TN Bucknasty Posted December 8, 2010 Report Share Posted December 8, 2010 Who do you want and/or expect to win the GOP nomination for the next Presidential election? Here's a breakdown from someone who is unaffiliated with any party. Personally, I'd like for Huckabee to win it, but I don't expect that to happen. I think he has a better chance in the general election than anyone, but he won't do well in the primary. He appeals to moderates too much. If he runs, he'll end up as a VP candidate. I figure it'll be Romney although I don't give him much of a chance with voters outside the GOP. I don't think he appeals to the other side enough, and I know he doesn't appeal to most swing voters. He'd just be another old, rich, white, republican guy which is exactly what most of the country expects from Republicans. Not to mention he is a Mormon, something that a lot of Americans either ridicule or just don't understand. I think another Palin run would destroy her and her family. I'm not sure how seriously people would take her at this point. She's more of a pop culture figure now. She would probably have a decent chance at winning it all, but I'm not sure how well she would do under constant bombardment while in office. She puts her foot in her mouth too often, and being a slick President in today's climate is just as important as being a good President. Too many people don't know the difference between the two. I've heard a few people talking about Bobby Jindal- very funny, like Republicans would really elect an Indian to the whitehouse period, especially after all of the ruckus that was raised over Obama's ancestry. The name Haley Barber is getting kicked around, too. I don't know a whole lot about him. Newt Gingrich- No way. Way too many people hated him even before all of the personal scandals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted December 8, 2010 Report Share Posted December 8, 2010 No doubt it will be interesting to see how things pan out, expect to hear a lot more very soon. I cannot say who I view as a favorite at this point way too early to think about making any speculations. As for Jindahl, lot of people(myself included) felt Oprah could not help buy the presidency for Obama when news of his intentions first started to come out after his appearance on her show, with that in mind I would not rule anything out at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan_Til_I_Die Posted December 8, 2010 Report Share Posted December 8, 2010 You need to include Tim Pawlenty, Bobby Jindal and Chris Christie. Based on what we just saw in November, I'd say whoever gets the backing from the Tea Party has the upper hand. People better not "misunderestimate" their power in the primaries. And right now I don't think Palin will run unless there isn't a clear Tea Party style candidate in the field. If there's not, she'll probably jump in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TN Bucknasty Posted December 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2010 You need to include Tim Pawlenty, Bobby Jindal and Chris Christie. Based on what we just saw in November, I'd say whoever gets the backing from the Tea Party has the upper hand. People better not "misunderestimate" their power in the primaries. And right now I don't think Palin will run unless there isn't a clear Tea Party style candidate in the field. If there's not, she'll probably jump in. I'm not to sure about this tea party business. If you look at history, that type of thing tends to backfire in the U.S. See- Bull Moose Party, Constitutional Union Party, Free-Soil Party, Liberty Party, American Party, etc. I can't recall a time when it didn't backfire. I'm not saying it can't work, but I am saying that it's risky business in this country. I remember it working once in Germany with the German Workers Party, NSDAP. Let me clarify that I'm not comparing them to the Tea Party before someone gets pissy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan_Til_I_Die Posted December 9, 2010 Report Share Posted December 9, 2010 Major difference between the aforementioned groups and the Tea Party. The Tea Party is fielding no candidates under their name. They are instead attempting to influence the two established major parties through the primary process to get more conservative/constitutionalists candidates nominated. And yes, I said two parties. There will be Tea Party supported candidates in democrat primaries in some states in 2012. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TN Bucknasty Posted December 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2010 Major difference between the aforementioned groups and the Tea Party. The Tea Party is fielding no candidates under their name. They are instead attempting to influence the two established major parties through the primary process to get more conservative/constitutionalists candidates nominated. And yes, I said two parties. There will be Tea Party supported candidates in democrat primaries in some states in 2012. You're right. It will be an interesting experiment given the format of the party. I figured the moderate party would've taken off better than it did. I figure if the tea party thing works, that'll be next. I don't know which side will adopt it first though. I think that most Americans are actually moderates, but moderates' opinions vary so much from person to person that it would be hard to form a strong party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebeilgard Posted December 10, 2010 Report Share Posted December 10, 2010 I've heard a few people talking about Bobby Jindal- very funny, like Republicans would really elect an Indian to the whitehouse period, especially after all of the ruckus that was raised over Obama's ancestry. i see a prejudice here, and don't think much of it. if the man is good, who cares what his color is or where his grandparents came from. could anyone, of any color, be any worse than what we have now? palin and newt, and a bunch of others you mentioned would all do fine. palin today would beat obama, and could most certainly out debate him. we'll see how it shapes up in the next 15 months or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TN Bucknasty Posted December 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2010 I've heard a few people talking about Bobby Jindal- very funny, like Republicans would really elect an Indian to the whitehouse period, especially after all of the ruckus that was raised over Obama's ancestry. i see a prejudice here, and don't think much of it. if the man is good, who cares what his color is or where his grandparents came from. could anyone, of any color, be any worse than what we have now? palin and newt, and a bunch of others you mentioned would all do fine. palin today would beat obama, and could most certainly out debate him. we'll see how it shapes up in the next 15 months or so. I'm not a big fan of prejudice either, but let's not be in denial about it. It exists, especially in rural areas where Republican support is very strong. I've heard enough tongue in cheek comments about Obama's racial and foreign background from Republican voters all over the place to know. People might vote for Jindal just to get rid of Obama, but there would be a lot of grumbling under people's breath. I doubt anyone would have enough sack to come out and say much though. I can see a Jindal vs. Obama campaign turning into a bar joke about 2.5 seconds after it began. I like Palin just fine, but the poor lady can't even debate with news anchors. Half of the country thinks she's a complete idiot based on her interviews and debates, even though she's very intelligent. Despite all of that, I still believe that she could defeat him in a race at this very moment, but what I said before still stands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted December 10, 2010 Report Share Posted December 10, 2010 I like Palin just fine, but the poor lady can't even debate with news anchors. Half of the country thinks she's a complete idiot based on her interviews and debates, even though she's very intelligent. Despite all of that, I still believe that she could defeat him in a race at this very moment, but what I said before still stands. Palin can debate just fine when she is on her own, problem for her appears to be when she has handlers telling her what to say. In my opinion a face to face debate between her and Obama would be a disaster for Obama, especially if Obama was forced away from his scripted speeches. In regards to the issue of race, think for a lot of voters this past election cast their vote for Obama as a matter of them being intimidated into being called racists for not voting for him. It was also apparently the hip thing to do for college age voters to vote for the first ever not white president despite what they knew or did not know about him. Real shame that anyone would vote based solely on race and not make informed decisions, but the fact is it happened and happens in smaller races all over the country. Race is an issue whether we like it or not, how Jindal would be viewed by voters, I see little difference to be honest and think it is probably not in great judgement to speculate how a majority of a party might view the candidate due to his race, if that candidate had all the other abilities required to lead this country. Think we can learn a lot from this past election and the run up to it. As for Palin as a candidate; kinda have mixed thoughts to be totally honest, I would vote for her and believe firmly that she has not only the ability but also has the best interest of this country at heart of any potential candidate we might see, however I am afraid like last time around there would be a portion of conservative minded voters who might still not take her seriously and either not vote at all or even worse vote against her. Right here on this forum we had voters(conservatives) suggest that they did not like McCain's choice in picking Palin, of course perceptions change and they may have changed since. Gonna be interesting over the next months for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TN Bucknasty Posted December 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2010 As for Jindahl, lot of people(myself included) felt Oprah could not help buy the presidency for Obama when news of his intentions first started to come out after his appearance on her show, with that in mind I would not rule anything out at this point. You know, you're right on this particular part as well as your later post where you said that "predicting how a majority will vote is not sound judgement". Who knows which way the Jindal thing will go. I mean, he did win in Louisiana. I'd say that's a feat in itself. Maybe racial issues won't be that big of a barrier after all. Outside of Huckabee, I don't know who I'd go for at this point. I can name a few I'd definitely be against on both sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strut10 Posted December 11, 2010 Report Share Posted December 11, 2010 The only two that would satisfy me don't have a snowball's chance in he** of winning an election and it's a shame. Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. Both are brilliant and as close to being Reagan conservatives as you'll find. The GOP's in trouble in 2012, I fear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.