Replies

*Whomever is the nominee will have to be just as charismatic, dynamic, and eloquent (yes, he's eloquent when delivering prepared texts) as Barry or they don't stand a chance.*

*sigh*.... That's what I liked about Romney last go around. The guy could have stood up next to Obama toe-to-toe and debated him eloquently and from a conservative position with the voice of experience. (Waits for the usual crew to bad mouth the guy's actions 10-years ago...)

I tend to buy into the idea that damaged goods are often just that. Romney, because he didn't make it in the general, isn't as damaged as McCain, but still... I've been hearing all the talk about Jindal coming from this site for some time, and frankly, I haven't gotten it. Now I do. No one had seen the guy talk before but pushed him right to the top of potential nominees.

I'm one huge on results, as well, but in this modern age, the right packaging and being able to deliver a moving and eloquent message is tremendously important. And no one I've seen is better at that than Obama. It was very evident even during the 2004 Dem Convention. Jindal can't compete with that, and he never has. McCain obviously couldn't, either.

"That's what I liked about Romney last go around. The guy could have stood up next to Obama toe-to-toe and debated him eloquently and from a conservative position with the voice of experience. (Waits for the usual crew to bad mouth the guy's actions 10-years ago...)

Agree 100% about Romney. He could have made Obama look very stupid in the debates especially on economic issues. I think the "Rich Guy" label still would have been hard to shake in the end. But, he may have had a fighting chance.

I'm not sure if you and I are in the minority at FR, but were certainly in the vocal minority. Expect a onslaught from "inarticulate is good" crowd her on FR.