Posted on 06/28/2009 9:47:29 AM PDT by tricky_k_1972
The Grand Old Party's 2012 presidential pool isn't looking so grand these days.
Add Nevada Sen. John Ensign's and South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's extramarital affairs to Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal's unconvincing TV speech and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's family dramas, and the Republican presidential herd is thinning fast -- leaving many to wonder who will lead the party in its attempt to reclaim the White House.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels are the names now being whispered in Republican circles as potential winners -- although observers admit political speculations can change overnight.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Are there any “family problems” in the Kennedy family? Doesn’t seem to hold them back from elections.
Don't remember Obama having an interview with real questions.
Ideology and principle are both important considerations when it comes to politics, so is pragmatism. You can't accomplish much if you're not elected.
TP was elected and re-elected in a near-socialist state (similar to Romney, btw), with NO NEW TAXES the theme of his tenure. And, unlike GHWB, the left's efforts to get him to go wobbly in that regard have been unsuccessful.
The left likes to refer to his support of increased "fees", but most, if not all, are taxpayer-optional. I.E, if you don't want to pay increased state campground fees, don't go camping. The left, while berating that position, is happy to propose gouging the paycheck.
Pawlenty has been a consistent supporter of parental notification on abortion, the death penalty for heinous crimes, and he almost single-handedly made concealed-carry a reality in this bastion of lefty-looniness.
Again, he's not necessarily my first choice (I'll wait and see who/what bubbles up), but he's well-spoken, plays well to the cameras, and seems to have an appeal that crosses party lines.
And, though he's not Reagan-like in his political rhetoric, he's managed to successfully govern without throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Obama was a muslum cokehead community organizer and that did not bother anyone. But we have some family issues or are bad in one interwiew and we are out. Pound sand liberal media you do not matter.
[She looked like a deer in the headlights during the infamous Katie Couric interview. ]
You obviously haven’t seen the recent interviews. She strikes fear in the interviewers hearts. I think she will eat Couric for lunch next time around, and there will be a next time.
Cripes, deer in the headlights? She was carrying the whole campaign as a nooby. And like McCain was such a wit in comparison.
Palin with congress critters Cantor or Ryan as VP.
Palin gave a fantastic speech at the Repub Convention.
I was elated to see how she had Obutthole and his henchmen trembling.
It was downhill from there. She’s got great principles (free markets, drill for oil, etc.), but her intellectual level is astoundingly lacking. Her debates were pathetic, especially when she said something to the effect of “I’m not going to answer that question. Here’s what I want to talk about...” WTF?
You guys aren’t being realistic in your fawning over her (as much as I would like her to be the one). The media will attack her again and she’s an easy target with her 11th grade speaking abilities.
I think you and GOP lady should hook up.
No question, you’re compatible. :)
As someone wisely posted here a few weeks ago regarding the 2008 election:
“Americans had a choice between Stupid and Evil. They chose Evil.”
“Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s unconvincing TV speech”
What the hell? Like Bush or Clinton ever wowed the world in speeches before they popped up. I assure you, absolutely no one remembers how well Jindal for whatever occasion that was.
Hate to tell you guys, but whether you like him or not, the candidate who consistently handled interviews very well and debated the best was Romney. He doesn’t rely on a teleprompter either.
[I think the David Letterman saga actually helped her. She showed that she won’t be the butt of everyone’s jokes when they cross the line, and for her to not retreat into some humiliated posture indicates a desire to be out there and take the hits as they come.]
She brushed Davo back with a beanball that almost split his noggin in two. I think most of the liberal commentators now know it is suicide to pull that crap on her. Name another spineless Republican who can say the same.
[Look, the most experienced candidate is Mitt Romney.]
You are soooo right. His experience bringing Romneycare to Massachusetts is just what we need.
Obama can’t speak without a teleprompter and we’re worrying about an interview that will be five years old by the election?
Yep.
Why didn't he win then?
I’m not saying an absolute NO, and I sure like Sarah. A LOT. But I just wonder if Palin has been too marginalized (unfairly, of course) to be THE candidate in 2012. We HAVE to have a candidate who takes ZERO out!
I guess the problem is: Sarah certainly is on a VERY short list of true CONSERVATIVES that are the ONLY candidates that should be nominated. But can she win the national election this soon? I just don’t know ..
(don’t brutalize me now.)
Governor Palin runs circles around Bozo Biden and TOTUS.
We all know Barry can't handle any interview without being spoon fed the screened questions in advance and clinging to his teleprompter. He's a stuttering buffoon off script.
And you harp on the Couric interview. Please. Sarah has more smarts, guts and oratory skills than all the idiots in the oval office combined....
-—”Why didn’t he win then?”
Romney didn’t win because the media feared him and sought to destroy him. They knew he was a formidable debater.
The turning point was the Florida Primary when McCain and his greasy operators dropped the “Mitt Romney has a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq” - which, as it turns out, was intentionally taken way out of context (Romney never said he would offer a timetable - in fact, he said the he did NOT favor a timetable).
In the debate in California after that, Romney nailed McCain on it, but IMO, didn’t go far enough. He should have accused McCain of dishonesty. But by then, the damage was done.
And did you see the obvious smear job by Newsweak Mag in which the cover photo showed a large pic of Romney with a large subtitle, “Mitt Romney - A Mormon Journey?”
Yet they never showed Obama on the cover with a “Obama - a Rev Wright disciple” subtitle did they?
There are many other things Newsweak could have chosen to label Romney on the cover, but that was a brilliant stab because it would alienate the religious left and the religious right.
meant to say: “The turning point was the Florida Primary when McCain and his greasy operators dropped the “Mitt Romney has a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq” BOMB...
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.