Posted on 01/12/2012 6:40:23 PM PST by mitchell001
Let's Rate the Conservative GOP Candidates with the Goal of Convincing Voters to unite behind one conservative GOP candidate to win the nomination against Romney.
Categories
Intelligence Articulate Ability to craft & push legislation Electability Presidential Stature
Let's order Gingrich, Perry, Santorum from highest to lowest under each of the above 5 categories.
Here is my answer. I welcome yours.
Intelligence - Gingrich, Santorum, Perry Articulate - Gingrich, Santorum, Perry Legislation - Gingrich, Perry, Santorum Electability - Gingrich, Perry, Santorum Presidential Stature - Gingrich, Perry, Santorum
FINAL SCORE - Gingrich, Perry, Santorum
Comments - Gingrich is a political warrior who never is at a loss for words and plans of attack. Perry is an experience politician who does not have the intelligence and grand plans of a Gingrich. He is a caretaker politician. Santorum has a good mind and heart, but looks like a high school teacher, lost badly in Pennsylvania Senate race and is no match for Obama.
nice try
I’ll second that.
I agree with that. I think any of the three would be a fine President. I think only Gingrich would be a good candidate against Obama and liberalism over all.
Good you pointed out that legislatively, Gingrich is a better conservative than the other two. Its’ true, and that will surprise some folks.
I think the cream is starting to rise to the top. We’ve been talking about Gingrich for two weeks straight and there ain’t no such thing as bad press. Perry is sinking and Santorum is being ignored.
I reject the notion that those criteria are the critical ones. Where are integrity, character, fidelity, stability, level-headedness?
That’s the order I’d put them in, too. Actually, I’d knock Santorum off that list because he really has no chance since he won’t appeal outside of a very narrow band of people (social conservatives who are not necessarily politically or fiscally conservative). And come to think of it, I’d knock Perry off, as much as I liked him, because there is just something about him that prevents him from catching fire. I don’t know what it is; his record is good, but I guess it’s just that he somehow has never found his voice and his way of projecting it.
So that leaves Gingrich. I wish at least one of the other two would drop out before SC.
The whole problem, of course, is Ron Paul. If he had not been in the midst of this, skewing the results (since he’s really not a Republican but still and always a Libertarian, for some reason being allowed to run in the GOP primaries), the other candidates would be much more clearly defined by now.
LOL, so all those words and you are really just saying, “vote for Gingrich” ;)
I do agree with you that Newt is the best option we have. I am not thrilled with him right now and think his attacks on Bain are misguided considering there is so much other material available to attack Romney with, but I still think you are correct that Gingrich is the best choice.
On paper Perry is great, but I’m now convinced he doesn’t have the communication skills necessary for the job. And the whole “vulture capitalism” line of attack smacks of desperation and won’t work.
Santorum is a good man, but he just completely lacks charisma and losing his re-election effort in his home state of PA by 18 points creates too many electability issues. Santorum won’t the nominee.
Paul is a kook, so he’s out.
Huntsman I can’t even take seriously.
That leaves us with Newt. I think as the nominee he is uniquely suited to take the fight to Hussein, will not tolerate the media framing the debate, and can unite opposition to Obama better than any other candidate.
Regardless of Ricky “SOPA” Santorum’s stable marriage, I’m not interested in his big government collectivist ‘conservatism’ platform.
In terms of sheer results, Gingrich’s record far exceeds the other two hands down.
I’m with you!
You rate Santorum too low. He’s as intelligent and well-informed as Gingrich; he has a terrific legislative record; and he has won repeatedly in heavily Democratic Pennsylvania. He has foreign policy knowledge that Perry completely lacks having served for years on the Senate intelligence committee. He is older than Obama by several years. He has proven to be an excellent debater and I think could handle Obama easily. He has a law degree and an M.B.A. He’s ethnic and has a great personal story to tell. He’s from a major swing state that Republicans have to win and he can bring Pennsylvania. Pennsylvanians generally don’t like Obama, especially western Pennsylvanias whom Obama called “bitter, clinging to guns and religion.” I’d love to see Santorum throw that back in Obama’s face during a debate. These “bitter” clingers are the sons and daughters and the people who worked in the mines and steel mills of western Pennsylvania to create the weapons that made up the Arsenal of Democracy that helped us win WWII. Santorum’s father and coal mining grandfather are those people. I’d love to see him to remind the POS in the White House about what he said about the people of western Pa. who have been Santorum’s constituents.
I prefer Gingrich but he needs to go positive.
Recall that Newt was totally positive (projecting excellent vision during each of the debates) and was polling at around 37% when Romney (and his Super Pac minions) went negative, no, "scorched earth," on Newt (have you seen any of the ads?). Nary a whimper from those in Iowa at the time, or from the rest of the nation for that matter.
Now, all of a sudden, "kumbaya" is the word of the day.
If Mitt can't handle this, imagine the tears when the Obama Chicago machine, armed with $1 billion, attacks.
I am a small business owner and frankly I have difficulty seeing where Newt is wrong in his criticism. I don't think he has attacked capitalism, as such. I do think he's done a credible job of attacking "vulture capitalism." I, for one, join him in the criticism.
I'm not a huge fan of Santorum, I just don't want MY party to take over them mantle of the "Party of the Serial Cheater."
I can see the point, I’ve been a victim of it, being in high tech.
I can see the point, I’ve been a victim of it, being in high tech.
It is far too late for that. He is damaged goods as well with his use of the despicable, lie-packed Soros-worthy propaganda piece "When Mitt Came to Town". Democrat activists created it. Just unreal.
I'm with you. I like Newt except for his cheating episodes.
I can hear the debate questions now:
Newt, military and DOD employee can't get or can lose their top secret clearance for having an affair. One of the main reasons is they can be blackmailed. How can voters be sure you only had two affairs and not susceptible to blackmail? Andrea Mitchell
Newt, the obamas look like the ideal family, while you have had issues with your trustworthiness? How do the voter know they can trust you?
George Stuffleupagus
Newt, IMHO has adult ADD. Not good for a President when he keeps proving it is not under control.
Another day same childish posts.
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.