Tea party hurting GOP chances in the fall?

[the makeout hobo]

The GOP tried your approach, they ran McCain. Never again.

I'm doubtful that a more conservative candidate, such as Huckabee,or a more libertarian candidate, such as Ron Paul, would have done any better. For all we know, they would have lost by an even worse margin. It was definitely a bad year for the GOP no matter who ran

 

[LiberalAvenger]

Senator Brown would be a good republican candidate for president in 2012 but the tea party is now trying to oust him.:cuckoo:

 

[NolaMan]

Senator Brown would be a good republican candidate for president in 2012 but the tea party is now trying to oust him.:cuckoo:

Not another Senator, especially after the diaster we currently have in office.

 

[LiberalAvenger]

Not another Senator, especially after the diaster we currently have in office.

Ok, it's official. No more senators can run for president by authority of NolaMan:smileyfart

 

[Renae]

Senator Brown would be a good republican candidate for president in 2012 but the tea party is now trying to oust him.:cuckoo:

Why the hell do people toss that guys Name out there? Do you have no clue about Politics??? McCain lost because HE failed to inspire the base Conservatives. Brown would fail, just as badly. The only reason to run Brown would be to give Obama a 2nd Term.

 

[NolaMan]

Ok, it's official. No more senators can run for president by authority of NolaMan:smileyfart

Not sure exactly where I said that... but OK.

Point being, what experience does he have that would qualify him for President?

I think it was pretty obvious your original comment was really just a lame attempt to take a swipe at the Tea Party by throwing his name out there, but your style seems to be an attempt to demonize those who might disagree with you, and ignore the root of their disagreements. More power to you.

 

[LiberalAvenger]

Not sure exactly where I said that... but OK.

Point being, what experience does he have that would qualify him for President?

I think it was pretty obvious your original comment was really just a lame attempt to take a swipe at the Tea Party by throwing his name out there, but your style seems to be an attempt to demonize those who might disagree with you, and ignore the root of their disagreements. More power to you.

Well, nobody could be as noble and unbiased as you.:roll:

 

[LiberalAvenger]

Why the hell do people toss that guys Name out there? Do you have no clue about Politics??? McCain lost because HE failed to inspire the base Conservatives. Brown would fail, just as badly. The only reason to run Brown would be to give Obama a 2nd Term.

I do have a few clues about politics. One, Obama won. Two, the conservatives did not vote for him. Duh!

 

[Redress]

Point being, what experience does he have that would qualify him for President?

He had the experience to win 51 % of the electoral vote. That is the only experience that is needed

 

[NolaMan]

Well, nobody could be as noble and unbiased as you.:roll:

Not sure where I claimed I was unbiased either, but I don't go out of my way to demonize those that might disagree with me politically.

 

[NolaMan]

He had the experience to win 51 % of the electoral vote. That is the only experience that is needed

Shouldn't we strive to elect someone that is capable of more than that?

 

[Dav]

He had the experience to win 51 % of the electoral vote. That is the only experience that is needed

Needed yes, but needed is different from preferrable. Plus, one would need some level of experience to get to that 51% in the first place.
Either way, Scott Brown is just way too inexperienced for the presidency. He wouldn't have even been a Senator for as long as Obama had been, and Obama was attacked heavily for his inexperience.

 

[LiberalAvenger]

Not sure where I claimed I was unbiased either, but I don't go out of my way to demonize those that might disagree with me politically.

You have got to be kidding.

 

[LiberalAvenger]

Needed yes, but needed is different from preferrable. Plus, one would need some level of experience to get to that 51% in the first place.
Either way, Scott Brown is just way too inexperienced for the presidency. He wouldn't have even been a Senator for as long as Obama had been, and Obama was attacked heavily for his inexperience.

He would be preferable to half a governor Palin.

 

[NolaMan]

You have got to be kidding.

Show me where I have attacked personally those who disagree with me....

 

[Dav]

He would be preferable to half a governor Palin.

I don't think Palin is going to run for president. And if she does run, she won't be nominated.

 

[somepeoplesay]

All I have to say is: Palin 2012! I will register republican just to vote for her in the primary. Maybe all that time she spent bitching on facebook will strike a chord with the heart of America.

 

[LiberalAvenger]

All I have to say is: Palin 2012! I will register republican just to vote for her in the primary. Maybe all that time she spent bitching on facebook will strike a chord with the heart of America.

Here in Virginia republicans and democrats do not register. Anyone can vote for either party in the primaries. My vote will be for the leather girl.

 

[UtahBill]

Remember, boys and girls, we get the government we deserve....

 

[cpwill]

But that was in Utah, the reddest state in the country. You'd expect that there.

that's the movement everywhere. by 2012, it's not going to be that difficult to beat Obama. All the candidate will have to do is prove that they are minimally competent and not actually insane.

 

[LiberalAvenger]

that's the movement everywhere. by 2012, it's not going to be that difficult to beat Obama. All the candidate will have to do is prove that they are minimally competent and not actually insane.

Yeah, but the way the Republican party is headed to the right I doubt that they will be able to do just that.

 

[the makeout hobo]

that's the movement everywhere. by 2012, it's not going to be that difficult to beat Obama. All the candidate will have to do is prove that they are minimally competent and not actually insane.

I don't know. They'll have to outcampaign Obama, and that's pretty hard. Especially since the base doesn't really have a truely exciting candidate to rally behind.

 

[Fiddytree]

that's the movement everywhere. by 2012, it's not going to be that difficult to beat Obama. All the candidate will have to do is prove that they are minimally competent and not actually insane.

Don't be ridiculous. It will be difficult. The Democratic Party has done much that will concern or anger Americans, but it is not entirely clear that this automatically translates to replacing an administration. The Republican party would need to promote a strong candidate that was backed by voter enthusiasm as well as a very notable party platform. The Republican Party is not there yet, and perhaps will not be for quite some time. The Democrats learned a lesson in 2004.

 

[Groucho]

that's the movement everywhere. by 2012, it's not going to be that difficult to beat Obama. All the candidate will have to do is prove that they are minimally competent and not actually insane.

That's what the Democrats thought in 2004 about Bush.

 

[danarhea]

that's the movement everywhere. by 2012, it's not going to be that difficult to beat Obama. All the candidate will have to do is prove that they are minimally competent and not actually insane.

That is going to be a task, because the Tea Party IS insane. I am not talking about the regular Tea Party, the original one. I am talking about the crazies who coopted the original one. The original Tea Partiers have been around for many, many years. In 2008, Ron Paul was noted for the Boston Tea Party, which raised beaucoup bucks for him. And this was pretty much grass roots too. Since then, you had the same people who blew John McCain's candidacy to hell take over, and now we have the Tea Party Express, which consists of the same crazies, along with Joe the Unlicensed Plumber, Sara Palin (who actually went up a couple of notches in my book, due to her being in favor of decriminalizing marijuana), and candidates who are scaring the bejesus out of most Americans with their extremism. Here are a couple of those candidates:

1) Sharon Angle - Wants to get rid of Social Security and Medicare.

2) J D Hayworth - Talks a lot about how the government spends money, but just 3 years ago, was the spokesman for a company that ran informercials telling people how they can get free money from the government. So dishonest was this commercial, that the company is rated an F- with the BBB, and attorneys general from 32 states have condemned that company. Yet, the same Hayworth who is running against McCain on the platform of restoring ethics to government is the same Hayworth who put his time and energy into the informercial made by these crooks.

And that's just 2 of them. There are plenty more of them out there.

There are a few in the new Tea Party movement that I would like to see elected, but most of what is available from them are certifiably bat **** crazy. And make no mistake - Today's Tea Party movement is a far cry from the Libertarian one of yesteryear. They are loons, plain and simple.