How "pitiful" is the Republican Presidential field?

[rightwinger]

So far, yes, I'm underwhelmed.

I rag on these guys just to piss them off. But seriously, the quality of candidates this go round are underwhelming. No elder statesman, no young stud, no up and comer.
Bland

LOL, and there it is!

RW: Hey guys, hey... Like hey, I just wanted to start a thread today to talk about, hey... guys... like I wanted to let you all know how I feel about the GOP chances in... uhmm... in the elections we are having here in almost 2 years. Hey guys, I wanted to tell you something, hey... this is important. So hey, so I'm very "underwhelmed" as of late with the 3 people I see so far for the Republican candidate... Well, the black guy is ok, and I don't say that because he's back, I say that because he is a TP candidate who is near anti everything I am so I figured I'd say I like him, it has nothing to do with him being black... I swear.

So hey…. Guys… hey like if you missed this thread that’s ok… Cuz hey, I’ll make another one in 3 days or so…

You still haven't answered a simple question

"Potential Republican candidates are not pitiful because we have...(Fill in the blank)

Time is not as far away as you think. Time for an unknown candidate to appear is quickly disappearing

 

[Charles_Main]

State Senate, reelected. Lincoln was also just a lowly state senator.

Unlike Lincoln. Obama's time in the State Senate was spent voting Present 89% of the time.

You call that experience?

FactCheck.org: How many times did Obama vote 'present' as a state senator?

A little over 3% of the time Challie. And it's procedurally identical to voting 'No.' Somewhat unclear why some of you obsess over it so.

My bad, maybe it was is stay as a US senator I was thinking off. Or I could be wrong. Who cares the point was. His time in the State Senate, and the US senate. Were not serious. They were nothing more than a stepping stone to a run for the white house. Simply making the Resume look like he knew WTF he was doing. Despite the fact he clearly does not.

So my bad for the misstatement.

And to the one loser who felt the need to give me like my 10th Neg rep ever. Get a life dude.

 

[Charles_Main]

Despite the fact that the person who is asking is a wanker. I will attempt to answer his loaded question.

"Potential Republican candidates are not pitiful because we have...(Fill in the blank)

Because so far we have no new exciting fiscal Conservative willing to run, all we have is candidates who will put Social Conservative issues at the front that IMO will hurt their chances to win the General Election.

The GOP needs to wake up to the fact that they only saw a resurgence this time around because of people like me. People who are more moderate to liberal on Social Issues, but want to see Fiscal Conservatism and a limited Federal Government.

 

[rightwinger]

Simple response Republicans...

The Republican Presidential field is not pitiful, we have (Fill in the Blank)

Why can't anyone do that?

Because your "question" at this stage is meaningless.

Why "answer" a fraudulent "question" if that gives it the air of legitimacy?

The truth is: some of the possible candidates might not appear (at least at this early stage) to be "stellar." That doesn't mean that with a little seasoning in the eventual primaries, they will not turn out to be superstars.

I'm not in a hurry. Why are you?

Far from meaningless

You should have 4 or 5 potential candidates that you are screaming from the rooftops by now. There is not a single potential candidate with any buzz right now.

Uninspiring bunch

 

[Charles_Main]

Simple response Republicans...

The Republican Presidential field is not pitiful, we have (Fill in the Blank)

Why can't anyone do that?

Because your "question" at this stage is meaningless.

Why "answer" a fraudulent "question" if that gives it the air of legitimacy?

The truth is: some of the possible candidates might not appear (at least at this early stage) to be "stellar." That doesn't mean that with a little seasoning in the eventual primaries, they will not turn out to be superstars.

I'm not in a hurry. Why are you?

Far from meaningless

You should have 4 or 5 potential candidates that you are screaming from the rooftops by now. There is not a single potential candidate with any buzz right now.

Uninspiring bunch

There are a couple I am not going to bother to name. Who still say they will not run, who if they ran. I think would generate the buzz you are talking about.

 

[AquaAthena]

How 'pitiful' is the Republican presidential field? - The Week

According to public opinion polls, the field is currently "quite weak." Only two likely Republican contenders — Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney — have positive favorability ratings. Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich have "especially poor" ratings, in the negative double digits. Is the 2012 GOP field, as The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan puts it, irredeemably "pitiful?"


The GOP field is weak: These numbers are "bad news for Republicans," says Jim Lindgren in The Volokh Conspiracy. Some of the GOP contenders could make "better than average presidents," but "I see no one who as yet looks to be a better than average candidate." If this is the best the GOP can muster, "President Obama will be hard to beat."

I think we will be seeing much more activity from the speakers at CPAC-2011 when and if Obama does the job a president and leader is supposed to do and that is come out and say which entitlements he is willing to cut. He is waiting for the Republicans to do it, instead of taking control and doing his job. I love this line by Romney when he criticized Obama for the 9% unemploment rate and mentioned the president's foreign policy had weakened America's status in the world.: "It is going to take a lot more than new rhetoric to put Americans back to work," Mr. Romney said. "It's going to take a new president."

 

[Yurt]

Simple response Republicans...

The Republican Presidential field is not pitiful, we have (Fill in the Blank)

Why can't anyone do that?

Because your "question" at this stage is meaningless.

Why "answer" a fraudulent "question" if that gives it the air of legitimacy?

The truth is: some of the possible candidates might not appear (at least at this early stage) to be "stellar." That doesn't mean that with a little seasoning in the eventual primaries, they will not turn out to be superstars.

I'm not in a hurry. Why are you?

Far from meaningless

You should have 4 or 5 potential candidates that you are screaming from the rooftops by now. There is not a single potential candidate with any buzz right now.

Uninspiring bunch

that doesn't really make any sense....obama wasn't even considered anywhere near the front running two years out and he won...

you're jumping the gun and ignoring history just to slam the pubs and get cheap political points

i would rather they take their time and get their shit together and produce some good candidates, last time it was all about mccain at this stage of the elections...better they wait

 

[rightwinger]

Because your "question" at this stage is meaningless.

Why "answer" a fraudulent "question" if that gives it the air of legitimacy?

The truth is: some of the possible candidates might not appear (at least at this early stage) to be "stellar." That doesn't mean that with a little seasoning in the eventual primaries, they will not turn out to be superstars.

I'm not in a hurry. Why are you?

Far from meaningless

You should have 4 or 5 potential candidates that you are screaming from the rooftops by now. There is not a single potential candidate with any buzz right now.

Uninspiring bunch

that doesn't really make any sense....obama wasn't even considered anywhere near the front running two years out and he won...

you're jumping the gun and ignoring history just to slam the pubs and get cheap political points

i would rather they take their time and get their shit together and produce some good candidates, last time it was all about mccain at this stage of the elections...better they wait

You are forgetting that we are talking about Republicans not Dems

Dems pick little known candidates out of nowhere.......McGovern, Dukakis, Carter, Clinton, Obama

Republicans pick tried and true candidates that they have known......Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Dole, McCain

 

[Dot Com]

My bad, maybe it was is stay as a US senator I was thinking off. Or I could be wrong. Who cares the point was. His time in the State Senate, and the US senate. Were not serious. They were nothing more than a stepping stone to a run for the white house. Simply making the Resume look like he knew WTF he was doing. Despite the fact he clearly does not.

So my bad for the misstatement.

And to the one loser who felt the need to give me like my 10th Neg rep ever. Get a life dude.

It wasn't an "or", "my bad", or a "misstatement". You threw something out there assuming it was correct w/o checking the source. Are you being facetious?

 

[JFK_USA]

What is so hard for Republicans to say "We ain't got shit" when it comes to potential candidates

This is one of the weakest GOP fields I have seen in my lifetime.

Reminds me of when the Dems ran Mike Dukakis and George McGovern

Because they know they can't win. They have no chance. People are already fighting Right Wing Extremism in Wisconsin and they have only been in power for a month. They have absolutely no chance in November 2012.

 

[Yurt]

What is so hard for Republicans to say "We ain't got shit" when it comes to potential candidates

This is one of the weakest GOP fields I have seen in my lifetime.

Reminds me of when the Dems ran Mike Dukakis and George McGovern

Because they know they can't win. They have no chance. People are already fighting Right Wing Extremism in Wisconsin and they have only been in power for a month. They have absolutely no chance in November 2012.

people said they had no chance in 2010 as well....

 

[Avatar4321]

What is so hard for Republicans to say "We ain't got shit" when it comes to potential candidates

This is one of the weakest GOP fields I have seen in my lifetime.

Reminds me of when the Dems ran Mike Dukakis and George McGovern

Because they know they can't win. They have no chance. People are already fighting Right Wing Extremism in Wisconsin and they have only been in power for a month. They have absolutely no chance in November 2012.

I love how spending within our means is extremism.

 

[Yurt]

Far from meaningless

You should have 4 or 5 potential candidates that you are screaming from the rooftops by now. There is not a single potential candidate with any buzz right now.

Uninspiring bunch

that doesn't really make any sense....obama wasn't even considered anywhere near the front running two years out and he won...

you're jumping the gun and ignoring history just to slam the pubs and get cheap political points

i would rather they take their time and get their shit together and produce some good candidates, last time it was all about mccain at this stage of the elections...better they wait

You are forgetting that we are talking about Republicans not Dems

Dems pick little known candidates out of nowhere.......McGovern, Dukakis, Carter, Clinton, Obama

Republicans pick tried and true candidates that they have known......Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Dole, McCain

oh, so because they have done so a few times, they always do so? look at all the new freshman in 2010....the people are want to blood...

i don't think the old rules apply and the gop learned that with mccain...don't forget, dems ran with hillary first, obama won because the delegates chose him, hillary was the clear front runner, further, in 2000 the dems ran gore.... so your statement is actually not accurate at all

 

[Avatar4321]

What is so hard for Republicans to say "We ain't got shit" when it comes to potential candidates

This is one of the weakest GOP fields I have seen in my lifetime.

Reminds me of when the Dems ran Mike Dukakis and George McGovern

Because they know they can't win. They have no chance. People are already fighting Right Wing Extremism in Wisconsin and they have only been in power for a month. They have absolutely no chance in November 2012.

people said they had no chance in 2010 as well....

In fact, it's the same people who said they have no chance in 2012

 

[zeitgeist2012]

You can go to his web site and present your concerns to him.... He is open minded, and he really does know the deal with what we are facing.... I have spoken with him on his radio show a number of times, and he loves rational discussion on all issues....

http://hermancain.com/

http://www.the912project.us/forum/t...81797:Comment:1907833&xg_source=msg_com_forum

He is one cool cat....

 

[Dot Com]

I love how spending within our means is extremism.

Where were you on the last admins keeping both wars off-budget (charging it to the grandchildren's acct). Did you call them on it at the time?

 

[Avatar4321]

I love how spending within our means is extremism.

Where were you on the last admins keeping both wars off-budget (charging it to the grandchildren's acct). Did you call them on it at the time?

Had no problem and still have no problem calling the Bush admistration on their overspending. They continued a problem that they should have fixed.

Why do you presume that it matters whether its an R or a D who does it? Its going to be bad no matter who does it.

 

[jgarden]

Simple response Republicans...

The Republican Presidential field is not pitiful, we have (Fill in the Blank)

Why can't anyone do that?

Because your "question" at this stage is meaningless.

Why "answer" a fraudulent "question" if that gives it the air of legitimacy?

The truth is: some of the possible candidates might not appear (at least at this early stage) to be "stellar." That doesn't mean that with a little seasoning in the eventual primaries, they will not turn out to be superstars.

I'm not in a hurry. Why are you?

Far from meaningless

You should have 4 or 5 potential candidates that you are screaming from the rooftops by now. There is not a single potential candidate with any buzz right now.

Uninspiring bunch

"Rightwinger" - you're searching for signs of "intelligent" life where none exists.

American voter demographics in the next 39 years will relegate these Tea Party/"birthers"/conservative Republicans to the politival "graveyard" where old, GOP elephants go to die!

- by 2050, "white" voters that form the core of these conservative groups will be in the minority

- by 2050, the number of Hispanic American voters will double from 15% to 30% of the electorate

- by 2050, the number of "black" American voters will remain at approximately 13% of the electorate

- by 2050, the number of Asian American voters will constitute 8% of the electorate

- Hispanic Americans, "black" Americans and Asian Americans have traditionally voted overwhelmingly for Democratic candidates and with the Republican Party steadily drifting to the far "right," there is little reason for this to change

- Hispanic and "black" Americans also tend to be concertatrated in the southern states which means they will represent the majority of voters long before 2050

- those "red" states that have traditionally been "bastions" of "white" conservatism, will rapidly become "blue" in the next few decades

- Texas has officially become a majority-minority state for the first time based on 2010 census estimates

- California and New Mexico are states already lacking a majority of whites who are not Hispanic

- Arizona, Maryland, Nevada and Georgia, have shares of non-Hispanic whites nearing the tipping point of 50%

- approximately 57% of all "black" Americans currently live in the South, up from 53% in the 1970s

- in 2010, there were 9 Hispanic American births for every death, compared to a 1:1 ratio for "whites"

- visible minorities accounted for 48% of all children born in Anerica in 2008

- a senior demographer at the Carsey Institute (University of New Hampshire) has stated that "the tipping point" where visible "minority" births exceed "whire" births may occur in 2011

http://www.oaoa.com/news/states-60402-hispanic-texas.html

 

[Provocateur]

Because your "question" at this stage is meaningless.

Why "answer" a fraudulent "question" if that gives it the air of legitimacy?

The truth is: some of the possible candidates might not appear (at least at this early stage) to be "stellar." That doesn't mean that with a little seasoning in the eventual primaries, they will not turn out to be superstars.

I'm not in a hurry. Why are you?

Far from meaningless

You should have 4 or 5 potential candidates that you are screaming from the rooftops by now. There is not a single potential candidate with any buzz right now.

Uninspiring bunch

"Rightwinger" - you're searching for signs of "intelligent" life where none exists.

American voter demographics in the next 39 years will relegate these Tea Party/"birthers"/conservative Republicans to the politival "graveyard" where old, GOP elephants go to die!

- by 2050, "white" voters that form the core of these conservative groups will be in the minority

- by 2050, the number of Hispanic American voters will double from 15% to 30% of the electorate

- by 2050, the number of "black" American voters will remain at approximately 13% of the electorate

- by 2050, the number of Asian American voter will constitute 8% of the electorate

- Hispanic Americans, "black" Americans and Asian Americans hace traditionally voted overwhelmingly Democratic and with the Republican Party steadily drifting away from the center and to the "right," there is little reason for this to change

- Hispanic and "black" Americans tend to be concertatrated in the southern states which means they will represent the majority of voters long before 2050

- those "red" states that have traditionally been "bastions" of "white" conservatism, will rapidly become "blue" in the next few decades

Which is why the Rs took control of the House in a huge ass-kicking demonstration in November?

Did you know that a RECORD numbers of Dems have left the Party since then?


Keep posting your delusions, however. They are entertaining.

 

[zeitgeist2012]

Regardless of race or ethnic heritage when in govt either you work for the best interests of the American people and the Republic or you are a traitor and deserve the punishment of traitors....

The Founder's rationals behind the second amendment advocate violence against govt or any other entity guilty of treason against the foundations of our Republic....

So, you would stifle free speech and facts? Bar the words of the Founders?

The Founders saw the bearing of arms as an indidvidual right and responsibilty to remove any entity that undermines the Republic....

Stiffling free speech against tyranny, and how it should be dealt with is Un-American....

We have politicians blatently speaking treason, and committing treason, against us and our Republic who would have been imprisoned or executed not so long ago for such treachery.... And, you want to dictate what is said in serious discussion on serious issues that are destroying our families and our Country?

Speak boldy the truth and let the cards fall where they may.... What more do you really have to lose after millions have been robbed of everything they held dear in this Country...

We seriously need to bring this committee back before real revolution takes place in our streets....

House Un-American Activities Committee

People who stiffle truth and free speech are already in the gutter.... To speak about truth and the defense of ones Country against tryanny is not advocating violence it is stating the obvious facts of life.... I can't say it any plainer than that....

I, and many other rational minded people on other sites have had these intelligent conversations on the facts of life without some dictator playing big brother or sister.... This usually only happens on sites moderated by progressive liberals mostly in other countries like Canada or Egypt....

After all, most of the world is already in rebellion against the tyranny of the progressive global elites, and the youth in this country who have been socioeconomically displaced by the progressive corporate/govt global movement are starting to rise up whether you approve of it or not....

Cowards usually hide behind pacification or conformity to everyones destruction.... George Soros is a poster child for this type of loyalty as demonstrated by his helping the Nazis execute his own people.... He and his globalized banking commrads continue on this type of twisted path as I speak....