Best GOP Candidate

[Ajidica]

Mea culpa. I mixed the words up in my brain.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Donald Trump? What a joke.

I voted Ron Paul, but I could support Rand Paul as well. I don't know much about Gincritch or Johnson. I'm no fan of Palin, but I'd vote for her over Obama. Ditto for Romney.

I would vote indy if faced with Obama VS Trump.

I don't know anything about the other 2.

@The OP- I don't really think Trump belonged (I doubt he's even going to run) but I think Palin and Romney's inclusions were valid. Would like to have seen Huckabee.

 

[Hygro]

orrery, I will be you $400 that Ron Paul won't win the primary.

 

[GhostWriter16]

@Hygro- That's not a bet I take. Just because I think Ron Paul SHOULD win doesn't mean I think he will.

 

[Hygro]

Oh I know you won't take the bet

and it's really too bad, since you'd actually honor it if you did...

 

[GhostWriter16]

Oh I know you won't take the bet

and it's really too bad, since you'd actually honor it if you did...

I can't think of a way of sending 400 dollars to you anyhow, and I don't HAVE 400 dollars.

That said, I wouldn't make the bet in the first place. Lying isn't something I like the idea of.

 

[Hygro]

psst, Domination, you're not orrery

 

[Cutlass]

one for you: read my posts?

No.

But than again, as someone who took and passed microeconomics, macroeconomics, monetary policy, and economic policy classes on college and read way to much of *** economic literature, I have no uncertainties about where mainstream economists stand. Even they will after external/internal shock lamentation admit that only relevant reason for continuous price increases is money printing (or monetary expansion if we want it to sound better...)

Moderator Action: Foul language
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

But there's a lot more to the cause and effect. The Fed is not causing the inflation. They are choosing to either accommodate the real economy, or cause a recession. Which they choose at any point in time is situational. They are certainly not causing the inflation pushed by food and oil prices that we are experiencing now.

 

[kochman]

Anyone but Sarah over Obama...

Sarah vs Obama 2012 is my worst nightmare.

 

[Azale]

Honestly, I think we can already close the book on T-Paw. He's boring as hell, and he's an entire year to try and gain some sort of footing, but hasn't been able to poll above 5% anywhere. His run to the right isn't all that credible.

Jonathan Chait thinks he is the frontrunner through process of elimination. I think he overstates the damage Romneycare will to do Mitt's campaign, but he raises some good points overall.

Huntsman is somewhat unfairly tagged with the "moderate" label I think...his record as Gov of Utah is actually pretty conservative (his pro-life credentials are better than anybody else in the field I think, for example)...he just isn't anti gay or environment.

Yea, and he is my "favorite" I guess. He is moderate enough on issues I care about (foreign policy, environment) and the one thing he seems radical on (abortion) I don't think he could actually affect damaging change. His last name is pretty presidential too.

That inability to raise money is a pretty significant drawback though...

This is also why Huckabee is doomed to fail.

 

[Joecoolyo]

Anyone but Sarah over Obama...

Sarah vs Obama 2012 is my worst nightmare.

It'd be my dream!

I would love to see Sarah get absolutely mauled in debates against Obama. It would probably shut her up for good.

 

[Ayatollah So]

Link to video.

This, plus what you said earlier*, is why Trump is my man for GOP candidate.

Newt Gingrich is like Sarah Palin without the fanatical base of support.

Donald trump so he can fire everyone.

The perfect Republican! Nothing suppresses wages like sky-high unemployment.

I dunno whats worse. The fact that Trump made the list or that people actually voted for him.

But have you paid attention to why* we voted for him?

Could you imagine if Trump had gotten the GOP nomination based on that birther crap, and Obama didnt release his certificate until just before the 2012 election? Ouch.

Stop it, you're making me drool. Oh well, an Obama that was capable of thinking strategically would be a not-Obama.

Anyone but Sarah over Obama

Sarah runs a close second* for my GOP fave

The answer to starred clues:
*We're liberals!

 

[IglooDame]

Romney, Huckabee, Pawlenty.... these are death kneel candidates for old geezers who have assumed the dying prayer position. They haven't a chance in hell and God help us if they do win because it'll be WW3 with some Islamic Iranian styled Caliphate if it ever happens.

So you left them out of a poll because YOU don't like them?

Ron Paul - I personally favor him but I don't think he can get possibly get enough Republican support to win the nomination
Gary Johnson - The libertarian dream candidate
Tom Miller - who?
Donald Trump - No. Just no.
Sarah Palin - I originally was happy about McCain picking her, but then I became aware of her lack of intellectual depth.
Rand Paul - I'd say that brand new US senators cannot successfully campaign for president, but... ummm... nevertheless, I don't think he can manage it.
Newt Gingrich - Manages to pull off "well-read" and "populist" at the same time.
Herman Cain - who?
General Petraeus - If I see his political stances, sure. But counter-insurgency expert and successful US general do not necessarily qualify him for president.
Mitt Romney - Probably the strongest mainstream candidate out of the gate.

And offhand, more legitimate candidates:

Tim Pawlenty - Another solid candidate from what I hear, but I'm not too familiar with him.
Mike Huckabee - Too religious to win a national election.
Chris Christie - He says he will not run in 2012, but if he did, he'd get some serious Republican votes.
John Huntsman - I'm not familiar enough with him to comment.
Rick Santorum - The lite version of Mike Huckabee. I just don't see social conservatives winning it all.
Michelle Bachmann - The lite version of Sarah Palin.

 

[downtown]

It's John Huntsman, not Howard.

What do you think about Mitch Daniels?

 

[IglooDame]

It's John Huntsman, not Howard.

What do you think about Mitch Daniels?

Oops, thanks - corrected.

I have heard Mitch Daniels' name, haven't taken a look at him yet.

Last time around at this stage Rudy Giuliani was clearly the front-runner (along with Hillary Clinton on the Dem side), and McCain's primary campaign was imploding, and that is just the latest example of the early field not being a particularly good indication of who gets going. So, I tend not to pay much attention at the start of the primary campaign, waiting at least until the Iowa and New Hampshire debates fire up.

 

[.Shane.]

... and that is just the latest example of the early field not being a particularly good indication of who gets going. So, I tend not to pay much attention at the start of the primary campaign, waiting at least until the Iowa and New Hampshire debates fire up.

Well said.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

I like how candidates who are clearly libertarian get to run as republican now. Yay for the US? It's nice that they think they have a chance but even though I trend libertarian I just don't see it happening at this stage with the mainstream. A lot of people in my age group (mid to late 20's) and younger trend this way but frankly most of the people I know in my age group are still too busy partying every night to give much of a crap about politics and voting.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Anyone but Sarah over Obama...

Sarah vs Obama 2012 is my worst nightmare.

If you had to vote for one, who would you vote for?

BTW: I don't like Palin much, but she wouldn't collapse America or anything. She did fine economically in Alaska. The main area I disagree with her is in social policies, not nearly Libertarian enough, but I doubt she's going to do anything worse than any other GOP Candidate in that regard, since Palin would probably leave that stuff to the states...

 

[downtown]

Sarah Palin isn't running for President.

 

[MobBoss]

So you left them out of a poll because YOU don't like them?

Ron Paul - I personally favor him but I don't think he can get possibly get enough Republican support to win the nomination
Gary Johnson - The libertarian dream candidate
Tom Miller - who?
Donald Trump - No. Just no.
Sarah Palin - I originally was happy about McCain picking her, but then I became aware of her lack of intellectual depth.
Rand Paul - I'd say that brand new US senators cannot successfully campaign for president, but... ummm... nevertheless, I don't think he can manage it.
Newt Gingrich - Manages to pull off "well-read" and "populist" at the same time.
Herman Cain - who?
General Petraeus - If I see his political stances, sure. But counter-insurgency expert and successful US general do not necessarily qualify him for president.
Mitt Romney - Probably the strongest mainstream candidate out of the gate.

And offhand, more legitimate candidates:

Tim Pawlenty - Another solid candidate from what I hear, but I'm not too familiar with him.
Mike Huckabee - Too religious to win a national election.
Chris Christie - He says he will not run in 2012, but if he did, he'd get some serious Republican votes.
John Huntsman - I'm not familiar enough with him to comment.
Rick Santorum - The lite version of Mike Huckabee. I just don't see social conservatives winning it all.
Michelle Bachmann - The lite version of Sarah Palin.

Now wait a second. Mike Huckabee is too religious to win, but Mitt Romney isnt?

I also have to correct you on Gen Petraeus. The point isnt whether he would be a good president or not, but rather if he would be a good candidate to win. The two arent necesarily the same thing.