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.
Pawlenty would be OK as a VP because watching him is like watching paint dry...he wont captivate anybody.
Romney WAS a good candidate in 08 but Conservatives wont have any part of him due to RomneyCare.
In general, Romney could be viable....except he is from tax-achusetts....NYC and "up north" people are not voted for in the southern regions of the U.S.....we are still in a civil war here....any northerner is equal to Satan.
This is the same reason McCain was favored in South Carolina years ago.....the far right/racism is a world unto itself. And they never travel anywhere, except maybe to Myrtle Beach.
I agree, absolutely. The republicans have to pull in independent and moderate candidates to beat Obama, and many like Palin who have strong appeal from the base can't pull in those much needed swing voters.
The Republican party has a major problem on its hands. Yes, Obama is very beatable. But the Republican party is so fragmented right now between the Tea Partiers, the Social Conservatives, and the moderate conservatives, they can't field a candidate yet who could unify the party as a whole. I know there are many people who think the Tea Party movement is in the majority, simply because "Obama is a socialist/Communist and the nation will rise up to oust him," but most of us like to look at this next election rationally and pragmatically. An extremist candidate will not win, not matter what the circumstances.
And many, like myself, would like to see an actual leader with good ideas, sensible (not radical) solutions, and the political savvy to do the things that need to be done.
Since the disenchantment of independent voters with Obama is well established, the 2012 Republican vote will consist of independent voters who accept whatever Republican runs after the internal struggle for control of the party is complete, the victors of that struggle and the balance of the committed anti-Obama vote. If the conservative/Tea Party elements prevail in that struggle, a portion of the left-leaning independents will be turned-off and either stay home or vote Democrat. Likewise, if the corporate wh*re/RINOs win the day, many of the conservative independents will either not bother or perhaps vote Libertarian. Obviously that's an enormous oversimplification, but the principle applies none the less.
It may seem that the ongoing conflict within the Republican Party is strictly an internal GOP matter, but in truth it has less to do with the party than the the nation as a whole. The Tea Party movement which seeks to take over the Republican Party is one that opposes the wildly popular deficit spending facilitated by both parties. To oppose what seems to its recipients to be free money will always be unpopular. Moreover, the inevitable change the movement promotes will only occur when the pain associated with financing government benefits exceeds the perceived value of those benefits for the majority of voters. This process is complicated by the fact that those who experience most of the pain are typically not the same people who enjoy most of the benefits. And while some on the receiving end are beginning to experience that pain at the gas pump and elsewhere as the dollar declines, it's just the beginning of the process. We have a long way to go before the current recipient class loses its political clout to tax payers and future generations responsible for the bill but still too young to vote.
The wishful fantasy of a latter-day Reagan coming on the seen to unite the Party and draw blue-collar Democrats is just that, a fantasy. And it isn't that principled conservatives aren't out there. The various Tea Party organizations endorsed candidates in 2010 and many won. No, the issue isn't candidates or a lack of them. The issue is the system carrots and sticks government has arraigned to keep recipients of government largess shamelessly dependent, increasingly plentiful and unwilling to bite the hand which feeds them. It's a proven formula. The last time we experienced this much dependency on the hand of government, it took WWII and the death of FDR to move people off the tit.
In the current contest, the message that must be carried forward is more important than the messenger, and that message is, "You can do better America". In 1960 and 1980, America responded to that very same message. We'll have to wait and see who carries that message forward in 2012 and if America is ready to respond to it again.
All the somewhat reasonable candidates have passed because they see no reason to blow their wad on a non-starter. They know their chance of beating Obama after going so far right in the primary will be nill. They aren't stupid, none of them care about there families or charity. They know if they get exposed and lose in a general that's it. They'll take there chances in a 2016 open field probably against Duval Patrick, Hilary, Anthony Weiner, Cory Booker, Martin O'Malley.
I don't think the public wants to hear about Huckabee's video, is he selling that or is it for charity?
Palin and her new expensive home, moving to AZ, when she was Gov of Alaska, Palins Alaska? Bristol selling a book
Pawlenty saying he balanced a budget when he took funds from the stimulus, heath care for the poor, education etc.
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.