Moderates Bush, Christie Pulling Away in Polls

The far right candidates, any of them, could not get within ten points of the Dem.

Bush and Christie can run evenly.
 
John Kasich....
That's who I want to run...

He's way too boring. It's like running white bread as your candidate. Another old white guy with policies that favor old white guys...again.

He's BY FAR the most qualified. Plus, he's very likable.
Perhaps so, but he does not have the campaign organization or the donors that he needs.

He visited Adelson in Vegas. You have no clue what he has. There's also time and plenty will be behind him including Fox news.
 
How can you get your stomach stapled and a year later people are still trying to roll you back into the water to save your life? It's always hilarious when they run away screaming "it talks".
 
.

The problem for the GOP is that the current alternative to a moderate is an absolute purist who would make an easy target for the Dems.

Libertarianism is a useful and interesting mental exercise, but when you combine it with hardcore social issues and give it a big stage, it's far too much.

.
 
Guys - you are basing "Reagan was VERY conservative" on what the far left said about him. That how they attacked him and tried to run against him.

I have posted the documentation of WHAT HE DID AS PRESIDENT. There is no question his administration was a moderate one. I lived the history - I don't HAVE to re-write it.

But if you'd rather base your opinion on what opponents said about him - rather than what he actually did as POTUS - knock yourself out.

Pretty funny that no matter what the record says, you just can't let go. This pathological need to desperately cling to an illusion.

Have fun with that.

Well Reagan sure did spend a lot.

I haven't seen a Republican or Democrat who has not during my lifetime.

Clinton got to a balanced budget, then gave it to that bush guy. We see how that worked out.
Republicans pushed it and billy caved (finally) wanting to be popular. He saw what people wanted and went with it, to his credit. The current occupant is much more of a liberal, being arrogant and condescending he doesn't care what America wants, he knows best.

You won't get any argument from me that Clinton was better than current guy....
Valid argument

The economy boomed under Clinton, budget surplus, relative peace
What you can't argue is that either Bush was better than Clinton or Obama
 
Well Reagan sure did spend a lot.

I haven't seen a Republican or Democrat who has not during my lifetime.

Clinton got to a balanced budget, then gave it to that bush guy. We see how that worked out.
Republicans pushed it and billy caved (finally) wanting to be popular. He saw what people wanted and went with it, to his credit. The current occupant is much more of a liberal, being arrogant and condescending he doesn't care what America wants, he knows best.

You won't get any argument from me that Clinton was better than current guy....
Valid argument

The economy boomed under Clinton, budget surplus, relative peace
What you can't argue is that either Bush was better than Clinton or Obama
Clinton had it easy.
The tech boom, which he did nothing to foster, goosed government revenues. He left his successor holding the bag on the bust.
The end of the COld War, thanks to Reagan, meant he could cut the miitary, leaving a dangerously unprepared military to fight the war on terrorism that Clinton ducked.
Bush inherited all those problems and did a very credible job of dealing with them.
 

Forum List

Back
Top