R
Red_Wolf
Guest
Ishii:
Why is dead the operative word? (You have probably noticed that I only post on nights I don’t fall asleep first. So don’t feel ignored if I don’t respond timely.) Two reasons.
Allow me a round about, two fold, response.
In 2012, the house will probably remain GOP; and the senate will probably also go to the GOP. Those senators up for re-election are the class of 2006, when the Democrats made major gains (in GOP areas) based on dissatisfaction with President Bush (and ACORN, indicted and convicted in about 3 dozen states for election fraud). That is why, ceteris paribus, the senate will most likely go to the GOP. Also, Obama, and the Democrats, are losing their shine.
But defeating Obama in 2012 is not foregone. The GOP must nominate someone who will prevail. No mean trick as the GOP is split, nearly equally, between people who would be most comfortable in the Constitution Party and “Democrat lite”. Let me use Tim Pawlenty as an example.
Governor Pawlenty was elected to clean up the mess made by a pro-wrestler. He did. He was very pragmatic, and made hard decisions no on else wanted to make (after the election). He was a Republican; elected in a very, radical, Democratic state. His record is not pure; his statements in the last few years are not pure. This may help to sell him as “middle of the road”, but it also alienates the Tea Party sorts.
To defeat Obama, we need to get out the marginal voters, those who don’t really care about this country all that much. We also need to bring in the votes of the couch potatos, who can’t be bothered to turn their attention from their TV shows long enough to see what is going on. And we need the activists. Most presidential elections are decided by people who don’t care.
I remember doing phone surveys in the 1976 campaign (for the party). So many I called thought that Richard Nixon was still the president. The election will be decided by people who don’t know and don’t care; or by activists, who really care.
We need a candidate who can turn out enough “real believers” to contact people; AND GET THEM TO THE POLLS (how George W. Bush won re-election).
Assume that the GOP takes the White House in 2012; then what? Again, going with Tim Pawlenty; what will he do? If he does not address the major problems, then it is just a slowing down of the downward slide. Not much of a change. We need to elect someone who will reverse the slide. I chose Tim Pawlenty because we don’t know what he would do; once elected, he did take on things best not talked about during the election (if one wanted to get elected).
I don’t see anyone running who has even a semblence of Ron Paul’s track record; we know what he will do; or his grass roots support; i.e. “true belivers”. Ron Paul, if elected, would be able to turn this country around. Two fold statement. 1. He would do it. 2. He knows how to do it.
That said, I’d rather the nominee were not Ron Paul. He holds both office AND senority. Best to elect a ticket that is not in office, so those that are can give better support.
We need to elect a GOP president; but if he is just “Democrat lite”, then there is no point. It only means that this country will go down the drain a few months later, rather than sooner.
Why is dead the operative word? (You have probably noticed that I only post on nights I don’t fall asleep first. So don’t feel ignored if I don’t respond timely.) Two reasons.
Allow me a round about, two fold, response.
In 2012, the house will probably remain GOP; and the senate will probably also go to the GOP. Those senators up for re-election are the class of 2006, when the Democrats made major gains (in GOP areas) based on dissatisfaction with President Bush (and ACORN, indicted and convicted in about 3 dozen states for election fraud). That is why, ceteris paribus, the senate will most likely go to the GOP. Also, Obama, and the Democrats, are losing their shine.
But defeating Obama in 2012 is not foregone. The GOP must nominate someone who will prevail. No mean trick as the GOP is split, nearly equally, between people who would be most comfortable in the Constitution Party and “Democrat lite”. Let me use Tim Pawlenty as an example.
Governor Pawlenty was elected to clean up the mess made by a pro-wrestler. He did. He was very pragmatic, and made hard decisions no on else wanted to make (after the election). He was a Republican; elected in a very, radical, Democratic state. His record is not pure; his statements in the last few years are not pure. This may help to sell him as “middle of the road”, but it also alienates the Tea Party sorts.
To defeat Obama, we need to get out the marginal voters, those who don’t really care about this country all that much. We also need to bring in the votes of the couch potatos, who can’t be bothered to turn their attention from their TV shows long enough to see what is going on. And we need the activists. Most presidential elections are decided by people who don’t care.
I remember doing phone surveys in the 1976 campaign (for the party). So many I called thought that Richard Nixon was still the president. The election will be decided by people who don’t know and don’t care; or by activists, who really care.
We need a candidate who can turn out enough “real believers” to contact people; AND GET THEM TO THE POLLS (how George W. Bush won re-election).
Assume that the GOP takes the White House in 2012; then what? Again, going with Tim Pawlenty; what will he do? If he does not address the major problems, then it is just a slowing down of the downward slide. Not much of a change. We need to elect someone who will reverse the slide. I chose Tim Pawlenty because we don’t know what he would do; once elected, he did take on things best not talked about during the election (if one wanted to get elected).
I don’t see anyone running who has even a semblence of Ron Paul’s track record; we know what he will do; or his grass roots support; i.e. “true belivers”. Ron Paul, if elected, would be able to turn this country around. Two fold statement. 1. He would do it. 2. He knows how to do it.
That said, I’d rather the nominee were not Ron Paul. He holds both office AND senority. Best to elect a ticket that is not in office, so those that are can give better support.
We need to elect a GOP president; but if he is just “Democrat lite”, then there is no point. It only means that this country will go down the drain a few months later, rather than sooner.
