Best GOP Candidate

[Cutlass]

Everyone seems to agree with that, so... stupid quotes from her were being posted just so we can make fun of her? Cause I'm definitely down with that if so, a little skewering of politicians who say dumb things makes every day better.

Well, as one of the other guys mentioned, they all make gaffs. Some of them are just a lot better at saying stupid things than others are. That doesn't necessarily prevent them from achieving high office. See both presidents Bush. But I think it's important to highlight the ones who are exceptional about it as much as possible. Because at some point you need to consider that it may exceed a disconnect between brain and mouth and instead be a disconnect between brain and reality.

 

[Ajidica]

Why do you doubt that statement necessarily? Certainly some Scientists believe in intelligent design, whatever you think of their reasoning, and they still could have easily gotten a Nobel Prize for something unrelated.

Saying 'some scientists' support ID is like saying 'some politicians support Communism'. While you could find some, they are in the miniscule minorty. Lastly, just because they are scientists does not mean they understand evolution. Composite Engineers don't need to understand biology.

Well, he was probably taught Evolution all his life...

Coming from Louisiana, I find that doubtful.

Cain.

In other words, Ingnorance is Blissful Strength.

That's just giving unfair advantages to businesses that fail.

No, it is called doing what is prudent. The American businesses have been protected for so long that they are in a condition to heroin addicts. They still have to be supported for a while because otherwise, the shock would kill the entire economy. If you support shock treatment for companies, then you hate jobs and in turn, hate America and our freedom.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Coming from Louisiana, I find that doubtful.

Didn't a SCOTUS decision say they had to teach it?

 

[Ajidica]

Didn't a SCOTUS decision say they had to teach it?

Given the state of Loisiana's education system, they probably still believe the Nullification Doctrine is valid.

 

[Quackers]

From my view of it from the UK, I think Mitt Rommney has the best chance of being nominated.

Who is the best candidate? For what? For me? Or to win?

Personally:i have no idea about the policy positions of any of them;
to win the presidency: none Obama is too strong.

 

[Ajidica]

Just out of curiosity, if Obama was running in the UK (as a candidate of the party that fits him best. He seems like a LibDem) what would his chances be to win if we took his current track record?

 

[Quackers]

Obama is no a liberal democrat. People don't take rank and file lib dems seriously .

I'd put Obama in as Labour, in the Tony Blair model. Good at PR, speeches and a trendy centre-left progressive social (christian ifluenced?) and centrist economic positions.

It is impossible to tell. But politicians have been talking Obama since he won the presidency in an attempt to try and steal his popularity for there own benefit. Gordan Brown chased Obama into a UN kitchen for a 5 minute talk - he didn't just want to talk he wanted the pr pic too!

 

[NickyJ]

From my view of it from the UK, I think Mitt Rommney has the best chance of being nominated.

Agreed. Strangely though, the media here in the U.S. seems to be ignoring him.

Who is the best candidate? For what? For me?

Depends on your views.

Or to win?

Romney. Someone may come out from behind later on (See McCain's 08 run), but so far, Romney is the clear frontrunner

Personally:i have no idea about the policy positions of any of them;
to win the presidency: none Obama is too strong.

Most of the candidates seem conservative, although that would be expected. For the Presidency, Romney blows Barry out of the water. Obama has many unpopular things hanging over him. I'm looking at this from a sort of 1980 election standpoint. The media thinks that there's no chance for the Republicans to win/ Carter will win easily. We all know how that turned out...

 

[kochman]

Personally:i have no idea about the policy positions of any of them;
to win the presidency: none Obama is too strong.

Most of his presidency has shown him with a higher disapproval rating than approval rating... and an approval rating of about 40%.
Since when he was elected, it was obviously over 50%, I'd say he's not looking to strong.

However, the Repubs could easily make him look way better if they did nominate someone like Palin/Bachman...

 

[Ajidica]

and an approval rating of about 40%.

That has been about standard for our recent presidents.

Since when he was elected, it was obviously over 50%, I'd say he's not looking to strong.

Every presidents approval points drops by a crapload after they enter office and the honeymoon period ends.

 

[JollyRoger]

I'm looking at this from a sort of 1980 election standpoint. The media thinks that there's no chance for the Republicans to win/ Carter will win easily. We all know how that turned out...

Reagan was expected to win or at least have a good shot in 1980 (especially post-debate). Romney polls behind Obama, but he may indeed be the next Ronald Regan. Obama would need to lose about 20 or 30 points to sink to Carter's ratings.

 

[Sveon]

It's a bit of a choice between the plague, cholera, dysentery, small pox, big pox, ultra pox and a butt-screw isn't it? Somehow I have voted Palin on this one - that makes me confused but well I guess she's as good as any to finger the red button. Good luck bros!

 

[kochman]

That has been about standard for our recent presidents.

Every presidents approval points drops by a crapload after they enter office and the honeymoon period ends.

Yes, but his disapproval rating is Carteresque... that's the kicker.
Anyhow, to get re-elected, you need over 50%. The fearmongering will ramp up here in a bit, on both sides... let's see who can scare the (uninformed) independents better... That's what it comes down to, the lesser of two perceived evils.

 

[Ajidica]

Yes, you need over 50% to vote for you, not to approve of you. Obama will likely win the 2012 election because of the 'He terrifies me less then the other person". The only two candidates that don't have the "Politicaly Terrifying" trait on their character profile are Pawlenty and Romney. Romney has Romneycare under his belt and some flip-floppy issues while T-Paw is just mind-crushingly dull. A 'fiscally conservative' who left his state a 5 billion dollar debt after he used accounting practices that would make Enron ashamed who is also dull is no challenge to a relatively popular president who is at least able to point the blame finger and who also is an excellent speaker.

 

[Slobadog]

I am of course a Obama supporter but if he had to be replaced I prefer that his replacement be Romney. Out of all the GOP candidates that flip flop from a northern republican to a southern or western republican in order to win the primaries, He is the one most likely to flop back once he's the nominee or president.

 

[Cutlass]

Romney's reinventing himself even as we speak. Now he's a home town country boy.

 

[civ_king]

Romney's reinventing himself even as we speak. Now he's a home town country boy.

He's selling his soul like McCain?

 

[Cutlass]

He's selling his soul like McCain?

He did that years ago. Now he's trying to convince people that he's just a regular Joe the plumber type of guy.

 

[warpus]

I don't like half the people on the list and have never heard of the other half.. so I voted for General Petraeus because he sounds like a superhero of some sort

 

[bhsup]

He did that years ago. Now he's trying to convince people that he's just a regular Joe the plumber type of guy.

And do you really think this is who Obama tends to hang out with?