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.
Romney and Huckabee were just as bad. But their were plenty of better candidates like Fred Thompson and Tom Tancredo. Even Guiliani was at least honest about the fact that he was a liberal unlike McCain, Romney, and Huckabee.
Long-serving Senators like McCain are logical primary choices based on their records, experience and name recognition but sure losers in the general because they have long track records that make them vulnerable to attack. Their opponents glean their past for scandals and major screw-ups (Keating five, swift boats, being Al Gore, etc) and hammer away with negative ads. Their relatively unknown opponents (BO, "W", Clinton, Carter, etc) largely get a free pass because so little is known about them. Hopefully the Republican Party has learned a lesson from the Dole/McCain defeats.
Because the republicans really had nothing to bring to the table. Mccain was the most well known (and deepest pocket) candidate on the lineup.
WHAT? McCain had public financing and the reason McCain was the most well-know is because conservatives complained about him for years. It wasn't Democrats who gave him the nickname of McLame. My reasoning for the primary was "anybody but McCain" but in the general election I had to do what his mother said we conservatives would do - held my nose and voted for him (over the socialist with zero experience).
If the Republicans run the retreads (Huckabee, Romney, Palin, Gingrich) in 2012, I'll have to hold my nose again.
Republicans usually pick the "next in line" candidate. Sometimes that results in really bad picks such as Bob Dole, Ford and McCain. My guessing is that they will choose Romney in 2012 and I really don't see him winning either. If he does it will only be by default because the economy is really FUBAR'd or because Obama got caught in a scandal of some kind.
America will never elect a Mormon. Notice I didn't say Mormons can't be president. I simply said America will never elect one president. If Republicans nominate Romney the Democrat will certainly win.
I also expect a strong primary challenge to BO but probably not Hilary. Gonna have a lot of *******s hitting the streets in 2011. Maybe Dodd will give it a whirl.
As for the Obamas, I suspect they have already begun stealing the White House silverware as they take in all the vacations they can before getting tossed out in 2012. Obummer hung his hat on that non-jobs creating stimulus that added a trillion to the national debt while doing little if anything at all to reduce unemployment.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,763,471 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
America will never elect a Mormon. Notice I didn't say Mormons can't be president. I simply said America will never elect one president. If Republicans nominate Romney the Democrat will certainly win.
I also expect a strong primary challenge to BO but probably not Hilary. Gonna have a lot of *******s hitting the streets in 2011. Maybe Dodd will give it a whirl.
As for the Obamas, I suspect they have already begun stealing the White House silverware as they take in all the vacations they can before getting tossed out in 2012. Obummer hung his hat on that non-jobs creating stimulus that added a trillion to the national debt while doing little if anything at all to reduce unemployment.
I can't wait for the debates!
Obama will do "just enough" to avoid a challenge from the left. He remembers what happened when Carter was challenged by Kennedy.
Sorry but nothing we can do about the what if's. Right now we need to figure out how to make things better off for most of us, not worse, or be told promises of a new era of HOPE AND CHANGE, that is nothing but a load of crap! I feel that the media, helped blind-sight so many who voted for Obama, because if this truly is the hope most of you wanted, you deserve what you are getting, you can be fooled once, but twice, fool me not.
I feel that the media, helped blind-sight so many who voted for Obama, because if this truly is the hope most of you wanted, you deserve what you are getting, you can be fooled once, but twice, fool me not.
It's much better than what I would have been getting under Methuselah and Mama Grizzly.
Politics is ALWAYS about the lesser of two evils. That's why no one party stays in power for a long time. Republicans will regain some of their power, the country will get sick of their antics, and the pendulum will swing back to Democrats, and back and forth.
He was the most sensible and moderate conservative there was unfortantly picking Sara Palin as his vice presidential choice spoiled all chances he had to be elected as president espcially amongst indepedent or non party affiliated voters.
Not true. Independent voters did not turn away from McCain because of Palin. McCain and Palin were in the lead with independents until the economy crashed. Tat's when/why they voted for Obama.
Stop rewriting history to what you wanted it to be.
Mccain was on life support and needed to throw a hail mary to have any chance of which he did with palin. Initially he did get a boost being a shock and people saying "sarah who?" after everyone found out how little experience she had and the thought of having her lead ultimately hurt mccain.
Again, not true. People had no problem with Palin. McCains numbers stayed ahead of Obama when he nominated Palin.
Obama was unable to jump ahead in the polss until the stock market crashed.
Stop rewriting history to what you wanted it to be.
Again, not true. People had no problem with Palin. McCains numbers stayed ahead of Obama when he nominated Palin.
Obama was unable to jump ahead in the polss until the stock market crashed.
Stop rewriting history to what you wanted it to be.
I agree with you to a certain extent. It was the failing economy that sank McCain. Put simply, he was far less convincing than Obama on the subject.
However, I disagree with regard to Palin. She was a liability that McCain didn't need when he was already struggling against Obama .... and that liability got worse as time went on. I know of quite a few long-term Republicans who voted Obama because of her.
I agree with you to a certain extent. It was the failing economy that sank McCain. Put simply, he was far less convincing than Obama on the subject.
However, I disagree with regard to Palin. She was a liability that McCain didn't need when he was already struggling against Obama .... and that liability got worse as time went on. I know of quite a few long-term Republicans who voted Obama because of her.
The numbers don't back you up. McCains poll numbers went up and stayed there because of Palin. They only went down because of the economy.
Millions of conservatives that just weren't going to vote turned out because of Palin.
That's what all the reporting and polling at the time showed.
The left has just made up this about Palin hurting McCain. It just did not happen that way.
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.
