Total Posts:39|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Ranking the GOP Primary Field

HisFlyness
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2011 5:50:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
It's going to be tough to beat Obama, if not impossible. Let's just say for argument's sake, that the economy goes into the gutter, unemployment soars and Obama becomes way more vulnerable. Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?

1.) Jon Huntsman
2.) Mitt Romney
3.) Rudy Giuliani
4.) Ron Paul
5.) Tim Pawlenty

Basically, I think in order to beat Obama in November, you're going to have to get someone who is moderate enough to appeal to those undecideds who aren't happy with what the Obama Administration has done so far. Huntsman would have the most interesting angle, in that he worked for Obama (couldn't he spin it that any argument against Huntsman is an indictment of Obama to pick good Ambassadors? Probably a stretch, but a thought!). Romney is moderate enough, but too flip-floppy/Kerry-like I think. Giuliani would never make it out of any primary, but I'd like to see him in a national race. I think he'd be dangerous. Ron Paul, while full of good ideas, seems to have a bit of a "Don't Take Me Too Seriously" air about him. Pawlenty is in there by default, because I've eliminated social-conservatives from my rankings.

This negates the fact that they'd have to get out of the primary first. Within the primary, you have to look at the uber-social consevatives, like Palin and Bachmann. But I don't think they'd stand a chance outside of the primaries.
"Not All Those Who Wander Are Lost." - Tolkein...or Babe Ruth. One of those guys.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 12:05:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/23/2011 5:50:49 PM, HisFlyness wrote:
It's going to be tough to beat Obama, if not impossible. Let's just say for argument's sake, that the economy goes into the gutter, unemployment soars and Obama becomes way more vulnerable. Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?

1.) Jon Huntsman
2.) Mitt Romney
3.) Rudy Giuliani
4.) Ron Paul
5.) Tim Pawlenty

Basically, I think in order to beat Obama in November, you're going to have to get someone who is moderate enough to appeal to those undecideds who aren't happy with what the Obama Administration has done so far. Huntsman would have the most interesting angle, in that he worked for Obama (couldn't he spin it that any argument against Huntsman is an indictment of Obama to pick good Ambassadors? Probably a stretch, but a thought!). Romney is moderate enough, but too flip-floppy/Kerry-like I think. Giuliani would never make it out of any primary, but I'd like to see him in a national race. I think he'd be dangerous. Ron Paul, while full of good ideas, seems to have a bit of a "Don't Take Me Too Seriously" air about him. Pawlenty is in there by default, because I've eliminated social-conservatives from my rankings.

This negates the fact that they'd have to get out of the primary first. Within the primary, you have to look at the uber-social consevatives, like Palin and Bachmann. But I don't think they'd stand a chance outside of the primaries.

you know, they are other threads for this. twice over in fact for this exact topic. one to rank those in the race and another I made to rank the ones that are not but you wish were.

In any case, it seems like you make this irrational lableing of social-conservative with 'radical' and its the non-social conservative that is a 'moderate' conservative. why not an economic conservative be the radically conservative and its the ones that are social conservative and economically socialist that are the moderate conservative?

and you cant just count out social conservatives as not having any chance against Obama. social issues are what fire up people enough to bother voting, there are what matter to the very large part of the conservative base in middle class Americans. people who are not going to know whats going on in wall street or why it matters no matter how often its on there news.

specifics in economic issues, its just not going to click with them, but hearing for a push in some basic common sense ideas like not spending more than the nation makes, that they might hear out too. and I'm afraid to tell you the Tea Party that is just too 'Radical' for you is the best at laying out those positions for the conservative base.

to really drive my point about the need for a socially conservative canidate....

Mcain was not a very social conservative. he was a moderate as it gets.

Virginia (my home state) has always voted republican for like...ever.

the year Obama was elected Obama won my state no contest.

If a candidate is too ashamed to run under the republican banner, the GOP platform, then they shouldn't bother running under and run under a different party. the 'moderate' and 'non-social' conservative will have 10 times the chance of getting my vote running as a independent not pretending to be a republican than he/she would running as a republican that waters down the GOP platform.

some arrogantly think the middle class conservatives will vote with the republicans no matter what.
I am in that middle class and as it stands I'm voting for Obama this next election unless a candidate like Palin shows up in the race to take him on.

I'd like to make Obama a one term president and give the white house back to a conservative, but the options are just not good enough for me to take the drastic measure of changing presidents.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 12:34:57 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 12:05:32 AM, Marauder wrote:
At 6/23/2011 5:50:49 PM, HisFlyness wrote:
It's going to be tough to beat Obama, if not impossible. Let's just say for argument's sake, that the economy goes into the gutter, unemployment soars and Obama becomes way more vulnerable. Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?

1.) Jon Huntsman
2.) Mitt Romney
3.) Rudy Giuliani
4.) Ron Paul
5.) Tim Pawlenty

Basically, I think in order to beat Obama in November, you're going to have to get someone who is moderate enough to appeal to those undecideds who aren't happy with what the Obama Administration has done so far. Huntsman would have the most interesting angle, in that he worked for Obama (couldn't he spin it that any argument against Huntsman is an indictment of Obama to pick good Ambassadors? Probably a stretch, but a thought!). Romney is moderate enough, but too flip-floppy/Kerry-like I think. Giuliani would never make it out of any primary, but I'd like to see him in a national race. I think he'd be dangerous. Ron Paul, while full of good ideas, seems to have a bit of a "Don't Take Me Too Seriously" air about him. Pawlenty is in there by default, because I've eliminated social-conservatives from my rankings.

This negates the fact that they'd have to get out of the primary first. Within the primary, you have to look at the uber-social consevatives, like Palin and Bachmann. But I don't think they'd stand a chance outside of the primaries.

you know, they are other threads for this. twice over in fact for this exact topic. one to rank those in the race and another I made to rank the ones that are not but you wish were.

In any case, it seems like you make this irrational lableing of social-conservative with 'radical' and its the non-social conservative that is a 'moderate' conservative. why not an economic conservative be the radically conservative and its the ones that are social conservative and economically socialist that are the moderate conservative?

and you cant just count out social conservatives as not having any chance against Obama. social issues are what fire up people enough to bother voting, there are what matter to the very large part of the conservative base in middle class Americans. people who are not going to know whats going on in wall street or why it matters no matter how often its on there news.

specifics in economic issues, its just not going to click with them, but hearing for a push in some basic common sense ideas like not spending more than the nation makes, that they might hear out too. and I'm afraid to tell you the Tea Party that is just too 'Radical' for you is the best at laying out those positions for the conservative base.

to really drive my point about the need for a socially conservative canidate....

Mcain was not a very social conservative. he was a moderate as it gets.

Virginia (my home state) has always voted republican for like...ever.

the year Obama was elected Obama won my state no contest.

If a candidate is too ashamed to run under the republican banner, the GOP platform, then they shouldn't bother running under and run under a different party. the 'moderate' and 'non-social' conservative will have 10 times the chance of getting my vote running as a independent not pretending to be a republican than he/she would running as a republican that waters down the GOP platform.

some arrogantly think the middle class conservatives will vote with the republicans no matter what.
I am in that middle class and as it stands I'm voting for Obama this next election unless a candidate like Palin shows up in the race to take him on.

I'd like to make Obama a one term president and give the white house back to a conservative, but the options are just not good enough for me to take the drastic measure of changing presidents.

That's very well put. Why change horses if they will just be the same as before?
Nicholas_Neal
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.
Merda
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 6:50:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

He'll never get the nomination. Here's why. He's pro dug legalization, pro gay marriage, and pro legalization of prostitution. So while some aspects of his policies are attractive to different sides of the aisle, he's really just too libertarian to garner sufficient support. He's too socially liberal for Republicans and too fiscally conservative for Democrats.
My manwich!
Nicholas_Neal
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 6:58:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"He'll never get the nomination. Here's why. He's pro dug legalization, pro gay marriage, and pro legalization of prostitution. So while some aspects of his policies are attractive to different sides of the aisle, he's really just too libertarian to garner sufficient support. He's too socially liberal for Republicans and too fiscally conservative for Democrats."

The argument is about who's the best to beat Obama. The fact that Ron Paul is the only who won't look like a total hypocrite when he says pro-life, pro-limited gov't or pro-constitution, (All three of those things are contradicted by being pro-war) is a good reason for the GOP to nominate him. You can't say that the GOP shouldn't nominate because the GOP won't nominate him.
Merda
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:24:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 6:58:18 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"He'll never get the nomination. Here's why. He's pro dug legalization, pro gay marriage, and pro legalization of prostitution. So while some aspects of his policies are attractive to different sides of the aisle, he's really just too libertarian to garner sufficient support. He's too socially liberal for Republicans and too fiscally conservative for Democrats."

The argument is about who's the best to beat Obama. The fact that Ron Paul is the only who won't look like a total hypocrite when he says pro-life, pro-limited gov't or pro-constitution, (All three of those things are contradicted by being pro-war) is a good reason for the GOP to nominate him. You can't say that the GOP shouldn't nominate because the GOP won't nominate him.

The OP asks who has the best chance to best Obama. Ron Paul is too fringe on economic and social issues to garner sufficient support for even the GOP nomination.
My manwich!
BennyW
Posts: 698
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:47:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:24:08 PM, Merda wrote:
At 6/24/2011 6:58:18 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"He'll never get the nomination. Here's why. He's pro dug legalization, pro gay marriage, and pro legalization of prostitution. So while some aspects of his policies are attractive to different sides of the aisle, he's really just too libertarian to garner sufficient support. He's too socially liberal for Republicans and too fiscally conservative for Democrats."

The argument is about who's the best to beat Obama. The fact that Ron Paul is the only who won't look like a total hypocrite when he says pro-life, pro-limited gov't or pro-constitution, (All three of those things are contradicted by being pro-war) is a good reason for the GOP to nominate him. You can't say that the GOP shouldn't nominate because the GOP won't nominate him.

The OP asks who has the best chance to best Obama. Ron Paul is too fringe on economic and social issues to garner sufficient support for even the GOP nomination.

In that case whomever the media selects. It seems like Romney is their go to guy because he is not that different than Obama, so no matter who wins, we lose. This is also a good argument against the lesser of two evils mentality.
You didn't build that-Obama
It's pretty lazy to quote things you disagree with, call it stupid and move on, rather than arguing with the person. -000ike
BennyW
Posts: 698
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:48:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:47:16 PM, BennyW wrote:
At 6/24/2011 7:24:08 PM, Merda wrote:
At 6/24/2011 6:58:18 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"He'll never get the nomination. Here's why. He's pro dug legalization, pro gay marriage, and pro legalization of prostitution. So while some aspects of his policies are attractive to different sides of the aisle, he's really just too libertarian to garner sufficient support. He's too socially liberal for Republicans and too fiscally conservative for Democrats."

The argument is about who's the best to beat Obama. The fact that Ron Paul is the only who won't look like a total hypocrite when he says pro-life, pro-limited gov't or pro-constitution, (All three of those things are contradicted by being pro-war) is a good reason for the GOP to nominate him. You can't say that the GOP shouldn't nominate because the GOP won't nominate him.

The OP asks who has the best chance to best Obama. Ron Paul is too fringe on economic and social issues to garner sufficient support for even the GOP nomination.

In that case whomever the media selects. It seems like Romney is their go to guy because he is not that different than Obama, so no matter who wins, we lose. This is also a good argument against the lesser of two evils mentality.

However, we can prove the media wrong.
You didn't build that-Obama
It's pretty lazy to quote things you disagree with, call it stupid and move on, rather than arguing with the person. -000ike
Merda
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:51:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:48:00 PM, BennyW wrote:
At 6/24/2011 7:47:16 PM, BennyW wrote:
At 6/24/2011 7:24:08 PM, Merda wrote:
At 6/24/2011 6:58:18 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"He'll never get the nomination. Here's why. He's pro dug legalization, pro gay marriage, and pro legalization of prostitution. So while some aspects of his policies are attractive to different sides of the aisle, he's really just too libertarian to garner sufficient support. He's too socially liberal for Republicans and too fiscally conservative for Democrats."

The argument is about who's the best to beat Obama. The fact that Ron Paul is the only who won't look like a total hypocrite when he says pro-life, pro-limited gov't or pro-constitution, (All three of those things are contradicted by being pro-war) is a good reason for the GOP to nominate him. You can't say that the GOP shouldn't nominate because the GOP won't nominate him.

The OP asks who has the best chance to best Obama. Ron Paul is too fringe on economic and social issues to garner sufficient support for even the GOP nomination.

In that case whomever the media selects. It seems like Romney is their go to guy because he is not that different than Obama, so no matter who wins, we lose. This is also a good argument against the lesser of two evils mentality.

However, we can prove the media wrong.

Huckabee doesn't have a set stance on anything. He's too inconsistent to be elected. Gingrich, Palin, Huckabee, and Romnee are clowns. Obama will in all likelihood win because Paul is out the moment the race gets serious.
My manwich!
BennyW
Posts: 698
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:57:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:51:48 PM, Merda wrote:
At 6/24/2011 7:48:00 PM, BennyW wrote:
At 6/24/2011 7:47:16 PM, BennyW wrote:
At 6/24/2011 7:24:08 PM, Merda wrote:
At 6/24/2011 6:58:18 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"He'll never get the nomination. Here's why. He's pro dug legalization, pro gay marriage, and pro legalization of prostitution. So while some aspects of his policies are attractive to different sides of the aisle, he's really just too libertarian to garner sufficient support. He's too socially liberal for Republicans and too fiscally conservative for Democrats."

The argument is about who's the best to beat Obama. The fact that Ron Paul is the only who won't look like a total hypocrite when he says pro-life, pro-limited gov't or pro-constitution, (All three of those things are contradicted by being pro-war) is a good reason for the GOP to nominate him. You can't say that the GOP shouldn't nominate because the GOP won't nominate him.

The OP asks who has the best chance to best Obama. Ron Paul is too fringe on economic and social issues to garner sufficient support for even the GOP nomination.

In that case whomever the media selects. It seems like Romney is their go to guy because he is not that different than Obama, so no matter who wins, we lose. This is also a good argument against the lesser of two evils mentality.

However, we can prove the media wrong.

Huckabee doesn't have a set stance on anything. He's too inconsistent to be elected. Gingrich, Palin, Huckabee, and Romnee are clowns. Obama will in all likelihood win because Paul is out the moment the race gets serious.

Romney doesn't have a set stance on anything, he flip flops more than walking to the beach. What makes you say Paul will be out when it gets serious? He stayed in long after he was Mathematically eliminated in the last election.
You didn't build that-Obama
It's pretty lazy to quote things you disagree with, call it stupid and move on, rather than arguing with the person. -000ike
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 6:27:02 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

I wish Paul would leave the GOP, and run as a libertarian, or whatever he claims to be. If you're against the party's platform, why be there at all??
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 6:39:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/23/2011 5:50:49 PM, HisFlyness wrote:
It's going to be tough to beat Obama, if not impossible. Let's just say for argument's sake, that the economy goes into the gutter, unemployment soars and Obama becomes way more vulnerable. Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?

1.) Jon Huntsman
2.) Mitt Romney
3.) Rudy Giuliani
4.) Ron Paul
5.) Tim Pawlenty

Basically, I think in order to beat Obama in November, you're going to have to get someone who is moderate enough to appeal to those undecideds who aren't happy with what the Obama Administration has done so far. Huntsman would have the most interesting angle, in that he worked for Obama (couldn't he spin it that any argument against Huntsman is an indictment of Obama to pick good Ambassadors? Probably a stretch, but a thought!). Romney is moderate enough, but too flip-floppy/Kerry-like I think. Giuliani would never make it out of any primary, but I'd like to see him in a national race. I think he'd be dangerous. Ron Paul, while full of good ideas, seems to have a bit of a "Don't Take Me Too Seriously" air about him. Pawlenty is in there by default, because I've eliminated social-conservatives from my rankings.

This negates the fact that they'd have to get out of the primary first. Within the primary, you have to look at the uber-social consevatives, like Palin and Bachmann. But I don't think they'd stand a chance outside of the primaries.

Of the list provided, there's only one that I'll consider and that's Pawlenty. I don't see why everyone is so quick to write off social conservatives. There are a lot more of us out here than you think, and if we can get a good voter turnout we have as much of a chance of beating Obama, as a moderate does. I personally believe that a moderate has less of a chance of winning against Obama, i.e. Mccain.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 6:45:00 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 6:27:02 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

I wish Paul would leave the GOP, and run as a libertarian, or whatever he claims to be. If you're against the party's platform, why be there at all??

The GOP platform isn't fixed in stone. Nor does every single candidate have to agree with everything on the platform. If it didn't change, well the Democrats would still be trying to legalize slavery.

He has a lot of shared values with the GOP platform such as pro-life, and fiscally conservative.

If Ron Paul ran as a libertarian, it would ultimately upset the Republicans chance of winning the Presidential Election.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 7:41:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 6:45:00 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/25/2011 6:27:02 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

I wish Paul would leave the GOP, and run as a libertarian, or whatever he claims to be. If you're against the party's platform, why be there at all??

The GOP platform isn't fixed in stone. Nor does every single candidate have to agree with everything on the platform. If it didn't change, well the Democrats would still be trying to legalize slavery.

I agree that they don't have to agree on everything, but from my own personal perspective, I don't want to see a successful GOP candidate who is against the core social issues that make me side with republicans, to begin with. There are already enough forces within the party working to change the platform, from the inside, and to me he just perpetuates the problem, and invites even more intrusion. I'm glad he claims to be pro-life, but he's against us on every other social issue.
Merda
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 10:34:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 7:41:06 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/25/2011 6:45:00 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/25/2011 6:27:02 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

I wish Paul would leave the GOP, and run as a libertarian, or whatever he claims to be. If you're against the party's platform, why be there at all??

The GOP platform isn't fixed in stone. Nor does every single candidate have to agree with everything on the platform. If it didn't change, well the Democrats would still be trying to legalize slavery.

I agree that they don't have to agree on everything, but from my own personal perspective, I don't want to see a successful GOP candidate who is against the core social issues that make me side with republicans, to begin with. There are already enough forces within the party working to change the platform, from the inside, and to me he just perpetuates the problem, and invites even more intrusion. I'm glad he claims to be pro-life, but he's against us on every other social issue.

What social issues in particular? Gay marriage, drugs, prostitution, flag burning......?
My manwich!
Grape
Posts: 989
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 11:16:18 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 10:58:32 AM, CiRrK wrote:
I see social conservatives and christian populists as the pawns of the republican party : )

I don't know if you're joking, but this is certainly true of a lot of people. The Republican Party does not have its sh!t together right now and they are kept afloat by a lot of stupid people. That plus the libertarian/neocon division that is starting to come into fruition between the non-stupid members of the party is going to cause serious problems in coming years.
BennyW
Posts: 698
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 11:16:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 6:27:02 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

I wish Paul would leave the GOP, and run as a libertarian, or whatever he claims to be. If you're against the party's platform, why be there at all??

I'll say the same thing about Romney, he should leave the GOP and run as a Democrat because that's what he is.
You didn't build that-Obama
It's pretty lazy to quote things you disagree with, call it stupid and move on, rather than arguing with the person. -000ike
ConservativeRepublican
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 11:37:49 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 11:16:55 AM, BennyW wrote:
At 6/25/2011 6:27:02 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

I wish Paul would leave the GOP, and run as a libertarian, or whatever he claims to be. If you're against the party's platform, why be there at all??

I'll say the same thing about Romney, he should leave the GOP and run as a Democrat because that's what he is.

I agree Romney is very undecided about his stance on many issues, and I believe he changes his stance so often because he would like to secure the nomination.
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 11:38:36 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 11:37:49 AM, ConservativeRepublican wrote:
At 6/25/2011 11:16:55 AM, BennyW wrote:
At 6/25/2011 6:27:02 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

I wish Paul would leave the GOP, and run as a libertarian, or whatever he claims to be. If you're against the party's platform, why be there at all??

I'll say the same thing about Romney, he should leave the GOP and run as a Democrat because that's what he is.

I agree Romney is very undecided about his stance on many issues, and I believe he changes his stance so often because he would like to secure the nomination.

Agreed
kfc
ConservativeRepublican
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 11:46:46 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I would like to see Rick Perry, current governor of Texas run for president as I think he would stand a very good chance against Obama as he has many of the Tea party activists for him as well as many average Republicans.
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 11:50:09 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 11:46:46 AM, ConservativeRepublican wrote:
I think he would stand a very good chance against Obama

I doubt he has that.
kfc
ConservativeRepublican
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 11:54:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Why not? The Tea Party is a growing body, and quickly gaining support, and the Republicans are taking control of government. I think that the next president will be a Republican, and possibly a Tea Party member.
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 11:56:34 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 11:54:26 AM, ConservativeRepublican wrote:
Why not? The Tea Party is a growing body, and quickly gaining support, and the Republicans are taking control of government. I think that the next president will be a Republican, and possibly a Tea Party member.

Obama has a lot of young support. I really want the next guy to be republican, but I doubt it.
kfc
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 1:37:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 11:16:18 AM, Grape wrote:
At 6/25/2011 10:58:32 AM, CiRrK wrote:
I see social conservatives and christian populists as the pawns of the republican party : )

I don't know if you're joking, but this is certainly true of a lot of people. The Republican Party does not have its sh!t together right now and they are kept afloat by a lot of stupid people. That plus the libertarian/neocon division that is starting to come into fruition between the non-stupid members of the party is going to cause serious problems in coming years.

The libertarian faction is likely to take over the neocon. The younger generation is a lot less religious and a lot more gay friendly. Social conservatism is dying.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 6:24:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 10:34:23 AM, Merda wrote:
At 6/25/2011 7:41:06 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/25/2011 6:45:00 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/25/2011 6:27:02 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

I wish Paul would leave the GOP, and run as a libertarian, or whatever he claims to be. If you're against the party's platform, why be there at all??

The GOP platform isn't fixed in stone. Nor does every single candidate have to agree with everything on the platform. If it didn't change, well the Democrats would still be trying to legalize slavery.

I agree that they don't have to agree on everything, but from my own personal perspective, I don't want to see a successful GOP candidate who is against the core social issues that make me side with republicans, to begin with. There are already enough forces within the party working to change the platform, from the inside, and to me he just perpetuates the problem, and invites even more intrusion. I'm glad he claims to be pro-life, but he's against us on every other social issue.

What social issues in particular? Gay marriage, drugs, prostitution, flag burning......?

You got it. Although I'd rather not have the government dealing with flag burning, that should be handled on a more personal level.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 6:26:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 10:58:32 AM, CiRrK wrote:
I see social conservatives and christian populists as the pawns of the republican party : )

Exactly how are you meaning pawns??
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 6:49:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 11:16:55 AM, BennyW wrote:
At 6/25/2011 6:27:02 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

I wish Paul would leave the GOP, and run as a libertarian, or whatever he claims to be. If you're against the party's platform, why be there at all??

I'll say the same thing about Romney, he should leave the GOP and run as a Democrat because that's what he is.

I'm not against that. I like what I hear from him at times, problem is when you look at previous comments and record in office, I'm not sure that we're going to get what we vote for with him. Overall, I just get a bad feeling about voting for him.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 6:58:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 11:38:36 AM, Koopin wrote:
At 6/25/2011 11:37:49 AM, ConservativeRepublican wrote:
At 6/25/2011 11:16:55 AM, BennyW wrote:
At 6/25/2011 6:27:02 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:59:08 PM, Nicholas_Neal wrote:
"Who do you think has the best opportunity to beat Obama in November?"

Ron Paul, and here's why. His fiscal conservatism and pro-life beliefs are enough to win the Republican base,and his civil libertarian and anti-war beliefs are enough to sway some liberal Democrats who are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish policies.

I wish Paul would leave the GOP, and run as a libertarian, or whatever he claims to be. If you're against the party's platform, why be there at all??

I'll say the same thing about Romney, he should leave the GOP and run as a Democrat because that's what he is.

I agree Romney is very undecided about his stance on many issues, and I believe he changes his stance so often because he would like to secure the nomination.

Agreed

2008: "Caught eating KFC chicken with a knife & fork." (May 2010)

That's actually listed, 3rd line down under Principles and Values.

http://www.ontheissues.org...