Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gary Johnson is totally unelectable for a lot of reasons; Rand Paul maybe...The OP did aak about moderate Republicans, the only one that comes to mind that is even remotely electable would be Christie. I have some concerns about his electability but he certainly is a moderate...Rand Paul certainly, other than maybe his foreign affairs stand, isn't a moderate!!!!
Anyone who says Huntsman, just wants another Dem with an R next to his name in office. No, he isn't a moderate, he in a RINO and at the far side of the fence...Someone said Jindal, that is a possibility..
Huntsman would be president right now, but the right wingers are too stupid to realize that.
I agree. There is a huge hunk of the GOP that are still moderate conservatives, especially in the north and west, who don't like the teabaggers. Their problem was they went for the wrong Mormon.
Huntsman's personality is similar to Colin Powell's; he was too quiet, too intellectual and too obviously well equipped politically to be attractive during the extended Repub primaries, where extremists got all the attention and made all the noise.
The party wanted a mouthpiece for all their social causes, not a real leader in 2012, and were sure that only an outsider or an outlier would turn the trick for them. So they got Bachmann, Caine, Santorum, Perry, and a bunch of other hoo-rahs, and believed to the bone that Anybody But Obama would win.
How does a statesman compete with a bunch of clowns? He cannot. So Huntsman got out fast.
I think the Republican party is going to undergo a change by 2014. They simply have to change to survive as a party, and there is already evidence that changes are happening. The gay marriage issue is a good indicator, and I honestly believe there will be more to follow before 2016 rolls around.
2014 will tell a lot of the tale. Bachmann became a persona non grata after the election, and is now in legal and political trouble for winning again in 2014. If she, and others like her, win again, then we may well see a repeat of 2012. But if she and some of those others lose, I think it will be a signal of a re-vamped party that will foster more responsible candidates.
One thing I'm sure of: when the ACA law is fully implemented, very much of the conservative opposition points will be wiped away. Universal health care for all has been a Republican issue in the past as much as a Democratic issue.
The tail can only wag the dog for so long before the dog takes over again.
Seems like a lot of folks are talking Hillary Clinton on the D side. Blech!
I suppose it might be time to vote GOP, but that is, frankly, a terrifying prospect. Most of the current GOP seem to be paid thugs, pimping Jesus for Lockheed-Martin and the oil lobby.
Is there one candidate who is sane, moderate, and rational?
The 2012 GOP lineup was a shop of horrors, or a farce, whichever you prefer.
I mean someone who believes in limits to military spending, who has not signed any stupid tax pledges, believes in and supports science, does not spew supply-side propaganda, cares about the environment, and can actually work with people of differing views, and has the ballz to stand up to the wackaloon, dittohead fringe in their party?
Please provides some examples, and give their chances.
Why do Democrats want us to put up moderates when they vote in far lefties?
Why do Democrats want us to put up moderates when they vote in far lefties?
Not familiar with the OP's history, but I didn't see any mention of party affiliation. I think the post offers a perspective from Independents or moderates who see no choice but the vote Democrat given the craziness of the current crop of Republican presidential perspectives.
I am just a pragmatist. I know the dems cannot hold the presidency permanently, and I actually think it is healthy to go from center left to center right. I think most Americans agree, that is why they fell for W's "compassionate conservatism" sales job in 2000. It turned out that W governed for the far right, and pissed everyone off. Obama rode in on a wave of disgust with the GOP. In 2012, after the debacle of the Bush president, they should have put forward some competent, Eisenhower technocratic pragmatists. Instead, the GOP ran off the rails with ideologically "pure" but transparently incompetent candidates like Perry or Santorum. Romney was worth a shot, and if the guy had not been such a complete weasel, probably a sensible choice. A person like Huntsman, who is manifestly fit to lead, is considered a RINO, so we'll get some tool like Ryan or Rubio, who will appeal only to the GOP base, and lose.
Anyway, outside of Christie, I'm not seeing anyone. The CPAC Conference told me all I need to know. The right wing craves red meat, and will not nominate you unless you give it to 'em.
If I was a Democrat, I'd want the GOP to nominate the most extreme nutcase.
Sure, I see that. But my personal view is larger than just winning the battle. A good republic needs competition by multiple competent, reasonable candidates, not two sides who will support their candidate regardless and screw the other side.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
