Posted on 11/10/2011 6:23:16 PM PST by TBBT
It would be so worth it to watch him mop the floor with Obama in a debate....
If my memory serves Newt has some awesome political skills. AND no matter who becomes the nominee (or the leading contender) the media will go after big time. So, yeah, it’s not a slam-dunk, but none of the potentials we have are. At the moment, with all of the deep concerns in the world, Newt (to me) looks better and better. He is a seasoned and skilled candidate who I think may be the best person to lead us thru what may well be a very dark and dangerous time ahead. A few months ago I was not even giving him the time of day.
The “debates” are nothing but reality shows, moderated by Liberals who try to make conservatives look like idiots.
LOL my husband tonight echoed your thought. He said, “He’s not running to be my brother in law”. I thought that was kind of funny. :)
I do not think debating plays a very big part of the Presidents everyday life.
Yup. Jesus is not running, and I’m convinced that there are people here who would find fault with Him as a candidate.
Being a sinner is one thing. Being a serial adulterer takes a special person. Divorce can be brutal, and the capacity to drag a good person through all that mud is not a high recommendation. Sorry. I’m an attorney. I get to see these things from the inside. It ain’t pretty. I respect Newt’s intellect, but I keep thinking, if he capable of cheating on them, why wouldn’t he cheat on us?
Debating is not, but articulating the agenda of the party and negotiating are. I think that Newt has proven he has those skills as well.
OK...if not Newt, then ???. Who’s your candidate?
Well, virtually every person is capable of cheating at something, so in light of that, there’s no way for us to *know* any of our candidates wouldn’t *cheat* on us (whatever you mean by that).
Perhaps we should make all Presidential candidates take a lie detector test so we can find out if they’ve ever cheated on their spouses, ever cheated on their taxes, ever run a red light, etc etc, that way we can be sure they are really really REALLY honest people who will never cheat on us. I’m sure this is what our founding fathers had in mind...
Yes we are leaning towards Newt. He’s qualified to be president and he knows how to deal with Washington. We love Herman but I don’t think he is going to be able to withstand this smear campaign.
From what I’ve seen of Herman publicly - there a lot to like. However that comes with the caveat - if he’s guilty of what’s he’s been accused of then it’s a different story. I have no idea where the truth lies here and it’s impossible to really know.
That being said, I don’t really care about the accusations. There are plenty of relevant reasons to question whether Herman is ready for prime time. He’s a gaffe a minute, requiring way to many “clarifications” latter in the day. Worse, is when he claims to be taken out of context when clearly he was not (very politician like for the non-politician). He’s clearly deep as a teaspoon on many issues - especially foreign policy. His - and his team’s - handling of this controversy has been abysmal. And that’s from a guy who claims that he’ll make up for his shortcomings by surrounding himself by the best people. Hypocrisy, is also brought to the fore when his campaign makes baseless claims against others while at the same time he bemoans baseless claims against him. And the hits just keep coming...
Good points, Reagan69. If Newt gets the Supreme Court urgency and will make appts. of Conservatives, then he is halfway there.
Cain.
Moral character matters. Marxism is bad, not because it is wrong to want everyone to have what they need, but because the means of achieving it in Marxism is fundamentally immoral. It is theft. If a candidate has a defective personal sense of moral duty, why should we expect him to have sufficient moral sense to guide a nation? Keeping a promise to one person does not seem too much to ask, when we are expecting his promises to millions to be kept.
And it is not a matter of perfectionism. We insist that a commercial pilot have 20/20 vision, because we want his passengers to have the best opportunity to survive the flight, no matter what might come up. Moral sense is that clarity of vision that enables a good leader to navigate novel difficulties without losing his sense of direction. We treat such skill lightly at our peril.
I’m a Cain supporter. Romney is a nonstarter for me. Not sure why you would mention Romney just because I don’t like what Newt did to his women folk. BTW, repeatedly breaking solemn oaths to people who trusted you isn’t conservative either.
Thanks for the sermon....
Not interest in Pastor-in-chief either...
Perhaps the point that all these candidates have serious flaws has been missed. But they are the bunch that we have to choose from. It’s just a fact that and any apple you pick out of this cart is going to have a few worms.
I think the field of serious contenders has been whittled down to 4 - actually 3 after Perry’s implosion. That 3 would be Romney, Cain, and Gingrich. So again I ask who’s it going to be?
Romney? Seriously? That guy has been running for president since the beginning of time. If you haven’t figured out why he’s unacceptable by now then you are hopeless.
Cain? please... I’ve noted just the tip of the iceberg of his unacceptability above.
Gingrich - even considering his flaws - has at least shown that he can git-r-done in some respects. Look back to 1994. Balanced budget, welfare reform, creating a majority and capturing the house for the first time in decades, reelecting a majority, capital gains tax cut etc.
Earth shattering? Maybe, maybe not. But what’s Romney’s claim to fame while in office? RomneyCare?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.