Viable Republican Candidates?

1. 61

   mel22posted 13 years ago

   Who will be the most viable candidates to run against the Dems next term?
   
   Romney?
   Pawlenty?
   Jindal?
   None of the Above?
   Palin?
   Other?
   
   Your thoughts on ONE that seems most viable as of now!

   replyreport
   1. 56

      C.J. Wrightposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Pawlenty....Seems level headed. Has a state run health care system that appears to work....if Americans decide they truly want that, maybe he's a guy you can trust to see it through. I specifically like his views on fiscal restraint and responsibility.

      replyreport
   2. 76

      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      None of the above.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         sneakorocksolidposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         You wouldn't vote for a republican anyway!

         replyreport
2. 65

   goldenpathposted 13 years ago

   I am seriously considering the next run.  Working on it.

   replyreport
3. 60

   Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years ago

   

   replyreport
4. 0

   sneakorocksolidposted 13 years ago

   I think Romney is very capable and is the best choice. I don't think the left is ready for a Mormon president.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      mel22posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      That would shake them up a bit wouldn't it. I personally don't know much about Mormons but any conservative at this point would be better than a liberal . He definitely looks presidential and speaks tough rhetoric.
      
      RM, But i saw Colbert kissing Tom Hanks on his show for a skit and it didnt look they were joking. They looked like they liked it. Grossed me out , I had to turn it. Hes like a gay Clark Kent with a Bizzarro alter ego compared to the normal Superman. He's a fake acting in the parody shoes of O'Reilly!

      replyreport
   2. 90

      livelongerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Haha...as if the left votes in the Republican primary. Good luck convincing fellow "conservatives."

      replyreport
      1. 0

         sneakorocksolidposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Well the gays weren't well behaved after the vote in California, how do you think they'll behave after that vote!

         replyreport
         1. 90

            livelongerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            A lot better behaved than you would have been if your rights had been voted away.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               sneakorocksolidposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               You rarely know what you're talking about and this is another prime example. How about for once you check your self and admit that their behavior was criminal? They lost all their rights, everyone of them, please!

               replyreport
               1. 90

                  livelongerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Gays and lesbians lost the right to get married, which they had before, and the numerous rights that go along with it. What would your reaction be if you lost these same set of rights?
                  
                  And yes, I agree, the voters of California who voted to deny a minority equal rights were criminal.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     sneakorocksolidposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     They never lost anything that denies them the same rights everyone has. They should be asking for a civil union if those rights associated with marraige are that important. They have  an agenda and they are playing it to be in position to sue churches.
                     
                     Well our system in this country is to vote for change, you lost! That does not give you the right to act out when you don't get what you want.

                     replyreport
                     1. 90

                        livelongerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        A civil union is not a marriage, and gays lost the right to get married. To argue differently reflects profound ignorance on the issue.
                        
                        We are a constitutional republic, with equal protection enshrined in the Constitution. The majority should never have the right to vote away the rights of a minority.
                        
                        You haven't detailed what "acting out" means. Were there violent riots that I missed? Are you complaining about the numerous rallies and marches against Prop 8? Are you offended by free speech?

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           sneakorocksolidposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           Gays briefly had the right because an activist judge overruled the previous decision. The Constitution also protects us from a radical minority that preserved the opinion ,that I share, that gay marraige is an offensive insult to the institution of marraige.
                           
                           "Acting out" in this case is vadalizing LDS churches, which is a criminal offense. This behavior demonstrates that gays and their supporters have no respect for the rights and values of others so they are afforded the same treatment without the vadalism.
                           
                           The conservative position is always to obey the law and thats the problem your side has. A reasonable compromise, civil union, is the middle ground. It's time you and the others like you find it and you'll gain the support you need to get it done.

                           replyreport
                           1. 90

                              livelongerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                              I don't think you understand what judges are supposed to do. They are charged with interpreting the constitutionality of laws. That is their job. So whenever they strike down a law as being unconstitutional, they are arguably being activist and they are simultaneously doing exactly what they are supposed to do. Besides, it was 4 judges who ruled that denying gay couples the right to marry was a violation of equal protection under the California constitution.
                              
                              However, it's striking that:
                              - you attribute the rectitude of Prop 8 supporters to acts of vandalism after the vote
                              - you assume all gays/lesbians and equal-rights supporters were guilty of the small minority of vandals
                              
                              Similar logic has been used to justify the Holocaust (specifically that Jews were complicit in Communist era crimes, and that Jews were fighting on behalf of the USSR during WW2 against Germany). Just stop for a second and think about the logic you're using to rationalize your viewpoint.
                              
                              And what you consider an insult to the institution of marriage is accepted by more and more people as a matter of legal equality. And more and more people are considering attitudes like yours an affront to American fundamentals of equality under the law, much like those arguing (and using similar rationales) against interracial marriage a few decades ago.

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 sneakorocksolidposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                 We both know who the vandals were. I'm all for rights and I've stated that numerous times but marriage is what it is. I think  the 7th court of appeals has a reputation for outlandish behavior. Well our morals that once were part of this sociaty have been watered down to the point that we almost don't have any.

                                 replyreport
      2. 56

         C.J. Wrightposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Uh...I think this last election proved that both parties participate in "operation chaos". However I do agree with you on Romney....conservatives have already decided on him. He's out. The mormon church only officially began to accept blacks in the church in the 1970's. Then there is the issue of the sub sects that still practice paligamy....too much fodder there.
         
         Now I know some will make the arguments that Obama was able to distance himself from his religous roots, therefore so could Romney. Well I think its quite clear that the Dem's are more accepting and forgiving(warranted or not) than the Republicans.
         
         I'll make this very clear. The Republicans can only win the presidency IF they present a candidate to the people that represents true conservative values. That candidate can not be one that has had repeated failed attempts at elected office. That candidate can not have a bunch of skeletons in his or her closet. By today's standards its nearly impossible.
         
         What I predict is this....there will be a Romney or Palin nominated. They will be destroyed by the media and ultimately rejected by conservative/independent voters. This is the worst possible scenario for the GOP.
         
         The other possibility is a Romney or a Palin run as an indipendent or third party candidate. This will divide the conservative base and the GOP will loose.
         
         The only possibility that I see being good for the GOP is this. Pawlenty or Jindal are really what they appear. Clean cut conservatives. If they are and they have to charisma to connect with independents the GOP will win by a landslide.
         
         All of this is really irrealevant IMO. The congress is the Key. The President is just a face.

         replyreport
   3. 65

      goldenpathposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I would support Romney and not just because I, myself, am a Mormon.  He has very good character and has the foundation of true integrity.

      replyreport
      1. 90

         livelongerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Good luck convincing non-Mormon conservatives of that.

         replyreport
5. 76

   livewithrichardposted 13 years ago

   I think Romney and Pawlenty have the best shot right now but thinks can change...lol just a few months back I would have said Mark Sanford but we all know how his chances went up in smoke.

   replyreport
6. 61

   mel22posted 13 years ago

   I think if Conservatives could get over the denominational divide and work together that Romney would be a great candidate. Good character is all that really matters!

   replyreport
   1. 0

      sneakorocksolidposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I agree we need someone with the knowledge  and integrity to make the tough choices and see them thru.

      replyreport
7. 0

   pgrundyposted 13 years ago

   Joe Scarborough.
   
   I'm sort of serious. Not long after Obama won he did this total makeover and became the voice of moderation and diplomacy on the right. Before that, I used to watch his morning show and he was as extreme and hostile as Cheney on any bad day. Suddenly he became Saint Joe, "Why can't we all just get along?"
   
   I said, whoa. Is he running for something? He might be.

   replyreport
8. 94

   habeeposted 13 years ago

   Mike Huckabee!!

   replyreport
9. 0

   ralwusposted 13 years ago

   I am contemplating running for Congress. Got my feelers out and my lips are ready for baby kissin'. Now to raise at least 5 grand.

   replyreport
10. 94

    habeeposted 13 years ago

    Go for it, Charlie! Too bad you don't live in GA.

    replyreport
11. 0

    ralwusposted 13 years ago

    Well, ya never know. I might come down there and run. LOL I want to start a new party.

    replyreport
12. 94

    habeeposted 13 years ago

    A Yankee, in Jawja? Oh, fiddle deedee!

    replyreport
    1. 71

       Jeffrey Nealposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       

       replyreport
    2. 0

       ralwusposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Hey, I belong dopwn there. LOL My ancestors were in the south and if ya know about King's Mountain, Gen. William Campbell was a cousin of mine. nyaaah! LOL

       replyreport
13. 94

    habeeposted 13 years ago

    Well, come on down, big boy!

    replyreport
14. 88

    Len Cannonposted 13 years ago

    I think the Republicans best chances are, in particular order,
    
    Mike Huckabee
    Tim Pawlenty
    Olympia Snowe
    
    
    Snowe is obviously the most likely to draw independants and dissatisfied democrats.  Huckabee is a charisma machine that makes you like him even though he's secretly incendiary and divisive. Pawlenty just seems to have a head of steam behind me and seems "respectable" and relatively competent without being overtly offensive.

    replyreport
15. 0

    Ghost32posted 13 years ago

    Palin all the way.  You heard it here first.

    replyreport
    1. 90

       livelongerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Hear, hear!

       replyreport
    2. 60

       Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       That would really help the economy.  Think of all the staffing 100 new comedy shows would need.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          Ghost32posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Hey, creating jobs is a GOOD thing!

          replyreport
    3. 0

       Madame Xposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       

       replyreport
16. 94

    habeeposted 13 years ago

    I think Huckabee is getting some good exposure from his show. He's incredibly likeable, smart, funny, and level headed. I do wish he weren't quite so far right, however. I think Romney's flip-flop on abortion will haunt him. Pawlenty seems like a good guy, but I don't know if he has enough charisma to draw voters in who find that an important quality. Rick Perry seems to have a lot of followers.
    
    I think Palin will run as a third-party candidate, splitting the conservative vote. If that happens, Obama will be re-elected. Unless, of course, he has enough after four years. In that case, I think Hillary will be the democratic candidate.

    replyreport
17. 65

    flread45posted 13 years ago

    No one in politics at the present time is worth voting for.
    We need to cull all of them and start over again.
    These people all belong to the same group,as they party together,eat together,take trips together,all on our tax payer money.
    What have your representatives done for you in the last 12 years??? WAR WAR WAR

    replyreport
18. 78

    Arthur Fontesposted 13 years ago

    Sean Hannity has made some odd comments on his radio show.  I do not know how much support he would receive but he is an articulate intelligent conservative with an already celebrity status.

    replyreport
19. 56

    C.J. Wrightposted 13 years ago

    Viable Republican Candidates.......

    replyreport
20. 62

    alexandriaruthkposted 13 years ago

    Pawlenty

    replyreport
21. 56

    C.J. Wrightposted 13 years ago

    I think so. Your thoughts on Jindal?

    replyreport
22. 0

    baconmidgetposted 13 years ago

    i think they all suck camel d*ck

    replyreport
23. 60

    Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years ago

    viable Republican candidate? 
    
    that's like saying tasty road-kill sandwich
    
    kinda hard to swallow

    replyreport
24. 0

    thetruthhurts2009posted 13 years ago

    Mike Huckabee or Jindal, anyone but Romney!

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Madame Xposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       

       replyreport