2012 USA Republican Presidential Primaries

[FordGT90Concept]

Those currently in the race:
-Mitt Romney (Former Governor of Massechuets)
-Ron Paul (Senator, former doctor)
-Newt Gingrich (Former Speaker of the House)
-Rick Santorum (Former Senator)
-Rick Perry (Governor of Texas) - Giving Gingrich the best chance possible to beat Romney.
-John Huntsman, Jr. (former Ambassador to China, former Governor of Utah) - "Family decision" the day before South Carolina's primary.
-Tim Pawlenty (Governor of Minnesota) - Opted not to run at all.
-Herman Cain (former chair/CEO of Godfather's Pizza, former deputy chairman and chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, former mathematician for the US Navy) - Out after campaign got "derailed" by sexual harrassment allegations.
-Michelle Bachmann (Congresswoman, former tax attorney) - "No path forward" after Iowa's results.

[MT Alex]

Apparently Mr. Murphy doesn't pay any attention to CPAC, or any other current poll. That is a list of worthless hand shitters.

[FordGT90Concept]

Mitt Romney was on both lists (CPAC and Murphy's). Murphy probably excluded Ron Paul because he was only able to win three states last year. He also doesn't attract independents are no Democrats. The likelihood of Paul winning the election are virtually none--unless, of course, 60%+ are most concerned about the debt and government spending.

[twilyth]

I don't know 3 and 4, at least not by name, but it sounds like a snoozefest.

[FordGT90Concept]

If Murphy is right, you'll hear a lot about them the closer we get to election season. Remember, Obama was unknown until he gave a speech at the 2004 democratic convention. Coming into 2008, he was an underdog until Iowa put him on the map.

[yogurt_21]

well the one I see are

Newt Gingrich: no chance of winning. brings up the tail of the pack with 5%
Mitt Romney: Reagonomics....need i say more? currently shows 13% in the polls
Mike Huckabee: leavse alot to be desired, but has kept his name out fo the papers, good for now, will need to reverse that later this year. has a lead in primaries at 16%
Donald Trump: crazy, down to 8% in primary run from his commanding 26% lead.
Sarah Palin: Psycho, yet showing 11% in polls

versus

Barrack Obama: current approval rating: 26% approve, 35% oppose, leaving 39% undecided.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll

as far as it goes between obama and them those polls are unreliable atm. we'll see how it goes as each launch into their official campaigns.

[CyberDruid]

Trump and Palin 2012. Now that's Obama's wet dream.

[yogurt_21]

Originally Posted by CyberDruid

Trump and Palin 2012. Now that's Obama's wet dream.

funny thing is he should have waited then until after the republican primaries to release the birth certificate. Then he woulda had a trump card on trump after it was too late to pick someone else.

[FordGT90Concept]

Trump and Huckabee are out. Gingrich is in. I think it's going to come down to Pawlenty, Romney, and Gingrich.

[CyberDruid]

So Ron Paul doesn't count?

[FordGT90Concept]

I don't think he can get the votes for nomination. He might surprise everyone but I just can't see it happening. His views are too extreme.

[twilyth]

Ron Paul is the Ralph Nader of the Republicans, except I doubt he'll get anything close to the kind of support Nader got.

[FordGT90Concept]

Yeah, I hear it said many times that Presidential elections are based on character and likability more so than politics. I think Ralph Nader is more likable than Ron Paul so it makes sense Nader would see more support than Paul. If Ron Paul was really likable, he could convincingly sell the idea of a smaller government but, because he is not, people have to like the idea of smaller government before choosing to vote Ron Paul based solely on that decision. That brings in some votes, but not a lot of them. I predict he will win 5-10 states compared to 2 in 2008 but it won't be enough to grab the nomination.

[CyberDruid]

Your views are too extreme.

[Screaming Beaver]

Most of the names thrown around are too extreme to get mainstream American approval no matter what the Tea Party may think or they are complete unknowns (Huntsman, Pawlenty, who?). That leaves people like Mike Huckabee (who announced he's not running) and Mitt Romney, a flipflopper with the albotross of approving the Massachusetts healthcare system that will remind people of "Obamacare".

I really don't see any strong contenders to face Obama come Nov 2012. Its very early though, the tv pundits say so often enough while they go right on discussing it anyway...

[FordGT90Concept]

Yeah, Romney is going to have to convince the delegates that Massachusettes healthcare system was right for Massachusettes but Obamacare is not right for the USA. If he outright says he will fight to repeal Obamacare, I think that will be a nonissue. If he says he will fight to improve Obamacare, that's going to be problematical.

[Screaming Beaver]

Well even if he decides to fight against Obamacare he still has his approval of MA healthcare while he was governor. Flipflopping is not going to be a benefit for Romney either, if the experiences of Kerry and McCain are any indication.

[FordGT90Concept]

I don't think one can consider this flipflopping. MA is a extremely Democratic state while the USA as a whole is not. MA is also densely populated with large urban areas. What works for MA won't work for USA at large and he knows that. If Romney supported Obamacare or a program like MA has for the entire USA, then yes, he'd be flipflopping. As far as I know, he has never supported anything like that. Look at him as supporting states' rights rather than supporting a public health insurance program.


Gingrich's campaign is "imploding" within a week of starting (lots of issues over Paul Ryan and gay rights activists).

[FordGT90Concept]

Mitch Daniels officially declared that he is not running for office. Pawlenty is supposed to announce he is running today or tomorrow. Herman Cain has announced he is running.

Gingrich took a beating this week but I don't think he's out. He basically voiced concerns about the "Ryan Plan" most Republicans thought but haven't said. In other words, I think these stumbles are more or less good for the Republican party in the long run.


Edit: Looking closer at Herman Cain, I am intrigued. I need to hear where he stands on the issue but I think he is now my favorite. CEO, Federal Reserve chariman, mathematician, and has some US Navy background, and oh yeah, he's black. Does it get any better than that?


Edit: I found a sticking point. He apparently has some degree of intolerance in regards to the Islam faith:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

In an interview with Christianity Today, Cain declared he would not consider appointing an individual of Muslim faith to a presidential cabinet or to a federal court. "No, I will not," he said. "And here’s why. There is this creeping attempt, there is this attempt to gradually ease Sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government. It does not belong in our government. This is what happened in Europe. And little by little, to try and be politically correct, they made this little change, they made this little change. And now they’ve got a social problem that they don’t know what to do with hardly."

Another sticking point is that he agrees with Democrats on naturalizing illegal immigrants already in the USA rather than deporting them.

The rest shouldn't be an issue with the base.

[FordGT90Concept]

I just got done watching the CNN New Hampshire Republican Primary Debate and I have to say I'm impressed with all the candidates and would have no problem voting for any of them.

Let the Democrats keep thinking the Republican candidates are weak as all it does is play directly into the Republicans' favor. Obama is in serious, serious trouble because he has given all of the candidates an unlimited supply of ammunition (on the economy, on foreign policy, on budgeting, on deficits, on Social Security and Medicare, on immigration, etc.) to use against him.


My favorite is probably Cain and my least favorite is Bachman. I don't care for Bachman because her background is a lawyer (we got two of those in the White House right now--three if you include the Vice Presidential Mansion). I like Cain the most because he has sat on the Federal Reserve board and understands the financial collapse/financial markets better than anyone else. Legislatively, I think Gingrich is still the best choice because knows the in's and out's of Washington political maneuvering (he knows how to get shit done). Gingrich is also very logical and basis his decisions on that, not affiliations. Paul is cut-cut-cut as usual but, unlike previous elections where I was constantly disagreeing, we are rapidly reaching the point where we take that approach making him look like a better candidate. A lot of directions were sent Santorums way (I think he got the most questions actually) and he answered them all admirably. Romney and Pawlenty had a strong showing too but Pawlenty appeared the weaker of the two because of his "Obamneycare" rhetoric which King forced a response to.

Like I said, all did excellent and they all have their eyes set on Obama, not each other (except Pawlenty, but that is excusable).

[CyberDruid]

Which tells me everything I need to know about your skewed perspective on reality

[FordGT90Concept]

Oh, so you support starting open conflict with Libya when even Gates can't name one strategic reason why we are there? You support auto bailouts, bank bailouts, blank checks to corporations, and "stimulus" that only puts us farther in debt? You support adding $1.5-1.6 trillion to the debt every year with no plans to deal with it? You support the federal government operating month to month instead of being forced to look at the broader picture? You support arguments rather than action in dealing with the borders? You support the federal government attacking states on issues like immigration where the states want to do something and the federal government wants to halt it just because? You support starting a war with Yemen? You support having the second highest tax in the developed world on corporations preventing them from competing anywhere except outside the USA? You support redirecting $500 billion from senior citizen healthcare to fund craptastic government sponsored healthcare for people still working (aka Obamacare)? You support growing programs like Medicare that are doomed to failure because their very nature requires they spend $3 for every $1 collected? You support your grand children inheriting the defeated, crumbling, neglected, poorly managed, and starved Roman American Empire?

Pray tell me, what did Obama do to get on your good side? Give you a free puppy? News flash: the humane society has tens of thousands of those equally free.

[yogurt_21]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

I just got done watching the CNN New Hampshire Republican Primary Debate and I have to say I'm impressed with all the candidates and would have no problem voting for any of them.

Let the Democrats keep thinking the Republican candidates are weak as all it does is play directly into the Republicans' favor. Obama is in serious, serious trouble because he has given all of the candidates an unlimited supply of ammunition (on the economy, on foreign policy, on budgeting, on deficits, on Social Security and Medicare, on immigration, etc.) to use against him.


My favorite is probably Cain and my least favorite is Bachman. I don't care for Bachman because her background is a lawyer (we got two of those in the White House right now--three if you include the Vice Presidential Mansion). I like Cain the most because he has sat on the Federal Reserve board and understands the financial collapse/financial markets better than anyone else. Legislatively, I think Gingrich is still the best choice because knows the in's and out's of Washington political maneuvering (he knows how to get shit done). Gingrich is also very logical and basis his decisions on that, not affiliations. Paul is cut-cut-cut as usual but, unlike previous elections where I was constantly disagreeing, we are rapidly reaching the point where we take that approach making him look like a better candidate. A lot of directions were sent Santorums way (I think he got the most questions actually) and he answered them all admirably. Romney and Pawlenty had a strong showing too but Pawlenty appeared the weaker of the two because of his "Obamneycare" rhetoric which King forced a response to.

Like I said, all did excellent and they all have their eyes set on Obama, not each other (except Pawlenty, but that is excusable).

that fact would keep me from voting for him. any idiot who sat on that board and watched the collapse happen needs to be shot hung and set on fire. You don't put those morons back in charge. I mean seriously one of the worst thigns Obama could have done is keep Bernanke and yet here we are.

[ChewyBrownSuga]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

Oh, so you support starting open conflict with Libya when even Gates can't name one strategic reason why we are there? You support auto bailouts, bank bailouts, blank checks to corporations, and "stimulus" that only puts us farther in debt? You support adding $1.5-1.6 trillion to the debt every year with no plans to deal with it? You support the federal government operating month to month instead of being forced to look at the broader picture? You support arguments rather than action in dealing with the borders? You support the federal government attacking states on issues like immigration where the states want to do something and the federal government wants to halt it just because? You support starting a war with Yemen? You support having the second highest tax in the developed world on corporations preventing them from competing anywhere except outside the USA? You support redirecting $500 billion from senior citizen healthcare to fund craptastic government sponsored healthcare for people still working (aka Obamacare)? You support growing programs like Medicare that are doomed to failure because their very nature requires they spend $3 for every $1 collected? You support your grand children inheriting the defeated, crumbling, neglected, poorly managed, and starved Roman American Empire?

Pray tell me, what did Obama do to get on your good side? Give you a free puppy? News flash: the humane society has tens of thousands of those equally free.

At the Republic debate it seemed that they were just agreeing with one another. They might have worded it differently, but it sounded like they were all on the same page. Especially on how to bring jobs back to America. Personally I'm going to wait a little long to form my opinion on the Republican party

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by yogurt_21

that fact would keep me from voting for him. any idiot who sat on that board and watched the collapse happen needs to be shot hung and set on fire. You don't put those morons back in charge. I mean seriously one of the worst thigns Obama could have done is keep Bernanke and yet here we are.

He was on the board back in Clinton's years. He didn't see this actual collapse but should have a good grasp of what the Federal Reserve is all about.

Originally Posted by ChewyBrownSuga

At the Republic debate it seemed that they were just agreeing with one another. They might have worded it differently, but it sounded like they were all on the same page. Especially on how to bring jobs back to America. Personally I'm going to wait a little long to form my opinion on the Republican party

Yeah, they largely were. Obama/Pelosi/Reid has given the Republicans much to agree on. That's why it will be difficult to choose which of them is actually most able to lead.