The Myth of Bad Republican Candidates

[mudwhistle]

Good to see a person telling the truth.

you mean..

"Good to see someone who agrees with me"

This is a matter of opinion...there is no "lie or truth" involved.

In all honesty..

Do you consider this to be a strong field of Republicans? Can you remember a weaker Republican field?

Actually that is a loaded question. My first reacion would be to say 08'. However I'm certain that other years in our nation's history have been worse.

A better question would be could there be a worse Democrat field than last year.

The frontrunners were a drunk from Delaware, a former First Lady, and a junior senator with zero leadership experience.

The drunk was the best candidate btw, even though even his own party considers him an idiot. But he's their idiot.

 

[mudwhistle]

Obama- 4 years as Senator, 3 years as POTUS, Fatal Flaws- Ran up the debt more than any president in our history. Has to fudge the numbers to make it look like the economy is recovering. Grew up associating with various Communists, Anarchists, Black Liberation Theology advocates, and domestic terrorists. Has members in his administration with close ties to terrorist groups such as Hamas, The Muslim Brotherhood, and The Weather Underground. Has forged alliances with various network and cable news organizations to assure slanted coverage of his administration. Several of his advisers are leading news personalities. Has associations with Occupy Wall Street organizers, ACORN, and SEIU. Taught classes on civil rights law and how to steal elections while a teaching at the University of Chicago.

You guys brought all those things up in 2008, and no one cared.

Much of it is outright hysterical.

Bottom line it. If unemployment is under 7.5% in November, he'll be re-elected, easily.

He'll have to put off gutting the military till after the election, cut off half the folks getting unemployment, and create 2 million new jobs to get that, and hope all of those folks that lost their jobs don't file for unemployment.

 

[rightwinger]

you mean..

"Good to see someone who agrees with me"

This is a matter of opinion...there is no "lie or truth" involved.

In all honesty..

Do you consider this to be a strong field of Republicans? Can you remember a weaker Republican field?

Actually that is a loaded question. My first reacion would be to say 08'. However I'm certain that other years in our nation's history have been worse.

A better question would be could there be a worse Democrat field than last year.

The frontrunners were a drunk from Delaware, a former First Lady, and a junior senator with zero leadership experience.

The drunk was the best candidate btw, even though even his own party considers him an idiot. But he's their idiot.

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

 

[bodecea]

Claiming that this is not a weak field is either an exercise in abject denial or intellectual dishonesty. Maybe both.

.

But, let him continue.

 

[Jarhead]

And there is not one thing in that statement that was not common knowledge.

Comparing Obama to the GOP candidates highlights two things. First, that the races of the past few cycles have been about the lesser of two evils, with the result of more and more evil choices as time passes.

Second, Obama did not win because of what was not known about him. He won because of what WAS known about the GOP. It had just run our economy into the shitter, and achieved a record national debt.

you missed the point.

Yes, all of the "negatives" were known about Obama.....but the media pressed on his "positives"...it was a balanced vetting at best.

But lets look at the GOP candidates..

Romeny ran a company that invested in losing propositions. They believed they would be more successful than not successful, and therefore make money doing what they do.....injecting capital and A NEW BUSINESS PLAN into a company with a great idea but a failed exisiting business plan.

They were successful 70% of the time turning companies around and growing them. Yes, they failed 30% of the time. That was likely far LESS than they expected.

So, while making a profit, they expanded 70% of the businesses that otherwise were going to fail.

But what has the media picked up on? The 30% of the failed companies...that ALSO would have failed without Bains atempt to do otherwise. No discussion of the positives. We hear about his failures and questionable decisions as a governor...not about his successes. That is not BALANCED reporting.

So I go back to what I said earlier....if ALL we heard about Obama was "freshman senator" and "first one not published as pres of law review" and "came out of a corrupt city/state of politics" and "his mentor is very outspoken about America"....do you really think he would have risen as a star?

It is a matter of how the media is presenting the canddiates.

 

[Jarhead]

In all honesty..

Do you consider this to be a strong field of Republicans? Can you remember a weaker Republican field?

Actually that is a loaded question. My first reacion would be to say 08'. However I'm certain that other years in our nation's history have been worse.

A better question would be could there be a worse Democrat field than last year.

The frontrunners were a drunk from Delaware, a former First Lady, and a junior senator with zero leadership experience.

The drunk was the best candidate btw, even though even his own party considers him an idiot. But he's their idiot.

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

I wanted to respond to something you said earlier....

You said the public is smarter than the GOP thinks they are and that the public does not get swayed by the media....or something like that..

Hear me out on this...dont get caught up in the fact that I chose Palin as an example. Put in her place any governor of any state....but it was Palin that this happened to...

She entered the media "vetting" process as a highly regarded governor of her state. She had a grass roots personae, a very high approval rating, many successes for her state and its population...some failuers (Bridge to nowhere)...but overall, her constituants saw her as an outstanding choice....I believe north of 80% at its peak.

Then the media hit...and anyone who says the media was NOT looking for dirt is disingenuous.....and that is expected....as they did with Obama...and McCain...

But...

All of a sudden, it was all about the Palin dirt...the bridge...her educational background, her daughter's preganancy...

Sure, they would mention her tax rebate to the people....but explain it as "going to bed with big oil"

Sure, you heard about her high approval rating....but only when the media would say "her high approval rating as governor has been dropping steadily"

And that is the point...

A woman with a very high approval rating saw her numbers drop as the media vetted her negatively...the people were quite happy with her......until the media started to tell them they shouldnt be.

Sure...you can say "well, the media made them realize what a bozo she was, so the media did the right thing"

Well, if she was doing nothing illegal...and she was not compromising the constitution of the state....and the people were happy with the lifestyle she is overseeing......why would the people care?

But they did anyway...becuase the media told them they should.

 

[The Rabbi]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/members/the-rabbi.html
Actually that is a loaded question. My first reacion would be to say 08'. However I'm certain that other years in our nation's history have been worse.

A better question would be could there be a worse Democrat field than last year.

The frontrunners were a drunk from Delaware, a former First Lady, and a junior senator with zero leadership experience.

The drunk was the best candidate btw, even though even his own party considers him an idiot. But he's their idiot.

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

I wanted to respond to something you said earlier....

You said the public is smarter than the GOP thinks they are and that the public does not get swayed by the media....or something like that..

Hear me out on this...dont get caught up in the fact that I chose Palin as an example. Put in her place any governor of any state....but it was Palin that this happened to...

She entered the media "vetting" process as a highly regarded governor of her state. She had a grass roots personae, a very high approval rating, many successes for her state and its population...some failuers (Bridge to nowhere)...but overall, her constituants saw her as an outstanding choice....I believe north of 80% at its peak.

Then the media hit...and anyone who says the media was NOT looking for dirt is disingenuous.....and that is expected....as they did with Obama...and McCain...

But...

All of a sudden, it was all about the Palin dirt...the bridge...her educational background, her daughter's preganancy...

Sure, they would mention her tax rebate to the people....but explain it as "going to bed with big oil"

Sure, you heard about her high approval rating....but only when the media would say "her high approval rating as governor has been dropping steadily"

And that is the point...

A woman with a very high approval rating saw her numbers drop as the media vetted her negatively...the people were quite happy with her......until the media started to tell them they shouldnt be.

Sure...you can say "well, the media made them realize what a bozo she was, so the media did the right thing"

Well, if she was doing nothing illegal...and she was not compromising the constitution of the state....and the people were happy with the lifestyle she is overseeing......why would the people care?

But they did anyway...becuase the media told them they should.

Excellent example.
The Left's response is, well she was an idiot and the media just exposed that.
It isn't true. If they want they can make anyone look anything. Robert Byrd and Strom Thurmond were about the same: both about the same age, both about the same career, both about from the same region. Yet the media lionized Byrd and demonized Thurmond.

 

[bodecea]

Actually that is a loaded question. My first reacion would be to say 08'. However I'm certain that other years in our nation's history have been worse.

A better question would be could there be a worse Democrat field than last year.

The frontrunners were a drunk from Delaware, a former First Lady, and a junior senator with zero leadership experience.

The drunk was the best candidate btw, even though even his own party considers him an idiot. But he's their idiot.

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

I wanted to respond to something you said earlier....

You said the public is smarter than the GOP thinks they are and that the public does not get swayed by the media....or something like that..

Hear me out on this...dont get caught up in the fact that I chose Palin as an example. Put in her place any governor of any state....but it was Palin that this happened to...

She entered the media "vetting" process as a highly regarded governor of her state. She had a grass roots personae, a very high approval rating, many successes for her state and its population...some failuers (Bridge to nowhere)...but overall, her constituants saw her as an outstanding choice....I believe north of 80% at its peak.

Then the media hit...and anyone who says the media was NOT looking for dirt is disingenuous.....and that is expected....as they did with Obama...and McCain...

But...

All of a sudden, it was all about the Palin dirt...the bridge...her educational background, her daughter's preganancy...

Sure, they would mention her tax rebate to the people....but explain it as "going to bed with big oil"

Sure, you heard about her high approval rating....but only when the media would say "her high approval rating as governor has been dropping steadily"

And that is the point...

A woman with a very high approval rating saw her numbers drop as the media vetted her negatively...the people were quite happy with her......until the media started to tell them they shouldnt be.

Sure...you can say "well, the media made them realize what a bozo she was, so the media did the right thing"

Well, if she was doing nothing illegal...and she was not compromising the constitution of the state....and the people were happy with the lifestyle she is overseeing......why would the people care?

But they did anyway...becuase the media told them they should.

I hear what you are saying, but how do you know that the area I bolded was not the Real Hype? I have some friends from Alaska and they never, ever liked her and were shocked that she was even considered. I know that is anecdotal, but how do we know which representation is the Real hype?

 

[The Rabbi]

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

I wanted to respond to something you said earlier....

You said the public is smarter than the GOP thinks they are and that the public does not get swayed by the media....or something like that..

Hear me out on this...dont get caught up in the fact that I chose Palin as an example. Put in her place any governor of any state....but it was Palin that this happened to...

She entered the media "vetting" process as a highly regarded governor of her state. She had a grass roots personae, a very high approval rating, many successes for her state and its population...some failuers (Bridge to nowhere)...but overall, her constituants saw her as an outstanding choice....I believe north of 80% at its peak.

Then the media hit...and anyone who says the media was NOT looking for dirt is disingenuous.....and that is expected....as they did with Obama...and McCain...

But...

All of a sudden, it was all about the Palin dirt...the bridge...her educational background, her daughter's preganancy...

Sure, they would mention her tax rebate to the people....but explain it as "going to bed with big oil"

Sure, you heard about her high approval rating....but only when the media would say "her high approval rating as governor has been dropping steadily"

And that is the point...

A woman with a very high approval rating saw her numbers drop as the media vetted her negatively...the people were quite happy with her......until the media started to tell them they shouldnt be.

Sure...you can say "well, the media made them realize what a bozo she was, so the media did the right thing"

Well, if she was doing nothing illegal...and she was not compromising the constitution of the state....and the people were happy with the lifestyle she is overseeing......why would the people care?

But they did anyway...becuase the media told them they should.

I hear what you are saying, but how do you know that the area I bolded was not the Real Hype? I have some friends from Alaska and they never, ever liked her and were shocked that she was even considered. I know that is anecdotal, but how do we know which representation is the Real hype?

Because her approval rating was sky-high (which doesn't include your friends, who were probably disappointed she didnt want to sleep with them).

 

[Jarhead]

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

I wanted to respond to something you said earlier....

You said the public is smarter than the GOP thinks they are and that the public does not get swayed by the media....or something like that..

Hear me out on this...dont get caught up in the fact that I chose Palin as an example. Put in her place any governor of any state....but it was Palin that this happened to...

She entered the media "vetting" process as a highly regarded governor of her state. She had a grass roots personae, a very high approval rating, many successes for her state and its population...some failuers (Bridge to nowhere)...but overall, her constituants saw her as an outstanding choice....I believe north of 80% at its peak.

Then the media hit...and anyone who says the media was NOT looking for dirt is disingenuous.....and that is expected....as they did with Obama...and McCain...

But...

All of a sudden, it was all about the Palin dirt...the bridge...her educational background, her daughter's preganancy...

Sure, they would mention her tax rebate to the people....but explain it as "going to bed with big oil"

Sure, you heard about her high approval rating....but only when the media would say "her high approval rating as governor has been dropping steadily"

And that is the point...

A woman with a very high approval rating saw her numbers drop as the media vetted her negatively...the people were quite happy with her......until the media started to tell them they shouldnt be.

Sure...you can say "well, the media made them realize what a bozo she was, so the media did the right thing"

Well, if she was doing nothing illegal...and she was not compromising the constitution of the state....and the people were happy with the lifestyle she is overseeing......why would the people care?

But they did anyway...becuase the media told them they should.

I hear what you are saying, but how do you know that the area I bolded was not the Real Hype? I have some friends from Alaska and they never, ever liked her and were shocked that she was even considered. I know that is anecdotal, but how do we know which representation is the Real hype?

Approval rating.
No better barometer than that.

Until the media blitz, the people were happy. They liked the financial status of their state; they liked their living conditions; they liked their state tax...sales tax....state of the state...
So who cares if she is a "bozo"..

But they decided they DID care.....yet they were so happy...

The media actually made them unhappy with something they were quite happy with...even theough HER actions as governor never changed.

It is the power of the media.....

Look at how much Bain is hated this week.

But...

If the media reported it this way...

"Bain successfully turned around over 70% of failing companies it got involved with. They saved thousands of jobs and allowed good ideas come to fruition.

You think people would hate it as they do right now?

Well...that statement is true.....think about it.

 

[rightwinger]

Actually that is a loaded question. My first reacion would be to say 08'. However I'm certain that other years in our nation's history have been worse.

A better question would be could there be a worse Democrat field than last year.

The frontrunners were a drunk from Delaware, a former First Lady, and a junior senator with zero leadership experience.

The drunk was the best candidate btw, even though even his own party considers him an idiot. But he's their idiot.

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

I wanted to respond to something you said earlier....

You said the public is smarter than the GOP thinks they are and that the public does not get swayed by the media....or something like that..

Hear me out on this...dont get caught up in the fact that I chose Palin as an example. Put in her place any governor of any state....but it was Palin that this happened to...

She entered the media "vetting" process as a highly regarded governor of her state. She had a grass roots personae, a very high approval rating, many successes for her state and its population...some failuers (Bridge to nowhere)...but overall, her constituants saw her as an outstanding choice....I believe north of 80% at its peak.

Then the media hit...and anyone who says the media was NOT looking for dirt is disingenuous.....and that is expected....as they did with Obama...and McCain...

But...

All of a sudden, it was all about the Palin dirt...the bridge...her educational background, her daughter's preganancy...

Sure, they would mention her tax rebate to the people....but explain it as "going to bed with big oil"

Sure, you heard about her high approval rating....but only when the media would say "her high approval rating as governor has been dropping steadily"

And that is the point...

A woman with a very high approval rating saw her numbers drop as the media vetted her negatively...the people were quite happy with her......until the media started to tell them they shouldnt be.

Sure...you can say "well, the media made them realize what a bozo she was, so the media did the right thing"

Well, if she was doing nothing illegal...and she was not compromising the constitution of the state....and the people were happy with the lifestyle she is overseeing......why would the people care?

But they did anyway...becuase the media told them they should.

Palin is a very good example. Rick Perry followed her example. Governors who, on the surface looked like emerging stars, but when the spotlight fell on them they proved to be not ready for prime time

The right blames the evil "Lamestream Media" for their candidates failings but both Palin and Perry have nobody to blame but themselves. "What newspapers do you read" and "Which cabinet departments would you cut?" are not difficult questions
Both Palin and Perry emerged as superficial candidates who were not up on current events and national issues. Both were also poorly prepared for the offices that they sought

To blame the media is just shoot the messenger

 

[mudwhistle]

In all honesty..

Do you consider this to be a strong field of Republicans? Can you remember a weaker Republican field?

Actually that is a loaded question. My first reacion would be to say 08'. However I'm certain that other years in our nation's history have been worse.

A better question would be could there be a worse Democrat field than last year.

The frontrunners were a drunk from Delaware, a former First Lady, and a junior senator with zero leadership experience.

The drunk was the best candidate btw, even though even his own party considers him an idiot. But he's their idiot.

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

Problem is media superstars don't always make great leaders, unless your leading a Rock & Roll band.

Obama has been a disaster, Hillary helped him because half of his administration is Clinton holdovers and she runs the State Department which has been a cluster-****.

Your problem is you put image over substance. Anyone who operates in the real world knows this leads to disappointment. Obama promised Hope & Change but instead he delivered division and conflict. He never accepts blame for anything. I figure the best thing he can do is move to Hawaii and turn the government over to someone else. Hopefully come next Jan he will.

 

[logical4u]

Oh, please, guy.

This is the weakest feild of GOP Candidates I've seen in 32 years of being involved in politics.

I guess you fell for it then.

No.

Any field where a crank like Bachmann or Cain can be considered a real contender is a weak field.

Did we forget, a mere three months ago, Herman Cain, crazy person, was considered a "frontrunner"?

After looking at all the GOP hopefuls, and finding them wanting, the GOP is going to pick the guy it soundly rejected four years ago becuase the party elites insist on it. A guy who won't even carry his home state.

Now, I'll admit, I really do wish Perry hadn't turned out to be such a dud. But what did him in was his own weaknesses.

And Obama, the undocumented "citizen" that has caused deceit, destruction and deaths (military assisted) is better than which one of them?

 

[Jarhead]

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

I wanted to respond to something you said earlier....

You said the public is smarter than the GOP thinks they are and that the public does not get swayed by the media....or something like that..

Hear me out on this...dont get caught up in the fact that I chose Palin as an example. Put in her place any governor of any state....but it was Palin that this happened to...

She entered the media "vetting" process as a highly regarded governor of her state. She had a grass roots personae, a very high approval rating, many successes for her state and its population...some failuers (Bridge to nowhere)...but overall, her constituants saw her as an outstanding choice....I believe north of 80% at its peak.

Then the media hit...and anyone who says the media was NOT looking for dirt is disingenuous.....and that is expected....as they did with Obama...and McCain...

But...

All of a sudden, it was all about the Palin dirt...the bridge...her educational background, her daughter's preganancy...

Sure, they would mention her tax rebate to the people....but explain it as "going to bed with big oil"

Sure, you heard about her high approval rating....but only when the media would say "her high approval rating as governor has been dropping steadily"

And that is the point...

A woman with a very high approval rating saw her numbers drop as the media vetted her negatively...the people were quite happy with her......until the media started to tell them they shouldnt be.

Sure...you can say "well, the media made them realize what a bozo she was, so the media did the right thing"

Well, if she was doing nothing illegal...and she was not compromising the constitution of the state....and the people were happy with the lifestyle she is overseeing......why would the people care?

But they did anyway...becuase the media told them they should.

Palin is a very good example. Rick Perry followed her example. Governors who, on the surface looked like emerging stars, but when the spotlight fell on them they proved to be not ready for prime time

The right blames the evil "Lamestream Media" for their candidates failings but both Palin and Perry have nobody to blame but themselves. "What newspapers do you read" and "Which cabinet departments would you cut?" are not difficult questions
Both Palin and Perry emerged as superficial candidates who were not up on current events and national issues. Both were also poorly prepared for the offices that they sought

To blame the media is just shoot the messenger

Again...the point I was making...

If the media presented her as

"she does not have any particular newspaper that she reads, but it has no affect on her success as a governor..."

Her ratings would have not dropped.

But instead they presented as "how can a governor not fgeel the need to read newspapers"...

but guess what....despite not reading newspapers, the people of her state were quite pleased with her perfomance

For example....with Obama...

How did the mainstream media present his tenure as President of the Harvard Law Review?

"he was the first black president of the harvard law review".....sure, a few outlets presented that he never published anything for the first time in the history of the position...But the media did not push it...they did not define him that way....

If he was defined this way...

"how can the first black President of the Harvard Law Review NOT see the privelage of such a position, and keep with traditon and publish something...."

He would not have been a star.

 

[rightwinger]

I wanted to respond to something you said earlier....

You said the public is smarter than the GOP thinks they are and that the public does not get swayed by the media....or something like that..

Hear me out on this...dont get caught up in the fact that I chose Palin as an example. Put in her place any governor of any state....but it was Palin that this happened to...

She entered the media "vetting" process as a highly regarded governor of her state. She had a grass roots personae, a very high approval rating, many successes for her state and its population...some failuers (Bridge to nowhere)...but overall, her constituants saw her as an outstanding choice....I believe north of 80% at its peak.

Then the media hit...and anyone who says the media was NOT looking for dirt is disingenuous.....and that is expected....as they did with Obama...and McCain...

But...

All of a sudden, it was all about the Palin dirt...the bridge...her educational background, her daughter's preganancy...

Sure, they would mention her tax rebate to the people....but explain it as "going to bed with big oil"

Sure, you heard about her high approval rating....but only when the media would say "her high approval rating as governor has been dropping steadily"

And that is the point...

A woman with a very high approval rating saw her numbers drop as the media vetted her negatively...the people were quite happy with her......until the media started to tell them they shouldnt be.

Sure...you can say "well, the media made them realize what a bozo she was, so the media did the right thing"

Well, if she was doing nothing illegal...and she was not compromising the constitution of the state....and the people were happy with the lifestyle she is overseeing......why would the people care?

But they did anyway...becuase the media told them they should.

I hear what you are saying, but how do you know that the area I bolded was not the Real Hype? I have some friends from Alaska and they never, ever liked her and were shocked that she was even considered. I know that is anecdotal, but how do we know which representation is the Real hype?

Because her approval rating was sky-high (which doesn't include your friends, who were probably disappointed she didnt want to sleep with them).

Governors who dish out large checks to the voters usually have sky-high approval ratings.

 

[HUGGY]

I guess you fell for it then.

No.

Any field where a crank like Bachmann or Cain can be considered a real contender is a weak field.

Did we forget, a mere three months ago, Herman Cain, crazy person, was considered a "frontrunner"?

After looking at all the GOP hopefuls, and finding them wanting, the GOP is going to pick the guy it soundly rejected four years ago becuase the party elites insist on it. A guy who won't even carry his home state.

Now, I'll admit, I really do wish Perry hadn't turned out to be such a dud. But what did him in was his own weaknesses.

And Obama, the undocumented "citizen" that has caused deceit, destruction and deaths (military assisted) is better than which one of them?

WOW! I thought all the birthers had died of rabies or brain anurisms. The military assisted deaths (Ossama etc) are still playing well for Obama. That's pretty much all I hoped he would accomplish in that Clinton and Bush couldn't drop that sucker and most of his Al Queda elites in over 10 years. I didn't have high hopes for the economy like many crybabies on this MB. NOBODY was going to turn the economy around on a dime.

 

[rightwinger]

Actually that is a loaded question. My first reacion would be to say 08'. However I'm certain that other years in our nation's history have been worse.

A better question would be could there be a worse Democrat field than last year.

The frontrunners were a drunk from Delaware, a former First Lady, and a junior senator with zero leadership experience.

The drunk was the best candidate btw, even though even his own party considers him an idiot. But he's their idiot.

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

Problem is media superstars don't always make great leaders, unless your leading a Rock & Roll band.

Obama has been a disaster, Hillary helped him because half of his administration is Clinton holdovers and she runs the State Department which has been a cluster-****.

Your problem is you put image over substance. Anyone who operates in the real world knows this leads to disappointment. Obama promised Hope & Change but instead he delivered division and conflict. He never accepts blame for anything. I figure the best thing he can do is move to Hawaii and turn the government over to someone else. Hopefully come next Jan he will.

This thread is about good candidates, not good leaders

You have to get elected first, and being a superstar helps. The GOP does not currently have any candidates who draw real enthusiasm out of the voters. Paul comes the closest

 

[Jarhead]

I hear what you are saying, but how do you know that the area I bolded was not the Real Hype? I have some friends from Alaska and they never, ever liked her and were shocked that she was even considered. I know that is anecdotal, but how do we know which representation is the Real hype?

Because her approval rating was sky-high (which doesn't include your friends, who were probably disappointed she didnt want to sleep with them).

Governors who dish out large checks to the voters usually have sky-high approval ratings.

yep...

Yet the media told them that she is a bozo...so they should not be happy with her despite such fianncial gains for the people she served.

And the people of Alaska agreed.

But I am sure many of them are now saying "what the ****...I was happy with her as governor....what the **** happened?"

 

[Jarhead]

2008 Republicans included McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Paul an Guiliani. Romney and Paul are leading the 2012 field and there are no other candidates as good as McCain, Huckabee or Rudy G

This field of Republicans lacks star power. Outside of Ron Paul, there is nobody who can generate enthusiasm and draw crowds

In 2008, Obama was a superstar. Probably the biggest personal attraction since JFK. Obama drew up to 75,000 people to hear him speak. there are no current Republicans near that. The only Republican who is close is Sarah Palin and she is unelectable

Hillary is another political superstar who ran in 2008. If Obama didn't smash McCain, Hillary would have.

Problem is media superstars don't always make great leaders, unless your leading a Rock & Roll band.

Obama has been a disaster, Hillary helped him because half of his administration is Clinton holdovers and she runs the State Department which has been a cluster-****.

Your problem is you put image over substance. Anyone who operates in the real world knows this leads to disappointment. Obama promised Hope & Change but instead he delivered division and conflict. He never accepts blame for anything. I figure the best thing he can do is move to Hawaii and turn the government over to someone else. Hopefully come next Jan he will.

This thread is about good candidates, not good leaders

You have to get elected first, and being a superstar helps. The GOP does not currently have any candidates who draw real enthusiasm out of the voters. Paul comes the closest

What made Obama a superstar?

His speahces (spechwriters)
His articulation? (Romeny is articulate)
His success as a senator? (he was simply a freshman in the group of 50)

 

[rightwinger]

I wanted to respond to something you said earlier....

You said the public is smarter than the GOP thinks they are and that the public does not get swayed by the media....or something like that..

Hear me out on this...dont get caught up in the fact that I chose Palin as an example. Put in her place any governor of any state....but it was Palin that this happened to...

She entered the media "vetting" process as a highly regarded governor of her state. She had a grass roots personae, a very high approval rating, many successes for her state and its population...some failuers (Bridge to nowhere)...but overall, her constituants saw her as an outstanding choice....I believe north of 80% at its peak.

Then the media hit...and anyone who says the media was NOT looking for dirt is disingenuous.....and that is expected....as they did with Obama...and McCain...

But...

All of a sudden, it was all about the Palin dirt...the bridge...her educational background, her daughter's preganancy...

Sure, they would mention her tax rebate to the people....but explain it as "going to bed with big oil"

Sure, you heard about her high approval rating....but only when the media would say "her high approval rating as governor has been dropping steadily"

And that is the point...

A woman with a very high approval rating saw her numbers drop as the media vetted her negatively...the people were quite happy with her......until the media started to tell them they shouldnt be.

Sure...you can say "well, the media made them realize what a bozo she was, so the media did the right thing"

Well, if she was doing nothing illegal...and she was not compromising the constitution of the state....and the people were happy with the lifestyle she is overseeing......why would the people care?

But they did anyway...becuase the media told them they should.

Palin is a very good example. Rick Perry followed her example. Governors who, on the surface looked like emerging stars, but when the spotlight fell on them they proved to be not ready for prime time

The right blames the evil "Lamestream Media" for their candidates failings but both Palin and Perry have nobody to blame but themselves. "What newspapers do you read" and "Which cabinet departments would you cut?" are not difficult questions
Both Palin and Perry emerged as superficial candidates who were not up on current events and national issues. Both were also poorly prepared for the offices that they sought

To blame the media is just shoot the messenger

Again...the point I was making...

If the media presented her as

"she does not have any particular newspaper that she reads, but it has no affect on her success as a governor..."

Her ratings would have not dropped.

But instead they presented as "how can a governor not fgeel the need to read newspapers"...

but guess what....despite not reading newspapers, the people of her state were quite pleased with her perfomance

For example....with Obama...

How did the mainstream media present his tenure as President of the Harvard Law Review?

"he was the first black president of the harvard law review".....sure, a few outlets presented that he never published anything for the first time in the history of the position...But the media did not push it...they did not define him that way....

If he was defined this way...

"how can the first black President of the Harvard Law Review NOT see the privelage of such a position, and keep with traditon and publish something...."

He would not have been a star.

Once the media realized what they had with Palin, it was game over. Palin was poorly prepared and had a minimal view of world affairs. She explained her foreign policy experience as being close to Russia and Canada but never provided examples where she actually dealt with either. She did not know the Prime Minister of Canada. She thought explaining that Putin having to fly over Alaska to visit the US was relevant.
The press had a field day .........and Palin deserved every bad press release. McCain had to ban her from talking to the free press and she still hasn't to this day

The right was free to attack Obama on any issues they thought relevant. They had FoxNews at their disposal 24/7. If they wanted to highlight the Harvard Law Review experience...they could have
Instead, they chose to attack on Rev Wright, Bill Ayers, Michelle Obama hates America, Obama was not born in America, Telepromters, Flag lapel pins and other nonsense
The American public gave a collective yawn and voted overwhelmingly for Obama