It’s way too late for an apology from Powell to have any credibility. If he’d resigned as soon as he knew he’d been used, and apologized right then, he’d have looked like he still had some honor (well, at least until his work in the My Lai coverup came back out). But that was years ago, and even if it weren’t, he’s too old already.
Snowe and Collins are panderers. Don’t be fooled by the feints toward the sane faction; they vote as they’re told.
None. I can’t think of a single Republican currently in politics who would make a good president. Any who were remotely sane have been given the boot. Even Collins or Snowe wouldn’t get my vote at this point. They’ve all taken a blood oath with the dark side as far as I’m concerned.
If you want to consider Charlie Crist a Republican (I don’t, even when he was one) okay, then Charlie Crist, but not because I consider him presidential material; he’s just not a crazed, bigoted anti-science racist. And if those are the only qualifications required to be a viable Republican contender for president, then this country is in deep, deep trouble.
If he were still around, I’d give Chuck Hagel a gander.
There aren’t any good choices among the current crop of Repubs, but some would be less bad than others…
I’d be Ok with Colin Powell, in spite of his baggage, but he’s well past the age for consideration. Mitt Romney could do a passable job, and Jon Huntsman of Utah might do fairly well. And, surprisingly, I think Mike Huckabee has some potential. He’s WAY to far right for my taste, but at least he seems to be his own man and not just a pawn of the greedheads. Of course we’d all have to get past his name…“President Huckabee” just doesn sound very…well…presidential. Don’t really see myself ever voting for a Republican president again though. As with John McCain…might be a good man, but I can’t stand the crowd he runs with.
SS
Apparently the worst recession since the Great Depression and the most pointless war fought in recent history are not enough for people to be turned off of the Republican party for more than one election cycle, so I want someone really radical. Someone that represents the direction that this country is moving in. But there really is no single candidate that covers it all so I am thinking we need a few of them in a row.
I am torn between whether Ron Paul or Sarah Palin better represents the direction the Republican party is going. Perhaps we can draft Grover Norquist or Alan Keyes.
I would actually consider it much worse. At least the corporatists are realists, even if their desired goals are antithetical to what I believe is best for the country. Someone who would actually suggest changing the Constitution to bring it more in line with the Bible has no connection to reality. I don’t want the leader of the country to owe more allegiance to the hypothetical Other World than to the real one.
Up until a couple years ago, I could answer the OP substantively (not that I share Shag’s low opinion of Pres. Obama’s performance to date). But: Sherry Boehlert and Lincoln Chaffee retired. The Ladies from Maine voted to sustain a filibuster on a measure that needed to pass (defense appropriation, IIRC, fergawdsakes), thus showing that their integrity and patriotism matter to them far less than their party loyalty.
I can give you three good answers:
At “wouldn’t mind him” level: the present Secretary of the Army, John McHugh, has been a state or federal representative or on the staff of his predecessors in his state senate seat for most of his adult life. I know him very casually – we went to the same school, I bought insurance from his father, he’d recognize my name, though we probably exchanged no more than a dozen words in person. He’s a rational moderate conservative, a man of integrity who understands the need for compromise on non-essentials while standing firm for essentials. His positions are too conservative for my taste, but they’re something the country could unite behind.
If someone pushes through a constitutional amendment making him eligible, I could seriously see Arnold Schwarzenegger as a viable candidate. His positions are refreshingly moderate, and he earned his place in government doing practical politics as a volunteer while still a career actor – he’s not just using celebrity status to get a job he’s not qualified for,
Failing either of the above, I’d have to advance Curtis Lemay – and I do mean the Doper, not the late Air Force General. He’s conservative, but he’s bright, he’s willing to learn and to examine what he holds as beliefs and change them when convinced. That alone puts him head and shoulders above most Republican politicians. And since he’s only 14, that means at least 21 years before he can be elected President – which from my perspective would not be a bad thing before we elect another Republican, given the present crop.
Erhm extreme anti-Republican/conservative bigotry much? I mean I’d never say that about Democrats or Social Democrats or Liberals or Labourists or non Stalinist/Maoist apologist Communists.
The reconstructionists are basically Presbyterian Wahhabist morons who think the Constitution is Satan inspired or some bull like that. Not to be confused with the Republican Party.
More realistically, I would propose former Republican Rep. Sherwood Boehlert that bravely told the retrogrades in his own party in recent climate change hearings that they were doing a dumb thing by repeating discredited climate change denier points and accusations, unfortunately they branded him “the green hornet” for that and other reasons and he decided to retire in 2007. However he is still active in climate change organizations.
Disapproval of a political party isn’t bigotry. Pretending that disagreement with them is bigotry is very Republican however.
Oh, that’s quite a Republican sentiment. Religious fanatics, anti-intellectuals, racists, sexists, homophobes, fascists, greedheads and just plain lunatics; that’s the Republican Party at this point. They have become an agglomeration of everything bad about America and have busied themselves driving out anyone who isn’t.
And? I said “everything bad in America”, none of those are positions significant in America. Nobody is going to build a power base on groups that barely exist or don’t exist at all.
Agreed. That’s pretty bad. I suppose, instead of “has some potential” I should have said “might be less than a total disaster”. After all…how realistic are his chances of actually being able to effect some sort of constitutional change, even assuming he could ever get elected - and that in itself is one heck of an assumption.
SS
Choosing only from among Pubs who have been presidential contenders in the past, it would be a tossup between Romney, who is liberal-but-elitist, and Huckabee, who is social-conservative-but-economically-populist.
Someone competent and pragmatic who understands the issues and wants to implement effective solutions to the nations and world’s problems over the short and long term rather than someone who tries to force reality to fit a narrow, backwards ideology and who doesn’t seem to understand or care about the problems facing the country and the world unless they can be used as an excuse to push a plutocratic, evangelical, libertarian/authoritarian worldview. That disqualifies about 90% of national republicans though. So someone from the last 10%.