Why Aren't Republicans Satisfied With Their Crop of Politicians?

[MarcATL]

You guys thought Palin was your savior, she didn't run and won't (if she knows what's good for her)

Then you thought Michelle Bachman was your savior, she won one straw poll and bit the dust immediately thereafter.

The instant Rick Perry skipped and jumped in the ring you swore he was your savior...he immediately flopped the second you were able to stop and listen to him speak.

Now you're begging and crying for Chris Christie to run, he won't (if he know's what's good for him)

Why are you running from the most sensible candidate you have already before you? Romney.

You know he'll be the last man standing and then you'll say you always knew he was gonna win and supported him.

What more do you want?

Seriosly....what. more. do. you. want?

 

[driveby]

They're all better than Obama, maybe Republican voters wanna set the bar a little higher...........

 

[Lakhota]

Why Aren't Republicans Satisfied With Their Crop of Politicians?

Good question. I guess they aren't quite batshit crazy enough for the TeaTard base.

 

[martybegan]

You guys thought Palin was your savior, she didn't run and won't (if she knows what's good for her)

Then you thought Michelle Bachman was your savior, she won one straw poll and bit the dust immediately thereafter.

The instant Rick Perry skipped and jumped in the ring you swore he was your savior...he immediately flopped the second you were able to stop and listen to him speak.

Now you're begging and crying for Chris Christie to run, he won't (if he know's what's good for him)

Why are you running from the most sensible candidate you have already before you? Romney.

You know he'll be the last man standing and then you'll say you always knew he was gonna win and supported him.

What more do you want?

Seriosly....what. more. do. you. want?

all of this frenzy is created by the media. Also the concept of a clear front runner in a party a year and a month before the actual election is a relatively new term. Years ago people went into the convention not really knowing who the hell was going to be the nominee.

Also remember that a good vetting in the primaries is helpful for candidates going up an unpopular unapposed incumbent.

 

[ladyliberal]

I'm not sure I agree with the premise. A recent poll found 65% satisfaction among lean-Republican voters for the current field: Washington Post-ABC News Poll (washingtonpost.com). That's statistically indistinguishable from the same number four years ago. I think part of the reason people talk about dissatisfaction and late entrants into the race is because it makes a good story.

The field seems plenty strong to me. It includes successful (arguably) governors, and lots of others thrown into the mix. Here's my list of people who are running, or thought about running:

Perry, Romney, Pawlenty, Thune, Daniels, Palin, Bachmann, Huckabee, Santorum, Gingrich, Paul, Cain, Huntsman, Thune, McCotter, Roemer, Guiliani.

Granted, some of those people never put themselves to the voters, but even among those running now, if you can't find someone you find acceptable, you probably never find GOP Presidential nominees acceptable. Of course, since I fall into that category myself, I might be missing something.

 

[Avatar4321]

We want George Washington. It's what we get for having high standards.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You guys thought Palin was your savior, she didn't run and won't (if she knows what's good for her)

Then you thought Michelle Bachman was your savior, she won one straw poll and bit the dust immediately thereafter.

The instant Rick Perry skipped and jumped in the ring you swore he was your savior...he immediately flopped the second you were able to stop and listen to him speak.

Now you're begging and crying for Chris Christie to run, he won't (if he know's what's good for him)

Why are you running from the most sensible candidate you have already before you? Romney.

You know he'll be the last man standing and then you'll say you always knew he was gonna win and supported him.

What more do you want?

Seriosly....what. more. do. you. want?

When did you become an expert on what other people think? You can barely keep up with your own thoughts.

 

[uscitizen]

Why Aren't Republicans Satisfied With Their Crop of Politicians?

Just proves how wrong genetically altered crops can go.
Bush was our first roundup ready president.

And Palin was blight resistant.

Is perry drought resistant?

 

[Photonic]

We want George Washington. It's what we get for having high standards.

I would rather have a Lincoln.

 

[uscitizen]

We want George Washington. It's what we get for having high standards.

I would rather have a Lincoln.

A Toyota for me.

 

[oreo]

You guys thought Palin was your savior, she didn't run and won't (if she knows what's good for her)

Then you thought Michelle Bachman was your savior, she won one straw poll and bit the dust immediately thereafter.

The instant Rick Perry skipped and jumped in the ring you swore he was your savior...he immediately flopped the second you were able to stop and listen to him speak.

Now you're begging and crying for Chris Christie to run, he won't (if he know's what's good for him)

Why are you running from the most sensible candidate you have already before you? Romney.

You know he'll be the last man standing and then you'll say you always knew he was gonna win and supported him.

What more do you want?

Seriosly....what. more. do. you. want?

I as a tea party member and republican am very satisfied with our field of candidates.

Some are begging for Christie to jump in here--I'm not. I think Christie's response has been more than clear--HE'S NOT READY for prime-time--and I agree with him. Obviously Rick Perry was pushed into jumping in this race--&-he wasn't ready either to meet the National Stage--and his poll numbers are collapsing.

We will be watching Romney--Cain--and Gingrich battle it out over the next couple of debates--and to me this is exciting. Republicans/Tea Party members are paying more attention than ever in the History of the United States--and we are VETTING all of our candidates.

We never--EVER want to make the same mistake that Democrats made by putting Barack Obama--an inexperienced--community organizer-- in the oval office.

So you're going to see some pretty good arguments on this board between conservatives as to which candidate they support & why. And that's O.K.--because that is the BEST means of electing the best out of the group to be the nominee--and believe me this decision will not be based on "rock star status" --perfectly pronounced speeches or a popularity contest. It's going to be ALL about policy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I'm not sure I agree with the premise. A recent poll found 65% satisfaction among lean-Republican voters for the current field: Washington Post-ABC News Poll (washingtonpost.com). That's statistically indistinguishable from the same number four years ago. I think part of the reason people talk about dissatisfaction and late entrants into the race is because it makes a good story.

True.

And as with the rest of the Nation, main-stream republicans aren’t paying much attention more than a year from the election. What we’re hearing from now is the discontent of the TPM and far right, for whom everyone’s a ‘RINO.’

 

[Avatar4321]

I would also point out that politicians have burned us enough in the last 50 years and have lost their credibility as a class of people. We are weary when they tell us what we want to hear because we know that very often they will do the opposite in office.

Why would we be excited about anyone when we've seen what harm politicians do? Unfortunately, learning from history has made us cynical.