So many public polls about the GOP candidates, so who do you like?

[rdean]

I think the GOP should go with Michele Bachmann. I believe her husband would make a fine "First Lady".

 

[Avorysuds]

I didn't turn on them. They were the best candidates the GOP had to offer....just not good enough

Extreme Conservatives, TeaTards and Libertarians can't even win the GOP primary....how are they going to win a general election?

Personally, I have voted for more Republicans for President than Democrats

The problem is that you claim to know the GOP's best chances yet even though you get "your pick" for the GOP they lost.... Why would anyone take advice from someone that seems to never get it right.


You liked McCain, you liked Mitt.... I remember telling you that you didn't and once they got the nod you would make them out to be horrible people, and that's absolutely what happened.

The GOP's best bet is a real conservative, not a Progressive Republican that you could see yourself voting for until they win the primaries. And lets face it, you don't win in the primaries, you are given the primaries, McCain and Mitt were incredibly disliked and the GOP forced them to be the winners. They literally excluded people they didn't want running and gave Ron Paul for instance something like 45 seconds talk time during a primary debate. VS the like 18 min for Mitt.

Best chance, lol.... And then they lost! horribly!

Your picks lost too

Only difference is they didn't come close to winning the GOP primary

Simple question. Which states that Mitt Romney lost would have been won by another GOP candidate? How could one of your conservative candidates possibly win a swing state?

Actually Ron Paul did very well in the primaries, passed the fact that he was not even at one of the debates because they didn't let him, and the media/GOP did incredible amounts to discourage him... Unless you for some retarded reason disagree with that easily provable and well documented statement.

Ron Paul was not my pick, he was the guy I liked and supported. In the GE he would have done just as well as Mitt and possible better.

Mitt was hated by the majority of the party, that's all there is to it. Disagree all you like, he was rich, spent like crazy more than any other candidate and was forced on the party by the GOP and media.... And he was hardly making it through the primaries, then lost the GE as he flip flopped as per usual and because Obama lite..

 

[JakeStarkey]

Christie and Cruz are finished before they began.

Paul might have a chance, Bush and Romney are contenders if they want to be.

I'm not trying to simply disagree with you here but Bush has support because of his name while he also has a exceptional amount of baggage due to the name, it's a for sure loss I feel with Bush. Romney already lost and was hated by the majority of the party.

Rand, I have no idea... But he would more than likely do far better in a GE than either Bush or Mitt.

The GOP is looking for a real conservative, with a record that is not comprised of pure hypocrisy. I dounbt they will have that by the end of the primaries, but we'll see.

Disagree, it's OK, that is what we are doing: trying to make sense out of a confusing mess.

Bush, as you say, has pro and con; so does Mitt. Rand, if he can stay off the weirdo path, maintain his conservative values but maintain a willingness to work where possible with the other side, may be the quy.

 

[rightwinger]

The problem is that you claim to know the GOP's best chances yet even though you get "your pick" for the GOP they lost.... Why would anyone take advice from someone that seems to never get it right.


You liked McCain, you liked Mitt.... I remember telling you that you didn't and once they got the nod you would make them out to be horrible people, and that's absolutely what happened.

The GOP's best bet is a real conservative, not a Progressive Republican that you could see yourself voting for until they win the primaries. And lets face it, you don't win in the primaries, you are given the primaries, McCain and Mitt were incredibly disliked and the GOP forced them to be the winners. They literally excluded people they didn't want running and gave Ron Paul for instance something like 45 seconds talk time during a primary debate. VS the like 18 min for Mitt.

Best chance, lol.... And then they lost! horribly!

Your picks lost too

Only difference is they didn't come close to winning the GOP primary

Simple question. Which states that Mitt Romney lost would have been won by another GOP candidate? How could one of your conservative candidates possibly win a swing state?

Actually Ron Paul did very well in the primaries, passed the fact that he was not even at one of the debates because they didn't let him, and the media/GOP did incredible amounts to discourage him... Unless you for some retarded reason disagree with that easily provable and well documented statement.

Ron Paul was not my pick, he was the guy I liked and supported. In the GE he would have done just as well as Mitt and possible better.

Mitt was hated by the majority of the party, that's all there is to it. Disagree all you like, he was rich, spent like crazy more than any other candidate and was forced on the party by the GOP and media.... And he was hardly making it through the primaries, then lost the GE as he flip flopped as per usual and because Obama lite..

Ron Paul won by stealing delegates in caucus states. Those where primary delegates were directly tied to votes....he got creamed

Paul would have lost more states than Romney did

 

[JakeStarkey]

Huntsman may be the most honest conservative in the bunch, very likable, who possesses a visionary side that is desperately needed in the party.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Huntsman may be the most honest conservative in the bunch, very likable, and possesses a visionary side that is desperately needed in the party.

This moment, though it shows that John Huntsman is a man of talent, skill and intelligence, probably did not help him with a GOP crowd that, at the minimum, gives the impression that it doesn't like things elite:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqSyE9NBA4g]Huntsman speaks Chinese, Romney says he's "lost" - YouTube[/ame]

I will never forget that moment. It was cool.

 

[Zander]

It's too early.

Ask me in 18 -20 months.

 

[Amelia]

Walker is a wonderful governor -- maybe best in the nation. I'm proud to have voted for him twice and look forward to voting for him again in November. But he has a staffing problem which will work against him on the national stage.

People on his staff do stupid things which make him look bad and he doesn't fire them.

That wouldn't matter if he were a Democrat, but he's not, so the media will blow everything out of proportion. He knows that's the national dynamic and still didn't make sure his people were taking their jobs seriously enough. This is not good.

 

[Immanuel]

I have lost trust in both parties. I don't care who gets the nod, I'm anti-party and I'm voting against the son or daughter of a bitch!

They are all authoritarian assholes and I simply don't give a shit about any of them.

HAVE I MADE MYSELF CLEAR!

 

[OKTexas]

I was pulling for Christie. If he is too damaged, I don't know. I really don't. Huntsman?

The commie's ambassador to commie China, of course, the ultimate no brainer.

 

[O.R.I.O.N]

I picked other but to be honest none really thrill me. Like most politicians they all have bad points or have supported legislation I disagree with. Probably sit this election in 2016 out or vote for a 3rd party just for the hell of it.

 

[O.R.I.O.N]

Kasich from Ohio isn't bad but he crossed lines in the 90's and voted for "assault weapons" ban...so that doesn't sit well with me...I want someone who can deal with the democrats as well as stick up for himself...I can tell you now I will never EVER vote for Paul,Palin,Bachmann or Christie.

 

[Immanuel]

I picked other but to be honest none really thrill me. Like most politicians they all have bad points or have supported legislation I disagree with. Probably sit this election in 2016 out or vote for a 3rd party just for the hell of it.

That is what I have done for the last two elections. You know what, you do not get the satisfaction of voting for the "winner", but you definitely can pride yourself in saying,"I didn't vote for that loser" when the rest of the world learns how much of a scumbag he really is.

 

[Political Junky]

I was pulling for Christie. If he is too damaged, I don't know. I really don't. Huntsman?

Huntsman has too much integrity for the modern GOP.

 

[Duped]

Santorum was picking up steam - I think he still has asperations! The more I think about it, Bush /Rubio might be the ticket. I like Rand Paul, but defeating Hillary is paramount!

 

[O.R.I.O.N]

I picked other but to be honest none really thrill me. Like most politicians they all have bad points or have supported legislation I disagree with. Probably sit this election in 2016 out or vote for a 3rd party just for the hell of it.

That is what I have done for the last two elections. You know what, you do not get the satisfaction of voting for the "winner", but you definitely can pride yourself in saying,"I didn't vote for that loser" when the rest of the world learns how much of a scumbag he really is.

Exactly. I have hated the choices in the last 3 elections..Bush/Kerry-Didn't vote,Obama/McCain-Voted Constitution Party,Obama/Romney-Voted Libertarian Party

I was pulling for Christie. If he is too damaged, I don't know. I really don't. Huntsman?

Huntsman has too much integrity for the modern GOP.

I think Huntsman should stick with it though he needs to run as a Senator or something get his name out there more...he is a likable guy and once the tea party fails to give America what it wants I think 2020 or 2024 will be his year and I personally think he could go down as one of the best presidents we have ever had.Just a feeling.

 

[Rozman]

I want Newt...

 

[blackhawk]

Phil Robertson just for the fun of seeing the left go off the rails if that were to actually happen but since it won't Rubio would be my early choice.

 

[Two Thumbs]

off that list I like Walker. last I heard he's returning the tax surplus to the tax payers. hopefully WI debt is gone, or that's just a bad idea.

also like Jindahl and Rand and Johnson, he had the right standards, but no one would talk to him

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I picked other but to be honest none really thrill me. Like most politicians they all have bad points or have supported legislation I disagree with. Probably sit this election in 2016 out or vote for a 3rd party just for the hell of it.

That is what I have done for the last two elections. You know what, you do not get the satisfaction of voting for the "winner", but you definitely can pride yourself in saying,"I didn't vote for that loser" when the rest of the world learns how much of a scumbag he really is.

Ridiculous conclusion. There is 0 satisfaction in "sitting it out" and not exercising one of your most important rights. Thats just laziness imo. People like you are as much to blame for our mess as everyone else.