A guy named Pataki?

In another thread about an (alleged) candidate who just dropped out of the race for President of the United States of America, someone was saying Kasich was the most decent contender on the GOP side, and I said,

And then someone else said I was right:

Well, I can see that, in that I could consider voting for him. I most likely wouldn’t vote for a GOP candidate myself for fiscal reasons, but Pataki seems less offensive than most of the Fox News darlings (or whatever they are). If the Democratic nominee suddenly turned out to be an agent of feathered imperialists from an alien galaxy–or something–I’d like a tolerable alternative.

At this point, if I were ordered to vote for a GOP candidate with a gun to my head, I’d, um, probably spoil the ballot, but yeah, just in case, I’d pick one of the guys from New York. There’s a lot to be said about Trump and his advantages as a celebrity who can scoff at the party machinery. Pataki doesn’t have those particular advantages.

What he does have is a record: moderately pro-environment, for a Republican; willing to let same-sex marriage stand; and someone elected thrice as governor of New York. And he hasn’t been lighting up the “Stupid Republican Idea of the Day” thread. Gun to my head, that’s a Republican I could stand. I could complain about his tax policy while maybe not flipping out as much about everything else.

And hey, first Magyar-American PotUS? Any Hungarians in the house? No? Oh, well.

I tend to proudly identify with the Tea Party, but I think Pataki would make a fantastic President. I prefer my ideologues in Congress where they belong. The President should be someone we can trust and who is competent and has a proven record.

If Pataki somehow emerged as the nominee, I’d be delighted.

Pataki’s problem is his utter colorlessness and lack of distinctive personality. He was a competent Governor of New York, which is a big achievement, but he largely operated behind the scenes.

Think about it, he was Governor for the 9/11/2001 attacks. Do you remember? Does anyone?

I think he would be a more competent President on the operational side than the rest of the field (though I don’t know much about Kasich), but will have a serious lack of being inspirational.

I think Pataki is the best chance the Republicans have for winning the Presidency in 2016. When it comes to the Presidency, mainstream centrist candidates win. The Democrats have been running mainstream centrists; the Republicans haven’t. And Pataki is the only centrist candidate in the Republican pack.

Ironically, Republican voters appear to be ignoring Pataki and are once again fighting over which candidate can carry the conservative banner to an Election Day defeat.

Another forgettable neoliberal cuck whom the mediarati love gushing over because he supports legalized abortion and gay marriage nevermind that he considers crackpot economic Lysenkoist supply-sider Arthur Laffer as his “intellectual influence”. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

I wish the media would gush over him a little. He could use the publicity.

Elections are much more about maximizing turnout from the party’s base than in switching over swing voters nor does being a centrist if otherwise you are a completely forgettable candidate guarantee victory-Bob Dole was certainly guilty of less deviationism from GOP orthodoxy while still being seen as “centrist” yet he was easily trounced by Clinton.

I think appealing to the base works in congressional elections (where conservatives often do well) but people are more motivated to get out and vote for in a presidential election.

The Clinton-Dole race isn’t a good one to use as an example because both candidates were viewed as centrist.

The man is pro stop-and-frisk. He thinks it’s a good idea and doesn’t see anything wrong with that or other racial profiling practices. That pushes him out of moderate territory.

It’s probably a very popular for a certain faction of the GOP, but for people who care about civil rights, he’s not centrist. Having him set national policy is scary.

Good to know.

Care to explain what the Tea Party has to be proud of? Being against deficits when there’s a black Democrat in the White House? Being against providing health care to the citizens?

Pataki is probably the least insane of the lot. Sort of like being the prettiest goat on the farm. He won’t get the nomination but it doesn’t appear that he’s wasting a lot of money in the effort, either.

Being against the political bullshit for starters. The Tea Party candidates tend to come from more diverse walks of life and are as much a reaction to the GWB era Republican Party as to the Obama administration.

As with any group of amateurs, some of them will go on to be successful and many of them will never be effective. Many of the worst, like Allen West, are already gone. A few more are likely to fall in the 2016 Senate elections, like Ron Johnson. I’m not worried about the Tea Party. In 20 years the better ones will be the only ones left and hopefully those who follow in their footsteps will know by then what works and what doesn’t.

You mean political bullshit of others.

The TP has an ample supply of its own.

No, they have an ample supply of stupidity that would never get said if they had real professionals telling them what to say.

Good thing they don’t.

I wish he would get the nomination, heck as a moderate Democrat I would vote for George Pataki over Hilary Clinton.


Don’t know why he’s dropping out. He’s been holding steady in the polls the whole time, and he’s got nowhere to go but up. There’s only 10 or 12 more guys to drop out and then he’ll be the at the top of the list.

…shirt and tie?

Seriously, had he run eight years ago, maybe he would have gotten better traction. Almost no one outside the New York area even knows who he is, and he was so unremarkable as governor, I suspect many New Yorkers don’t remember him.

Pleasant enough guy, but he’s too smart for the numbskullery required to be a Republican candidate for president these days.