The Official 2008 "Your Candidate Will Never Win" Thread!

Errr... well I think the point was that they were unelectable, so it is not surprising that you don't like them.
 
Romney is a flip flopper who once tried to get to the left of Ted Kennedy on abortion, will swing right to get the nomination and will get trounced in the general. The evangelicals will sit at home instead of vote for someone they consider a member of a cult.

He hasn't changed position while he's been governor of Massachusetts, and the flip-flop issue isn't one, unless he takes a page from the Kerry playbook and fails to address it.

I think his business background and lack of connections to Washington will help him out; the jury is still out as to how much evangelical support is necessary. And of course, it depends who the Democratic candidate is.

Still, I'm not going to place any bets before 2008.
 
Regarding Romney, I have no issue whatsoever with his faith, and I think it's pretty stupid to not vote for him just because he's a Mormon. My concern is simply rooted in the fact that, Republican or not, he managed to get enough people to vote for him to win that also elected Ted Kennedy.
 
Regarding Romney, I have no issue whatsoever with his faith, and I think it's pretty stupid to not vote for him just because he's a Mormon. My concern is simply rooted in the fact that, Republican or not, he managed to get enough people to vote for him to win that also elected Ted Kennedy.

A valid concern, but he also ran against Kennedy in a Senate race (and I think he gave Kennedy the narrowest margin of his career), so it's not like he had anything in common with Chappaquiddick Ted...
 
I am pretty unelectable, too. I am probably only going to get one vote - me.
 
Really, the reasons I gave in the OP stand. His record isn't very conservative, and he isn't a Christian.* He's simply not electable.

*as the majority of Republican primary voters will define it. I have no opinion on whether Mormons are Christians or not.
 
the jury is still out as to how much evangelical support is necessary.
The evangelicals were motivated in 2000 and 2004 and got Bush one-state victories. They sat at home in 2006 and we saw what happened there. I guess it all depends on how much evangelical support he loses in places like Florida and Ohio. In Texas, the typical Southern Baptist would be very reluctant to vote for a Mormon, especialy one from the land of Dukakis, Kennedy, and Kerry. Many would just sit at home and not vote at all.
 
Why the evangelicals will sit at home if Romney is the nominee:

When he ran for US Senate in liberal-leaning Massachusetts in 1994, Romney said abortion should be ''safe and legal." As a candidate for governor in 2002, he said he would keep the state's abortion rights laws intact and has since said that he kept that promise. But this year, as he began preparing a potential run for president, Romney said he is ''in a different place" than he was when he first ran for office in 1994 and has stressed that he is ''personally prolife."

Romney was asked repeatedly by the Globe last week to elaborate on his abortion stance, and he refused. ''I think I've said it a few hundred times through my campaign the same thing I'll say today, which is that I personally do not favor abortion. But as governor of Massachusetts, I will keep the laws as they exist," Romney said Wednesday.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/03/clarity_sought_on_romneys_abortion_stance/
Strike one - Being from Massachusetts;
Strike two - Being a Mormon;
Strike three - Having too "liberal" of a past in his abortion stances.

It will be a piece of cake to make him unacceptable to a significant chunk of the Republican voting base. They will sit the election out.
 
Don't know any of 'em. Still, I keep hearing Obama has the charisma. And that's what decides the election.

Nothing else matters

If even Metallica understands this, it must be true.
 
I have never really understood all those conditions for being electable in the US. Like being caucasian christian man, having served in the army, etc. You can be sued for a slightest sign of discriminating anyone, but the whole electorate discriminates women, other races, ... every four years.

However, the news usually mention only Obama, Clinton, Edwards and McCain here in the EU.
 
Indeed, that why the usians need to have an elderly, black, handicapped female president sooner rather then later.

No, I'm not trying ot be funny, think about it.
- When you're in the supermarket and an old woman wants to cut in line in front of you, you curse her in your head but you will let her cut in line.
- Black because you can't criticize them, or you're racist.
- Handicapped, same reason as the old woman. You just can;t refuse them anything without feeling like a complete bastard.
(I thought about gay or lesbian, but since the prez will have to deal with all kinds of religious nutcases all over the world, I let that one slip.)

Just think of the diplomatic advantage you now have! Pax America around the corner.
 
Indeed, that why the usians need to have an elderly, black, handicapped female president sooner rather then later.

No, I'm not trying ot be funny, think about it.
- When you're in the supermarket and an old woman wants to cut in line in front of you, you curse her in your head but you will let her cut in line.
- Black because you can't criticize them, or you're racist.
- Handicapped, same reason as the old woman. You just can;t refuse them anything without feeling like a complete bastard.
(I thought about gay or lesbian, but since the prez will have to deal with all kinds of religious nutcases all over the world, I let that one slip.)

Just think of the diplomatic advantage you now have! Pax America around the corner.

We've already had elderly presidents, and a handicapped one as well.
 
I'd like to see some evidence via polling or something that indicates he would not be voted for due to being a Mormon. I personally think that is a crock.
 
The evangelicals were motivated in 2000 and 2004 and got Bush one-state victories. They sat at home in 2006 and we saw what happened there. I guess it all depends on how much evangelical support he loses in places like Florida and Ohio. In Texas, the typical Southern Baptist would be very reluctant to vote for a Mormon, especialy one from the land of Dukakis, Kennedy, and Kerry. Many would just sit at home and not vote at all.

Perhaps, but this is why his opponent is crucial in determining this. Which is why I'm not placing any bets in this calendar year.

I must say, I'm surprised that Pontiuth deems Romney unelectable based on his religion but ignores the 400-pound gorilla of Obama's skin color...
 
I am willing to bet one of the people on PP list will win the whole thing.

Obama is just this elections Howard Dean. All hype, and when people start actually voting....then its adios amigo.

As for the earlier question about Wesley Clarks baggage......his former campaign went into the toilet when he got endorsed by Michael Moore. Whacko endorsement = kiss of death.
 
I am willing to bet one of the people on PP list will win the whole thing.

Most assuredly, as the only candidates who didn't make his list seem to be McCain, Obama, and Edwards...

As for the earlier question about Wesley Clarks baggage......his former campaign went into the toilet when he got endorsed by Michael Moore. Whacko endorsement = kiss of death.

The General actually had a campaign?

;)
 
I'd like to see some evidence via polling or something that indicates he would not be voted for due to being a Mormon. I personally think that is a crock.

I posted a news article here that says exactly that last year, from the Washington Post. I'll see if I can find it.
 
Back
Top Bottom