is yes.

But virtually every conservative and a great number of democrats would be better than what we have now.