Who would YOU choose?

Since most people have realized that "Community Organizer" ranks lower than "Village Idiot" on the intelligence scale, a pet rock will suffice in November of next year.

You know, Flatus, I was tempted to taunt you all on the inability of the Repubs to find one credible candidate, but I held back because I'd really like to know who the Repubs on this forum would choose. I guess you can't answer. If all you can do is try to ridicule Obama, then I'd say you must feel pretty helpless when it comes to your party beating him in 2012.

Now, does anyone else have a REAL answer?

quote:

Originally posted by Flatus the Ancient:
Since most people have realized that "Community Organizer" ranks lower than "Village Idiot" on the intelligence scale, a pet rock will suffice in November of next year.

So McCain is going to run again?

quote:

Originally posted by Flatus the Ancient:
Since most people have realized that "Community Organizer" ranks lower than "Village Idiot" on the intelligence scale, a pet rock will suffice in November of next year.

Even if it's true that the GOP can win in 2012 with just about anyone as long as there's an (R) by his or her name (which I doubt), the question remains, who? Politics isn't about just beating the other team and declaring victory; presumably there are policies you'd like to see enacted and some people you would be more comfortable with than others as the head of the executive branch and commander-in-chief of the military. So who do Republicans on this board think best represents their ideal candidate and someone they'd most like to see as president? I'm genuinely interested.

Broken link, by the way.

Thanks, Me. Here's the link:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s...=2011-03-22-14-21-44

No mention of Ron Paul, the candidate that the far right seems endeared with.

quote:

Originally posted by Flatus the Ancient:
Since most people have realized that "Community Organizer" ranks lower than "Village Idiot" on the intelligence scale, a pet rock will suffice in November of next year.

And where do "Editor of the Harvard Law Journal" and "United States Senator" rank on your intelligence scale?

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
No mention of Ron Paul, the candidate that the far right seems endeared with.

Paul has some good ideas, but he has some other ideas that taint his agenda with a thick veneer of nuttiness. He, like Sarah Plain, has a dedicated core of true believers, but neither of them will expand their bases enough to win any national election.

I posted this over five hours ago and so far I've gotten one snide remark from a right-winger, and a few comments from some libs. Are you Repubs telling me you HAVE no preference?

Ferrill? B? ANYONE?

quote:

And Haley Barbour comes off as insensitive about race relations in the South.

Ain't it about freakin time that people just got over that ****? How long does Brother Al and the Good Reverend Jackson think we need to kiss ass to make up for mistakes of the past?

Don't get me wrong; there is a huge number of black Americans who have gotten over it, do there best to feed their families, and generally just want freedom and to be treated like everyone else. However, there is a small vocal minority of black Americans who want not to be treated equally, but specially to make up for sins of the past. Screw that. Slavery sucked; but it's been over for quite some time.

Also, if black folks truly want to stop racism, they need to silence the "gangster rappers" and quit glorifying outlaw athletes as do the whites that worship those filthy bastards. Society needs to quit promoting this "Thug Life" lifestyle.

What was that about Barbour?

OK, Hammer, is Barbour your choice? Could you tell me what policy ideas he has that you like?


Anyone else? Renegade? Cage? El? Ronnie?

I've been gone all day, ONO.

The ones I like: Bobby Jindal, Chris Chritie, Jeb Bush (don't faint), Herman Cain, Huckabee, Paul Ryan, Donald Trump, and a few other.

Right now, we don't even know who is going to run.

B, what is it you like about each of them, and what don't you like? If all of them were running, which one would you vote for? I realize that you probably don't have as much information about them as you would need to make a clear choice yet, but based on what you know so far, why do you like them?

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
OK, Hammer, is Barbour your choice? Could you tell me what policy ideas he has that you like?


Anyone else? Renegade? Cage? El? Ronnie?

Didn't say that, ONo. It just baffles be that "not sympathetic enough about race relations" is still being whined about today. Herman Cain or Jindal are probably my first picks.

I'll ask you too, then - what policy ideas of theirs do you like? Anything about them that you don't like?

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
B, what is it you like about each of them, and what don't you like? If all of them were running, which one would you vote for? I realize that you probably don't have as much information about them as you would need to make a clear choice yet, but based on what you know so far, why do you like them?

OK,briefly:

Bobby Jindal-young, tough, follows his gut, took over the BP cleanup and did a hellofa job.

Chris Chritie-got balls, LOL he's tough, he doesn't back down over fights, he can cut the deficit.


Jeb Bush- great governor of Florida. Never whined about hurricane Katrina, did what needed to be done.

Herman Cain- still learning about him. so far so good.

Huckabee-I like him but he will never be pres. The US will not elect a preacher.

Paul Ryan-young great economic mind, could handle the deficit.

Donald Trump- business smarts. Could handle diplomacy well. Never backs down.

That is just off the cuff. It's been a loooong day and I'm exhausted.

Thanks, B. Now go get some rest. I'm about to do the same.

All of the above look better than an untried community organizer with a now dismal record.

Look, there are about 8 months before the primary season. It is a conservative trait to scan literature and ponder the many questions that must be answered before a selection is made. In the end, I suspect some people who will vote in the Republican primary are looking for someone who will attempt to balance the national checkbook by cutting unnecessary spending without robbing the productive citizens to "spread the wealth" to those who neither toil nor sweat and will not be too afraid to spit in the eye of the devil. Others will vote for the "most electable" because of name recognition, appeal to swing voters, or because that candidate promises to throw money at the right causes or constituency. I would prefer to elect the former type of candidate who I suspect would be the Chris Christy-Mitch Daniels-Mike Huckabee sort. Given the record of Obama, I will accept the likes of a candidate like Mitt Romney in the general election unless Polls show Obama with less than 20% of the vote, then I'll go third party.

quote:

And where do "Editor of the Harvard Law Journal" and "United States Senator" rank on your intelligence scale?

Given the performance of the Senate and the former-"Editor of the Harvard Law Journal"-in-Chief, it looks like there may be a three way tie. It appears that either an Ivy League college education is much overrated or community colleges are truly a bargain.

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
I posted this over five hours ago and so far I've gotten one snide remark from a right-winger, and a few comments from some libs. Are you Repubs telling me you HAVE no preference?

Ferrill? B? ANYONE?

Just now saw the post, some of us have to work for a living. I would prefer Governor Christie but he says he's not running. If not I'll wait and listen to all the candidates and see which one I believe will most follow my ideas for the correct leadership that we are sorely lacking today. There's no such thing as a perfect spouse so I'm not looking for a perfect candidate. Looks like you're stuck with supporting Obama. That sounds depressing to me.

I will add Retired Lt. Colonel of the United States Army Allen West to the mix.

quote:

Originally posted by b50m:
I will add Retired Lt. Colonel of the United States Army Allen West to the mix.

Well, OK. The "mix" is entitled to at least one hothead.

If the rethugliteacons DON'T go with Michele Bachmann, ( I HOPE, I HOPE, I HOPE) then let them PLEASE go with Jimmy McMillan, the RENT IS TOO **** HIGH candidate from NEW YORK!

Man what a great time it is for comedians and ALL comedians should CONTRIBUTE to the republican party as royalty for material alone!

As stagflation sets in, any Republican with the slogan, "I'm Not Obama!", will be the winner.

Can the Times Daily please start a forum section for kids? That would give rocky somewhere to post his childish rants and leave the adults alone.

quote:

Originally posted by elinterventor01:
As stagflation sets in, any Republican with the slogan, "I'm Not Obama!", will be the winner.

LOL, but true.

Donald Trump! With Allen West as vice pres.

I hope ya'll are joking talking about Donald Trump... He's as flakey as his hair. He may call himself a "R" canidate, but he is between liberal and to the left of moderate on most issues and would be a disaster even if he were in the GOP primary.

Newt Gingrich is very smart and knows his way around politicians. Due to the climate of the American people, I think he'd really push hard to get conservative policies passed on the economic front, and he has the chops to push them well. He'd ROAST Barry in one-on-one debates. Barry would look like a 13 year old high school student trying to keep up with Newt's grasp of the issues. I'm not a huge fan of Newt, but if we end up having to go the "lesser of two evils" vote again, he's a hell of a lot better than McCain!! That I know for sure. Newt's biggest issue is the baggage he brings personally(something I'm sure libs would love to bash him for even though they all want Clinton to be added to Mt Rushmore. LMAO!)

I like Allen West a ton, and Herman Cain also. Neither really has the cred right now due to lack of experience in the gov't, but hey, look who the prez is right now...so that obviously isn't that important. lol

I've talked before how I like Ron Paul's views on economics. If we would actually listen to him, we'd have a much better chance at curing what ails us as a country. But his presentation hurts him. He's old and squeeky and always seems to be whining. If we could find someone marketable to articulate his message, that's who I'd want.

I just like Bachmann and Palin. I def think they have a nitch right now and should stick with that. Neither would survive the brutality of a campaign.

Not a huge fan of Huckabee. Once again, I think he has a good spot right now and should stay there. He is better at rallying his fans of his show than I think he'd be at rallying votes vs Obama.

I DO NOT WANT ROMNEY!!! I think that is clear enough.

Jindal is pretty good, but young. He has plenty of time to cultivate his political career. No need for him to jump in right now.

Jeb Bush...It wouldn't matter if he had pixy dust that would guarantee the fix for the country, his last name will never let him win IMO.

Don't know a lot about Christie. I've heard troubling things about his views on social issues, but also heard he was pretty conservative on economic issues. But don't know enough about either to speak intelliently on him.

Bottom line is though, Obama is looking weaker and weaker coming to the end of his term. His radical leftist base hates that he is a war monger, and the independents have seen way too many F ups with the economy, and way too many broken promises he made during his "Hope and Change" garbage he fed the mindless masses during his campaign. Only those of us voting in the GOP primary can screw this up IMO. If we'll get the right guy(or gal) in the face off, Barry will be a 1 termer.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
No mention of Ron Paul, the candidate that the far right seems endeared with.

quote:

Originally posted by beternU:
Paul has some good ideas, but he has some other ideas that taint his agenda with a thick veneer of nuttiness. He, like Sarah Plain, has a dedicated core of true believers, but neither of them will expand their bases enough to win any national election.

You both show your ignorance of who Ron Paul is and what he stands for.

He is not the candidate of the "far right"...he is the candidate of Liberty & Freedom.

And only during this "nutty", statist, nationalistic period of history do the ideas of true freedom and limited government get described as having "a thick veneer of nuttiness".

Liberty and Freedom doesnt tell me anything. Sounds like hope and change. Jimmy Carter came to DC not knowing nor understanding how bigtime politics works. He refused to negotiate and offer quid pro quo and so he was outcast from both parties. Paul would suffer the same fate. Or worse.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Nation:

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
No mention of Ron Paul, the candidate that the far right seems endeared with.

quote:

Originally posted by beternU:
Paul has some good ideas, but he has some other ideas that taint his agenda with a thick veneer of nuttiness. He, like Sarah Plain, has a dedicated core of true believers, but neither of them will expand their bases enough to win any national election.

You both show your ignorance of who Ron Paul is and what he stands for.

He is not the candidate of the "far right"...he is the candidate of Liberty & Freedom.

And only during this "nutty", statist, nationalistic period of history do the ideas of true freedom and limited government get described as having "a thick veneer of nuttiness".

As far as the names mentioned in the article, I'd have to say "none of the above". But then I'm not a republican.

I'm a part of the "dedicated core of true believers" of economic and civil freedom.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
Liberty and Freedom doesnt tell me anything. Sounds like hope and change. Jimmy Carter came to DC not knowing nor understanding how bigtime politics works. He refused to negotiate and offer quid pro quo and so he was outcast from both parties. Paul would suffer the same fate. Or worse.

You do realize Ron Paul has been in Washington for quite a while, right?

He has demonstrated his commitment to "Liberty & Freedom" for many, many years.

He has never voted the "party line"...he has many times been the LONE dissenting vote out of 435 on legislation he felt went beyond limited government.

His track record supporting "Liberty & Freedom" is second to none.

I say all that...but that doesn't mean I think he could get elected.

quote:

I think he'd really push hard to get conservative policies passed on the economic front, and he has the chops to push them well.

He and other republicans had that chance when sick willie was in office.

Ron Paul is a flake. His kid is even flakier. I think they both snack on paint chips.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Nation:

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
No mention of Ron Paul, the candidate that the far right seems endeared with.

quote:

Originally posted by beternU:
Paul has some good ideas, but he has some other ideas that taint his agenda with a thick veneer of nuttiness. He, like Sarah Plain, has a dedicated core of true believers, but neither of them will expand their bases enough to win any national election.

You both show your ignorance of who Ron Paul is and what he stands for.

He is not the candidate of the "far right"...he is the candidate of Liberty & Freedom.

And only during this "nutty", statist, nationalistic period of history do the ideas of true freedom and limited government get described as having "a thick veneer of nuttiness".

Ron Paul is definitely not far right. Libertarianism is definitely more liberal than conservativism.
The difference is that Libertarianism is not a promoter of social welfare programs.

Libertarians are fiscal conservatives and liberal on social issues. Liberal in the sense that they dont believe the government has any say so in what you put in your body, or who, or what constitutes a marriage, or anything at all to do with the private medical procedure popularly called abortion. Conservatives on the other hand are intent on the government dictating all those things to us "for our own good". Cause Jesus told them too.

Is NONE OF THE ABOVE an option?

quote:

Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
Is NONE OF THE ABOVE an option?

Yes, just stay home.