I think Romney is still the frontrunner, but apparently he is leaving a very bitter taste in many republican’s mouths. I think Palin was waiting for the e-mail to see what the general impression was before she announces. I think she now has a 70% chance of running. If Rick Perry runs, he may take the nomination, but I am not sure the country is ready for another Governor from Texas as President.
Perry would make less of an impact than Fred Thompson. The medical mandate issue alone would sink him.
We are not discussing electability. We are discussing the nomination. Romney will self destruct.
Palin is queen of the fruitcakes and she is winning.
Crane
You work on the assumption that the Republicans don’t look towards electablity when they do.
At the end of the day, John McCain won the 2008 nomination, despite Limbaugh screaming his lungs out, despite all the venom coming at him from Coulter, despite all the hate on wingnut websites like “TownHall” and “HotAir” calling him “Juan McAmnesty” and worse. At the end of it all, simple, Republican moderates looked at all the people the right loved arguing about whether Jesus and Satan were brothers and said, “No thanks”.
The Republicans have not nominated an “unelectable candidate” since 1964. They’ve nominated guys who’ve lost- McCain, Dole, etc, but these guys weren’t “Unelectable”.
In fact, the system is geared towards a moderate. Super Tuesday is all “Blue States” that while the GOP has very little chance of taking them in November, they do tend to favor more middle of the road guys.
Also, again, I don’t think Palin is actually running. I think she is just recharging her brand name.
I agree with Recovering Republican. Romney’s an absolute shoe-in for the nomination. I’m 95% sure Palin will run, but she’ll run knowing she hasn’t got a hope in hell. It’s not much of a gamble for her, considering her approval ratings among Republicans. I think she wants to play ‘Kingmaker’. She’ll run for nomination, get her face on TV for a few more months, lose, and then throw her weight behind Romney.
COrt- I don’t think that is what I was saying.
I said that the REpublicans would nominate someone who was electable. I didn’t say Romney was a shoe-in. I could see him losing to Pawlenty or Perry pretty easily, but those guys would be equally “electable”. And frankly, looking at the economy, Obama’s gots some splainin’ to do.
I see Romney having several liabilities-
-
MOrmonism- Besides the animosity Evangelicals and Baptists feel about LDS, the fact is, they believe some pretty crazy stuff that would turn off even the non-religious. Mormonism is Scientology plus 150 years. There’s going to be a very uncomfortable moment when someone is going to ask Romney (who will be running against the first black president) if he really thinks dark skin is a curse from God like the Book of Mormon says it is.
-
How I got rich- We are in an economy where everyone is afraid of losing their jobs, and neither party is offering much guidance. Romney made his money in places like AmPad where his business practices essentially consisted of downsizing people or Damon Instruments cheating their customers.
-
The Guy is as phony as a Hooter’s Waitress - Not much to add to that. Who is the “real” Mitt Romney?
I’m sure much will be made of his Mormonism in the primaries, but I’m not sure the base will have that much of a problem with it come an election. I don’t see a downside to your second point, any business background is a plus for him compared to some of the other wingnuts and he’s never going to appeal to unions.
This third one is a problem now and forever though. He ran as a moderate in Mass, governed much farther to the right on all social issues, and then campaigned for President the last time as way right on both economic and social issues. I was reading the transcript of his Meet the Press interview from 2007 and the squirming was palpable. With the primaries shaping up to be him vs. the wingnuts, he’s going to end up in a box he can’t get out of.
Electability is a judgement. When I first heard that Reagan was entering politics I did not consider him electable.
Palin is as ‘electable’ as GW Bush was in 2000.
You are correct that I view the Republican nomination as an alternative to electability, but Palin actually has a fair chance. Republicans will not vote for Obama just because they do not like Palin.
Consider the alternatives:
Perry - Less electabile than Palin - Secessionist, medical mandate law, scandal - he’s too smart to chance it
Romney - Mormon with too many flip/flops
Pawlenty - Who?
Bachmann - You’re kidding!
Cain, Santorum, Johanson, Paul - Political Roadkill
Crane
Why do most on here seem to think that Ron Paul has no chance, is crazy, or is “political roadkill” as mentioned in the previous post. Stop listening to the corporate (abc, nbc, fox, cbs, cnn) media about who is or is not “electable”. Decide for yourself. Seek the facts from the candidate himself. Watch the interviews, speeches and debates. I can’t understand why strong national defense, protection of personal freedoms, a sound monetary policy and a free market economic system where government regulations promote competition, are principles that are unelectable.
If nothing else, please study the history of the Federal Reserve. You will be shocked and amazed that America has allowed itself to live under such a criminal system for so long.
http://ronpaulflix.com/2011/05/ron-paul-2012-epic-consistency-and-truth/
All you say is true - but the guy will never be President of the US.
Shocked - look at our system for funding elections (use the conflict of interest rules for US corporations as your reference) - shocking!
Crane
If enough people vote for him, he will be president. If everyone who says the “he can’t/won’t win” line actually voted for him, he would win in a landslide.
Big corporation pour giant amounts of money into candidates because it buys them favorable legislation from the candidates they help elect. IF we had highly principled/uncorrptable politicians it wouldn’t matter how much money companies threw at them. Laws would apply to all, equally, and not advantage the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. That’s the huge flaw of humanity…money, status, and power will win out most of the time over what is right for the majority.
Not many people are going to vote for him.
That means something like 70 million people think he can’t or won’t win. Most of them wouldn’t vote for him even if they thought he could win. So how is he going to win?
If I had to choose someone in the Republican field or die, it would be Ron Paul…mostly for the legal weed.
Despite what you hear from the Ron Paul Four Year Cicadas, he has a much better chance of getting pregnant than being elected president. For whatever reason, he has a cult following. But seriously, blaming all the problems of the 20th and 21st century on the Federal Reserve is silly, as is the notion of going back to the gold standard. Add in the normal loony-toon libertarian nonsense and fold in an extensive history of racist statements and you have a candidate with no chance whatsoever. But like Harold Stassen and Pat Paulson, he’ll run again…and again… as long as he has a pulse.
Gosh, really? Ron Paul polled at 3% last time, even with Republicans he never made it to 10%. Who exactly is going to vote for him? Even hard line right wingers who like the ‘drown the government in a bathtub’ rhetoric, still want all their government goodies.
Like I said - roadkill!
Crane
Reagan and Bush could point to successful runs as governors with fairly substantial accomplishments. Palin quit her job to star on reality TV.
But as I’ve said, if the economy doesn’t get better- soon- the Republicans can nominate the Cheney/C’Thulhu ticket and win.
No, they won’t. In fact, whoever the GOP nominates is going to get their floor of about 45% of the vote. And Obama will get about 45% of the vote no matter how bad the economy is. The election is going to be made in that 10% who are going to look at their underwater mortgage, their busted 401K and their job that hasn’t kept up with inflation and realize Obama hasn’t really made things much better. Palin might be one to scare those people off.
Rec,
I was referring to the time before he ran for governor of Calif. He was a failed actor. His wife got the Oscar winning role in Johnny Belinda and he got Bedtime for Bonzo. At that time he was sub-Palin in electability.
I agree that the swing 10% will determine the election.
I live off of my investments. At one time there was some safety in diversification. That all went away in the Bush economic disaster. Since then I have averaged 40% per year gain in the market. I haven’t recovered yet but Obama’s policies are stabilizing the economy. His policies are moderate, rational and successful.
The economic positions of Republicans today are not policies at all. They are just cliches that pander to the ignorant. Any investor would have to be insane to vote Republican.
Crane
That’s exactly the problem! The establishment republicrats are going to drown us in debt and devalue our dollar which will erode our quality of life. The national debt and the unemployment rate have never at these levels at the same time in any of our lifetimes. That’s what makes Paul so different, he isn’t like any other politician you’ve ever heard.
I’m not blaming ALL problems of the USA on the FED, just most of the big economic ones. The ‘boom and bust’ cycles are created by the FED putting to much money in the hands of to few (the rich guys of course) to quickly, which causes inflation that can’t be reigned in. That hurts the people with the least amount of money the most.
Promoting personal liberty, peace, following the rule of law, and an economic system that doesn’t favor the wealthy, politically connected elitists. That’s ‘whatever’ reason. I’m assuming the ‘lib’ in your name is short for liberal. Shouldn’t you be standing for candidates that promote personal freedom? Isn’t classic liberalism AGAINST “big brother” government intruding in on your lives? Do you think that Obama actually cares about your right to choose what types of medical treatment you get or even what type of milk you drink, or keep your records and your home protected by government intrusion? The patriot act renewal tears up the 4th amendment, just as Bush did before.
They aren’t. And if Ron Paul would do a complete 180 on his positions and start supporting those things, then he would be electable. You assume that people think he’s crazy because we haven’t seen what he actually proposes. To the contrary, that’s exactly why we think he’s crazy. Unless you’re going to claim that the media made up the bit about him wanting to go on the gold standard? Or repealing the Civil Rights Acts?
Band name!
Did you make that up? That is the funny thing I’ve read all week.