GOP Nominee 2012 - Who Will It Be?, Pt. 2

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I can only hope it comes with all the lighting and dramatic music as the season finales to The Celebrity Apprentice, as well as all the corporate sponsorship.

PS: Does he get to say, "You're fired" to someone at the end? Inquiring minds want to know! :hyper:
 
for all intend and purposes
the 2008 Democratic primary rally season and convention could have been produced be the X-Factor team.
 
Newt Gingrich. Perry is an imbecile, Cain is following in his footsteps, and I'm just not sure Romney can excite the base enough to win.
 
Newt Gingrich. Perry is an imbecile, Cain is following in his footsteps, and I'm just not sure Romney can excite the base enough to win.

Do you think he'll be able to connect with Indepedents in the general though?
 
Do you think he'll be able to connect with Indepedents in the general though?

I truly don't know. I hope so. I don't necessarily think Romney can.

I also feel like he'll be able to hold his own against Obama when the debates begin, and that'll serve him well.
 
How do you feel about the fact that Gingrich is an incredibly unlikable person? I mean that honestly. He's by all accounts a huge dick. Not that it's uncommon in politics, but yeah.
 
How do you feel about the fact that Gingrich is an incredibly unlikable person? I mean that honestly. He's by all accounts a huge dick. Not that it's uncommon in politics, but yeah.

Is it odd that i find his personality somewhat likable? I think it probably is :lol:

I do understand what you're saying about his personality though. He's a divisive figure, and I think most people will disagree with me on my assessment of his personality. I do find Romney more unlikable though.
 
I'll probably vote for Obama unless Ron Paul gets the Republican nomination. I like his stance on foreign policy more than anyone else's, including Obama's.
 
I'll probably vote for Obama unless Ron Paul gets the Republican nomination. I like his stance on foreign policy more than anyone else's, including Obama's.

What is it with some people's infatuation with Ron Paul? I don't understand.
 
What is it with some people's infatuation with Ron Paul? I don't understand.

If you're implying that I'm infatuated with him, you're wrong.

People may seem infatuated because he is very unique. He tells it as it is, and isn't a demagogue. This especially applies to his stance on foreign policy. Not one politician in America wants to deal with the root causes of terrorism, which are: decades of America's policing the world/being involved in wars that we don't have to be involved in. Instead, most politicians talk about what they think is the best way to be INVOLVED in the Middle East (as if it's a necessity), whether it be sanctions, military presence, threats, whatever it is. Because of many decades of such American policy, the American public is brainwashed into thinking that we have to be involved, whether it be through force or otherwise, and is too blinded with arrogance to even think that this might be drawing hatred towards us.

However, there is a segment of the population that is humble enough to realize that we should mind our own business. Many people all over the world think this as well, but most Americans & politicians simply don't get it. And so when people see a candidate who represents this view, it's a rare site, and so their passion makes them seem infatuated.

I don't agree with most of Ron Paul's extreme free market economic policy, and I think Obama's policy is probably better. But if it really came down to Ron Paul vs. Obama, I would support Ron Paul 100% if it means an end to American militarism around the world.
 
So a question for the conservatives; who are you leaning towards and why?

I'm just curious about where you all stand.

Romney. I have a preference for governors, people who have worked in the private sector, and he's more of a moderate, which is kind of where I am. And he does the best in head-to-head matchups, which is a big factor. He's more likely to get independents to the polls and help down-ballot.

That said, I am 110% behind whoever the GOP nominee is.

How do you feel about the fact that Gingrich is an incredibly unlikable person? I mean that honestly. He's by all accounts a huge dick. Not that it's uncommon in politics, but yeah.

So what? How many times have people in here mentioned how they wished Obama was tougher? Lyndon Johnson was probably the biggest a-hole we've ever had as president, yet the left and the history books seem to hold him in pretty high regard. I thought we all supported competence and intellect over "vote for the guy you'd like to have a beer with." :shrug:
 
I thought we all supported competence and intellect over "vote for the guy you'd like to have a beer with." :shrug:

"We all" who? The people who voted for W? Kept convincing us that Sarah Palin was competent and smart and we were sexists for implying otherwise?

I think the funniest thing about Gingrich being the potential candidate is that I have no doubt that he looks at the Tea Party faction of the Republicans with absolute scorn and thinks that they are too stupid for words. If there ever was an intellectual elitist who isn't even nuanced about it, it's Newt.
 
The other interesting thing about Newt beyond all of his hypocritical family values baggage is that he's on the wrong side of two of the Tea Party's biggest boogie men; climate change and the fairness doctrine. Just how has he duped these folks?
 
"We all" who? The people who voted for W? Kept convincing us that Sarah Palin was competent and smart and we were sexists for implying otherwise?

Philsfan brought up likability. I'm saying it would be hypocritical in a Newt/Obama race for the left to campaign on "But look at how much more likable Obama is" or "Look at how unlikable Newt is" given the "who do you want to have a beer with?" argument that you and others have dismissed when played by the right.
 
On Thursday, at a campaign stop in Iowa, the former House speaker said, “Start with the following two facts: Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works. So they literally have no habit of showing up on Monday. They have no habit of staying all day. They have no habit of ‘I do this and you give me cash’ unless it’s illegal.”

Way to go Newt.

For the record, I was one of those kids. Nice to know I lazied and stole my way to the corporate world. What a loser.
 
Philsfan brought up likability. I'm saying it would be hypocritical in a Newt/Obama race for the left to campaign on "But look at how much more likable Obama is" or "Look at how unlikable Newt is" given the "who do you want to have a beer with?" argument that you and others have dismissed when played by the right.
I wouldn't underestimate David Axelrod like that, I think you're off the mark with potential Dem election strategies.

The issue with Gingrich isn't really "likeability" from my point of view. I do not believe he has the political discipline to run and win a national campaign. He speaks his mind, he's honest with his views and it hurts him in the news cycle (just look at the terrible, almost-aborted start to his nomination campaign this time out).

Gingrich and Obama are both intellectuals who have problems when it comes to optics (effectively communicating policy with normalfolk). The difference is that Obama, and his team, are capable of staying on-message n an election cycle.

I also have a feeling at a time of such a historic distrust and disgust with Congress, the guy who presided over the 1990s government shutdown will have a hard time shaking off the negative spin you can do on that.

jGdkZ.jpg


Even though this led to a positive outcome and a couple of consecutive balanced budgets, the Prez always gets historical credit for a good or bad economy, much to Clinton's benefit. Not Nooters.
 
Philsfan brought up likability. I'm saying it would be hypocritical in a Newt/Obama race for the left to campaign on "But look at how much more likable Obama is" or "Look at how unlikable Newt is" given the "who do you want to have a beer with?" argument that you and others have dismissed when played by the right.

Like usual I think you're bending the conversation to fit your agenda.

He wasn't talking about "who do you want to have a beer with" type of likability, he's talking about the fact that many, even within the Republican party, think he's a backstabbing asshole.
 
That said, I am 110% behind whoever the GOP nominee is.

This says all I need to know about you. You're all about partisanship, no matter if you agree or even like the eventual GOP nominee.

Is it about Obama? Do you honestly believe that a Bachmann, Santorum, Cain would be better for the country than Obama?

Have you ever voted for a non-Republican candidate? As a liberal, I have, in the past, voted for right-of-centre candidates, based foremost on policy, track record and, yes, likability.

I, personally, would have voted (if I was American, of course) for the 2000 version of John McCain over Obama.
 
This says all I need to know about you. You're all about partisanship, no matter if you agree or even like the eventual GOP nominee.

Is it about Obama? Do you honestly believe that a Bachmann, Santorum, Cain would be better for the country than Obama?

Have you ever voted for a non-Republican candidate? As a liberal, I have, in the past, voted for right-of-centre candidates, based foremost on policy, track record and, yes, likability.

I, personally, would have voted (if I was American, of course) for the 2000 version of John McCain over Obama.
I think you're overlooking the general contempt many conservatives have for the Federal government in general.

I think there must be something subconsciously thrilling for many GOP voters about potentially sending in nutjob to Washington to implode the joint (a la Palin, Bachman, Cain, Rick).
 
I also feel like he'll be able to hold his own against Obama when the debates begin, and that'll serve him well.



it seems to me that this is really what the base wants. someone who will get all shouty at Obama during the debates, perhaps call him "boy." :shrug:
 
Gingrich and Obama are both intellectuals who have problems when it comes to optics


i'd call Gingrich a pseudo-intellectual.

next debate, take a drink every time he says "profoundly" or "fundamentally" or thinks that his every thought will "profoundly and fundamentally change the way we live now."
 
Philsfan brought up likability. I'm saying it would be hypocritical in a Newt/Obama race for the left to campaign on "But look at how much more likable Obama is" or "Look at how unlikable Newt is" given the "who do you want to have a beer with?" argument that you and others have dismissed when played by the right.
Oh, so by asking a conservative how they feel about it, I'm campaigning on it? Dear Lord.
 
Like usual I think you're bending the conversation to fit your agenda.

He wasn't talking about "who do you want to have a beer with" type of likability, he's talking about the fact that many, even within the Republican party, think he's a backstabbing asshole.

I agree that Newt's likability and demeanor will be an issue in the primary. But in the general, it becomes irrelevant among the GOP base. He'll get 95% of that 40% of the electorate regardless. But if the Obama team and his supporters use likability/amiability to persuade the independents, and people on the left were to see nothing wrong with that, that would be hypocritical in my view.

Again, you can say the same thing about LBJ, who people of all political persuasions disliked to a degree.

This says all I need to know about you. You're all about partisanship, no matter if you agree or even like the eventual GOP nominee.

Please. I'm all about the very things you brought up- track record, experience, policy, etc. If that's indeed your standard, there are a lot of Obama voters in here who voted for a guy with none of those things to be the leader of the free world. Your beef should be with them.

Is it about Obama? Do you honestly believe that a Bachmann, Santorum, Cain would be better for the country than Obama?

Yes, I do. Tell me- with a Republican House and Senate, what could Obama possibly dream of accomplishing in his 2nd term? Even Chris Matthews, of all people, expressed that concern. I want someone who knows how to fix the economy and will sign the bills that Congress presents him or her. That person clearly isn't Obama.

Have you ever voted for a non-Republican candidate? As a liberal, I have, in the past, voted for right-of-centre candidates, based foremost on policy, track record and, yes, likability.

Well, considering I've voted in one presidential election, my answer is no. At the state and local level- I live in Illinois. Look at what decades of liberal policy have done here. Why would I ever for a Democrat?
 
You said it would be hypocritical for the left to campaign on it. I assumed by "the left" you were talking about me, since that's how you always talk about people here whom you disagree with.
 
Stop. This is truly pathetic. I thought better of you than that.
No, national politics in America is pathetic. She's right on point.

A discussion about a candidate's "otherness" (suck my dick, Hilary) is pathetic.

Demanding the birth certificate of the first black president that has been public record for ages is pathetic.

....

This is the political arena. All bets are off on pathetic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom