Posted on 12/07/2010 10:46:52 AM PST by pissant
Romney is the one person on that list I would not vote for at all. Ever. For any reason. At best he is Nixon Lite (not referring to Watergate).
Here we go again. We are in the season in which dozens of would be Presidents are making their final decision as to whether to throw their hat in the ring for 2012. The election is still two years away, but in our increasingly insane system - in which an obscene amount of money is required to make the run - late entrants into the race (as Fred Thompson proved in the last cycle) do not have a chance. Within a few short months, we shall have before us a playbill with probably a dozen actors listed, each of whom has decided that he or she is the answer to our Republican presidential prayers. Thus, the question again: when I vote for the survivor of the Republican primary/caucus marathon, will it be with my nostrils clenched, or will it be with the enthusiasm that I felt for Ronald Reagan? In this regard, it is worth mentioning that of my six previous Republican votes for President, not once did I vote for the eventual winner in the Republican Presidential primary.
Pundits, pollsters and the media have been handicapping the field for a while already. One could list as many as two dozen people who are considered "potentially serious candidates." I must say that I feel somewhat more encouraged than I have been at the corresponding point in previous cycles. Within the field there are definitely several candidates who appear worthy of the mantle worn by Reagan. Two in particular are very attractive to me: Jim DeMint and Mike Pence. Now admittedly I might not know enough about either of these potential candidates to be certain that we don't have another Trojan Bush in the making. But DeMint's book, Saving Freedom is a glorious manifesto for individual liberty and Pence's recent article in the October issue of the magazine Imprimis entitled "The Presidency and the Constitution" is a testament to Constitutional faithfulness that is inspiring. I know even less about some of the other contenders (Barbour, Daniels, Jindal, Pawlenty, Perry, Thune), but their conservative credentials appear strong and - at least at first glance - it seems quite possible that I might be able to cast an enthusiastic vote for one of them.
But you will note that I have so far omitted mention of the four names that garner the most play in the media - and the likelihood is that my eyes will be gazing at one of their names on my electronic ballot as I decide whether my nose must be shielded before I tap the box next to their name.
Gingrich. In principle, Newt passes muster. His conservative credentials are impeccable. The books he has published, the causes he has championed, the candidates he has supported since he was chased from power, all reinforce his unquestioned conservative beliefs. But Newt is damaged goods, thoroughly demonized by the left, and he has a track record of volatility and questionable judgment. I'm sure that Obama is licking his chops at the prospect. I don't think that it will happen. Still, I would vote for him with some enthusiasm, but I would be worried.Palin. More damaged and demonized goods - maybe more so than Newt. More chop licking by Obama. It would take a book to explain the incredibly negative reaction she elicits. But the sad fact is that some of that reaction emanates from certain conservative quarters. Therefore, I doubt that she could secure the nomination - if she even decides to run. She is extremely attractive, with bona fide conservative credentials, but one cannot escape the feeling of insufficient gravitas for her to be considered Presidential material. Of course the current resident of the White House apparently had gravitas (now unmasked as arrogance unsupported by talent) and charisma. We know how that turned out. I would vote for her over Obama of course, but as with Newt, I would be worried.
Huckabee. He certainly has played a magnificent game since 2008. If one watches his TV show and reads his words, one senses that his adherence to the principles enunciated earlier are solid and unshakeable. There is just the little matter of his failure to live up to those principles when he was Governor of Arkansas. If it comes to it, I'll vote for him. But I doubt that I'll be able to keep my fingers off of my nose - although the stench I‘ll be attempting to avoid will not be nearly as pungent as it was for McCain.
Romney. Can you say RINO? Romney has a proven track record as a fake conservative. The words "Massachusetts Health Care" should be sufficient to instantly disqualify him. If elected, there is not a chance that he will lead the charge to reverse the country's inexorable slide toward Euro-socialism, international feebleness and economic decline. And yet he is widely perceived to be the front runner for the Republican 2012 nomination. Should he achieve that goal, it would prove that the Tea Party revolt of the last two years has been for naught. The thought of voting for him - despite the fact that I will do so if left no other choice - is deeply disheartening.
But perhaps fate will be kind and one among the earlier group of names will emerge as the victor. I will vote enthusiastically for the person who can help the US turn the page on the sorry age of Obama and lead our country out of the leftist wilderness.
I'd be more interested in a Daniels/Rubio-or- Christie ticket. I don't say it's my dream ticket but I could get behind it. I like governors over committee members any day (as long as they don't quit).
I like Bolton but he wouldn’t get a single idependent vote, he is unelectable as President and I think most Freepers would agree.
I’m calling “Concern Troll Alert” on this Palin damaged good thing.
There are several candidates I could support enthusiastically and, but for one thing, Palin would not be my favorite. That one thing is that Palin is Doing It. She is following Reagan’s playbook with solid conservative credentials, more solid than Reagan’s before the 70s, and she is Walking the Walk and Talking the Talk. She has put herself out front of things much more than Reagan ever could, largely because of the Internet and the availability of FNC. Reagan had General Electric Theater and local speeches. I think that at some point the women who are not activist Democrats and Feminists will swing to her big time. even if her opposition is named Clinton.
You nailed it!
Not to mention the probability that the Republican primaries will be full of Democrats who will vote for Romney. If the kenyan runs without opposition the Democrat primaries will have low voting and the Republican primaries will be swamped- with Democrats, some or most voting positively for Roney as an alternative to the Luo. If Romney then gets elected he will know to whom he owes that victory and will govern accordingly. I think Democrats undêrstand that. If Soetoro runs and has serious opposition from the Left then maybe they will leave the R primaries alone.
Spot on.
Exactly. Palin is going balls out (so to speak) while the others are sucking their thumbs and saying “duh what do I do?” or whining that she is so popular and its just not fair...LOL! If any of the other conservatives can get their act together and make things happen like Sarah then they will get my attention and support, until then, they are just third string or worse, water boys and girls.
The “GOP” in the last presidential primaries probably included a good percentage of Democrats and it will likely be the same in 2012.
The country does not do well when it elects legislators to the Presidency who do not have experience as Executives, like governor. I would vote for an ex-mayor much more confidently than someone whose experience is legislative only, no matter how long he has served or what committees he chaired.
Does the press have anything on DeMint that would ruin his chances?
I don’t know enough about him to know if there is anything that can seriously damage him. Same with Pence... is there anything solid that the left can really hurt either of them with?
thanks.
Here we go again. We are in the season in which dozens of would be Presidents are making their final decision as to whether to throw their hat in the ring for 2012. The election is still two years away, but in our increasingly insane system - in which an obscene amount of money is required to make the run - late entrants into the race (as Fred Thompson proved in the last cycle) do not have a chance. Within a few short months, we shall have before us a playbill with probably a dozen actors listed, each of whom has decided that he or she is the answer to our Republican presidential prayers. Thus, the question again: when I vote for the survivor of the Republican primary/caucus marathon, will it be with my nostrils clenched, or will it be with the enthusiasm that I felt for Ronald Reagan? In this regard, it is worth mentioning that of my six previous Republican votes for President, not once did I vote for the eventual winner in the Republican Presidential primary.
Pundits, pollsters and the media have been handicapping the field for a while already. One could list as many as two dozen people who are considered "potentially serious candidates." I must say that I feel somewhat more encouraged than I have been at the corresponding point in previous cycles. Within the field there are definitely several candidates who appear worthy of the mantle worn by Reagan. Two in particular are very attractive to me: Jim DeMint and Mike Pence. Now admittedly I might not know enough about either of these potential candidates to be certain that we don't have another Trojan Bush in the making. But DeMint's book, Saving Freedom is a glorious manifesto for individual liberty and Pence's recent article in the October issue of the magazine Imprimis entitled "The Presidency and the Constitution" is a testament to Constitutional faithfulness that is inspiring. I know even less about some of the other contenders (Barbour, Daniels, Jindal, Pawlenty, Perry, Thune), but their conservative credentials appear strong and - at least at first glance - it seems quite possible that I might be able to cast an enthusiastic vote for one of them.
But you will note that I have so far omitted mention of the four names that garner the most play in the media - and the likelihood is that my eyes will be gazing at one of their names on my electronic ballot as I decide whether my nose must be shielded before I tap the box next to their name.
Gingrich. In principle, Newt passes muster. His conservative credentials are impeccable. The books he has published, the causes he has championed, the candidates he has supported since he was chased from power, all reinforce his unquestioned conservative beliefs. But Newt is damaged goods, thoroughly demonized by the left, and he has a track record of volatility and questionable judgment. I'm sure that Obama is licking his chops at the prospect. I don't think that it will happen. Still, I would vote for him with some enthusiasm, but I would be worried.Palin. More damaged and demonized goods - maybe more so than Newt. More chop licking by Obama. It would take a book to explain the incredibly negative reaction she elicits. But the sad fact is that some of that reaction emanates from certain conservative quarters. Therefore, I doubt that she could secure the nomination - if she even decides to run. She is extremely attractive, with bona fide conservative credentials, but one cannot escape the feeling of insufficient gravitas for her to be considered Presidential material. Of course the current resident of the White House apparently had gravitas (now unmasked as arrogance unsupported by talent) and charisma. We know how that turned out. I would vote for her over Obama of course, but as with Newt, I would be worried.
Huckabee. He certainly has played a magnificent game since 2008. If one watches his TV show and reads his words, one senses that his adherence to the principles enunciated earlier are solid and unshakeable. There is just the little matter of his failure to live up to those principles when he was Governor of Arkansas. If it comes to it, I'll vote for him. But I doubt that I'll be able to keep my fingers off of my nose - although the stench I‘ll be attempting to avoid will not be nearly as pungent as it was for McCain.
Romney. Can you say RINO? Romney has a proven track record as a fake conservative. The words "Massachusetts Health Care" should be sufficient to instantly disqualify him. If elected, there is not a chance that he will lead the charge to reverse the country's inexorable slide toward Euro-socialism, international feebleness and economic decline. And yet he is widely perceived to be the front runner for the Republican 2012 nomination. Should he achieve that goal, it would prove that the Tea Party revolt of the last two years has been for naught. The thought of voting for him - despite the fact that I will do so if left no other choice - is deeply disheartening.
But perhaps fate will be kind and one among the earlier group of names will emerge as the victor. I will vote enthusiastically for the person who can help the US turn the page on the sorry age of Obama and lead our country out of the leftist wilderness.
DeMint and Pence are two outstanding conservatives, and both would be repulsed at how some so-called conservatives, let alone liberals, belittle, smear, and outright lie about Sarah Palin - a lady whom both men have stated their admiration for.
deMitt/PenceMSNBC.
What did Duncan Hunter drop out already?
Sorry but governors make good presidents, not legislators. Now If one of them is smart enough to jump onboard the President Palin Express...
Present.
Pissant posts a thead about Sarah Palin being damaged goods written by a Huckabee supporter.
Good luck with that one pissy, this will surely elevate your status as a great thinker on FR.
Does this mean you're from Illinois?
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.