Paul Ryan has stated pretty clearly and unambiguously that he absolutely will not run. I can only hope he changes his mind though, I think he would be a great candidate.
There are some potential dark horses I'd also like... Mitch Daniels comes to mind. I don't know much about Tim Pawlenty, but I have heard good things about him too.
If I absolutely had to choose from the candidates listed in the poll, I'd probably go with Gingrich. I just wish the man would stop talking about "secularism" like it's a bad thing.
EDIT: Didn't see Pawlenty in the poll. But then, I still don't know much about him, as I said, so....
Though Pawlenty won't embrace the "moderate" label, if he enters the 2012 field, he'd be well-positioned to earn himself a good look from Republican primary voters who are dissatisfied with the direction of the party. The governor prefers the term "modern" conservative. He supports government intervention to reduce global warming and wants his party to focus on the material needs of middle class voters. He's pro-life and opposes gay rights, but he recently signed a bill that gives unmarried couples property rights. He opposes federal or state funding for embryonic stem cell research. He is an evangelical protestant.
I chose "other", so I sure hope you're right and someone else emerges. I'm not real gung ho on any of the current front runners.
I disagree. We don't need a moderate or centrist at this point, we need a real, hard core fiscal conservative that isn't afraid to make the tough decisions that are necessary to get this country out of debt and back on the road to prosperity.
Huckabee is a good man that I like and respect, but I think he's a little too soft and a little too religious.
Pawlenty isn't too bad, but he has to do something that makes him stand out from the rest, which he hasn't yet done.
Palin has the conservative values I'm looking for, but I just don't think she would make a good president. She is a good motivator and campaigner, but I don't think she would make a good leader. Maybe in the future that might change, but she needs to cool her jets before that could ever happen.
Romney is probably the best of the front runners. I think his business skills would be of great benefit to the American economy, and his moral standing is impeccable. The one thing that bothers me, is that he was the one who passed Massachusetts's health care law, which is about as anti-conservative as a person can be.
Gingrich is a hard core conservative, but a little too hard core for my taste. He tends to speak a little too freely, which would not bode well for our international relations. He also tends to lean toward radical solutions from time to time, which scares me a bit.
The two people I would like to see run for president, have both shown absolutely no interest in running. They are New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan.
Good thread LL.
.
I'd like to see Gingrich run. I think he's redeemed himself. Like his style. Excellent speaker. He's extremely well informed. Yep, I could see him.
The reason I copied your post, Disney, is I'm very surprised that you think the GOP is moving far right. I sure don't see that at all. I don't think their stand on immigration is conservative enough, as an example.
I disagree. We don't need a moderate or centrist at this point, we need a real, hard core fiscal conservative that isn't afraid to make the tough decisions that are necessary to get this country out of debt and back on the road to prosperity.
Jindel made a less then perfect speech and Liberals wrote him off.
Nothing to me, is more hilarious then to read a bunch of liberals sit around talking about who the best type of Republican is, and who should run for the GOP Ticket.
It's the most pretentious circle jerk on these forums. First off, WHY THE HELL would Conservatives give a flying rats ass who you people think is a good "Republican"? The fact that DD thinks Arlen Specter and Olympia Snowe are good "Moderate" Republicans proves my point. Those two are quite hated by the base and the GOP outside of their states.
The more you guys LIKE a Candidate, the more amused I get. And this silly notion any ONE OF YOU would vote for a GOP is sheer goofiness. "Gee, DD thinks this Candidate is a good choice, I should give him a second look." NOT.
Jindel made a less then perfect speech and Liberals wrote him off.
Nothing to me, is more hilarious then to read a bunch of liberals sit around talking about who the best type of Republican is, and who should run for the GOP Ticket.
It's the most pretentious circle jerk on these forums. First off, WHY THE HELL would Conservatives give a flying rats ass who you people think is a good "Republican"? The fact that DD thinks Arlen Specter and Olympia Snowe are good "Moderate" Republicans proves my point. Those two are quite hated by the base and the GOP outside of their states.
The more you guys LIKE a Candidate, the more amused I get. And this silly notion any ONE OF YOU would vote for a GOP is sheer goofiness. "Gee, DD thinks this Candidate is a good choice, I should give him a second look." NOT.
The base isn't the entire party though. That is what really annoys me. I used to think I was a Republican, but now it's overrun with neocons and the base is pretty much neocon too.
Which shows you don't know what you're talking about, and you might have voted by accident for a Republican dog catcher once.
I don't know what you are talking about, so explain it to me. Do you think the base, the right wing neocon, big government base is the just the Republican party and nobody else is? The same base that loved Palin, always hated Ron Paul and now hates McCain?
You are using Left Wing Talking points. You wouldn't know the GOP base if it bit you on your rear. The base doesn't "hate Ron Paul" we just don't see him as a serious candidate for President. He's too kooky. The "Neo-Con" wing you blather about, THEY are the ones that got McCain in to the hot seat, and the BASE rejected him.
for a presidential candidate, today?
discuss.
more, and that was my point - that the fiscally responsibility of republican is a myth. but more importantly, that the amount of spending as a percentage of GDP favors democrats even when they spend more. it is not how much is spent, but how much is returned on what is spent.I was not making the argument Republicans spend
less. Most of them spend just as much as Democrats, if not more.
apologies - here is another path to the same data. it is a lotta wading, though. here is a graph compiled from the raw data:The FBO link you provided does not work.
there are good reasons that freedom of the press is important.As for your other source, I remain critical. It is not a government document.
again, i would emphasize the difference between 'deficit' and 'debt' especially debt as % of GPP. Roosevelt's huge deficits resulted in the largest economic boom in history.I have a link that refutes your argument: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy04/pdf/hist.pdf
(go to page 23 of the report). It shows deficit as % of GDP each year since 1930.
well... that characterization is an exageration. i'll admit. much of what he says, i like. on drugs and race ("If we had probably a repeal of most of the federal laws on drugs and the unfairness on how Blacks are treated with these drugs laws, it would be a tremendous improvement."), for instance. usually, i love obstinately committed people, and paul is one.Why do you think Ron Paul is a nut?
I chose "other", so I sure hope you're right and someone else emerges. I'm not real gung ho on any of the current front runners.
I disagree. We don't need a moderate or centrist at this point, we need a real, hard core fiscal conservative that isn't afraid to make the tough decisions that are necessary to get this country out of debt and back on the road to prosperity.
Huckabee is a good man that I like and respect, but I think he's a little too soft and a little too religious.
Pawlenty isn't too bad, but he has to do something that makes him stand out from the rest, which he hasn't yet done.
Palin has the conservative values I'm looking for, but I just don't think she would make a good president. She is a good motivator and campaigner, but I don't think she would make a good leader. Maybe in the future that might change, but she needs to cool her jets before that could ever happen.
Romney is probably the best of the front runners. I think his business skills would be of great benefit to the American economy, and his moral standing is impeccable. The one thing that bothers me, is that he was the one who passed Massachusetts's health care law, which is about as anti-conservative as a person can be.
Gingrich is a hard core conservative, but a little too hard core for my taste. He tends to speak a little too freely, which would not bode well for our international relations. He also tends to lean toward radical solutions from time to time, which scares me a bit.
The two people I would like to see run for president, have both shown absolutely no interest in running. They are New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan.
Good thread LL.
.
I meant to tag Palin and Other.
I LIKE Palin, I think she'll be the VP again to be honest...
However, Huckabee is smarmy, Pawlenty a centrist trying to remake his image as "conservative", Newt's a good commentator but not electable material and Romney passed "RomneyCare" in Mass, that excludes him right off the bat.
Jindel would get my vote,
Christie (NJ Gov.) right now would as well.
Caine has lots of potential but age and cancer issues might be enough to sink that.
Oh, JC Watts would if he decided to run.
LOL....you mean THIS guy?
YouTube - Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA) Responds To The Obama State Of The Union (1)
Sorry....but people are never going to forget this...it sealed his doom.
Pawlenty isn't a great candidate IMHO, here's a little food for thought.
2012: Pawlenty's Not Running For Re-Election - Politics - The Atlantic
What does this mean, the "Material needs of"? And he's a warmer, that's a deal breaker for me.
I'm scratching him off my list right now! Yuk!
Gingrich. He's highly intelligent and I think he would be a very good president.
Frankly.....Gingrich is too much of a hypocrite with a lot of skeletons in his closet. That is going to keep him from being a serious candidate. Frankly...
They are New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan.
Christie also pressured teachers, who don't work for him, to agree to contribute 1.5 percent of their pay toward their health-care benefits. He warned them that if they didn't go along, he would campaign against passage of school budgets in their districts. Most teachers refused to contribute, Christie did as he had promised, and voters rejected a record 59 percent of school budgets. At the end of June, the Democratic-controlled state senate and assembly passed Christie's budget almost unchanged from his proposal.
I don't think so. No one with an opinion on the matter worth hearing is gonna care that he divorced his crippled wife or whatever it was he did that supposedly makes him teh eeeeeebil.
Seriously...? I think there are a LOT of people in this country that are going to question his integrity and character because of that. I think a lot of Republicans recognize that and would be reluctant to back him.
Plus....Gingrich represents the politics of the past. I think if the GOP is going to have a shot, they have to go with someone that represents a new direction for the GOP...but hey....I could be wrong.
I don't think so. No one with an opinion on the matter worth hearing is gonna care that he divorced his crippled wife or whatever it was he did that supposedly makes him teh eeeeeebil.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?