Republican Primaries

[RACJ]

Yes, I want the GOP to be defeated, but if that is not to happen, I want the most moderate one of them to win. That’s no contradiction. It’s working for victory, but wanting to minimize losses if victory is not to be had.

If BHO wins re-election, "victory" will mean unfettered Marxism which will destroy our children's and grandchildren's future. America will be dead. I can't do that to my loved ones. I have no desire to see the likes of Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright celebrating again, nor the spirits of Saul Alinsky and Vladimir Lenin spinning euphorically in their graves once more. Marxism offers nothing to our world except misery, poverty and depression. :( Rob

 

[RACJ]

This post reminds me why I think, deep down, Barak Obama is going to be reelected as President. First of all, it’s shrill and over the top. Many Republicans these days, like Republicans during Franklin Roosevelt’s presidency, are shrill. They can’t simply attack the President’s policy, they have to hurl personal and ideological attacks against the man. They hate the man and not his politics. Most voters see through these kinds of attacks and will avoid voting for a Republican candidate if they feel the attacks are too personal and don’t focus on issues. The second reason I think the Democrats will win the next election is because Republicans seem intent on eating their own. To label Romney a socialist is just the pinnacle of . . . well, let’s just say it isn’t wisdom. Vote for Palin or Paul if you want to, but neither one will ever be more than the individual who ruined the Republican Party’s clear chance for a victory in 2012,

I just want to add, Tsuwano, that aside from a stark lack of terrorist connections, Romney will be little better that BHO. As Ma. governor, Romney worked with the far left on every issue, abortion, gays, gun control, environmental scams and socialized medicine. Why in God's name would any Republican lover of freedom and standards want this guy? A President Romney will give us the same pompous, leftist SCOTUS nominees as BHO as well. :blush: Rob

 

[RACJ]

How do you feel about Gov. Perry?

I'm not Ishii, but for me , Perry is a pale imitation of Gov. Palin. His in-state tuition breaks for illegals smacks of basic injustice to me. He is better than some others, notably Romney, Huntsman and Gingrich. I'd rather have the real thing, Sarah Palin of Alaska.;) Rob

 

[RACJ]

Straight from American Thinker, as balanced a blog as the Daily Worker. LOL!

Yathink that all the good 'ol proletariats at the Daily Worker will be pulling the lever for BHO again? Maybe they know something that most of his other supporters refuse to acknowledge? Rob

 

[estesbob]

Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe are the democrat definition of moderate. I find them nauseating.

From the Democrats standpoint moderate equals pro-abortion

 

[ishii]

Yes, I want the GOP to be defeated, but if that is not to happen, I want the most moderate one of them to win. That’s no contradiction. It’s working for victory, but wanting to minimize losses if victory is not to be had.

Well if you believe that the more “moderate” Republican would have the best chance of beating Obama (Romney, e.g.) then what you’re saying doesn’t make sense because you’ve stated that you want Obama to be re-elected.

Ishii

 

[mary_bobo]

Yes, I want the GOP to be defeated, but if that is not to happen, I want the most moderate one of them to win. That’s no contradiction. It’s working for victory, but wanting to minimize losses if victory is not to be had.

With all due respect, Rich, what has the president done that makes you think he deserves a second term, other than not being a Republican?

 

[estesbob]

With all due respect, Rich, what has the president done that makes you think he deserves a second term, other than not being a Republican?

He got us out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and closedGitmo his enlightened social programs led to a 1,000 per cent decrease in abortion and cheap health care for all his brilliant economic programs led to an elimination of the deficit and recor low unemployment rates and record high home ownership At least that is what Catholic Democrsts claimed would happen when they voted for him. One wonders what their excuse will be this time around

 

[ishii]

I certainly hope that particular post doesn’t represent the average Republican voter. Actually, I’m not sure than many posts on this forum represent the average Republican voter. In the end, I think Gov. Perry from Texas is going to throw his hat into the ring and that he will end up the Republican nominee. I think he is waiting for everyone to get tired of hearing the same old names over and over again. He will come through as a compromise candidate, hoping to draw the two wings of the Republican Party together and selecting as a running mate an individual who represents the weakest element of that compromise. What is your take on Perry?

I have to admit that I don’t know much about Perry. When I first heard him mentioned as a potential GOP candidate, I thought that nominating a Texas governor so soon after W. Bush might be a liability. He seems to have undergone a conversion in the past twenty or so years - going from a Gore supporter to archconservative. In many ways his record in Texas as presiding over strong economic growth and job creation would compare favorably with Obama’s dismal performance. There have been concerns about his executive order mandating the HPV vaccine for girls - although there was a parental opt-out available. He is pro-life but supported Guliani for the nomination in 2008. He’s an evangelical christian who attended a John Hagee fire and brimstone sermon and reportedly said he agreed with everything in the sermon. I will be honest : I would rather see someone else than Rick Perry who can appeal to a wider range of voters and isn’t so closely identified with the protestant evangelical right and who doesn’t see America as the world’s policeman to be on a never ending mission that committs troops in far flung places around the globe. That said, I would vote for him over Obama.

I would like to see a new generation of leaders - people like Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, and Nikki Haley gain prominence and become viable candidates. Alas, I suppose its too early for them to be considered for the top of the ticket, they might be good choices for Vice president.

Ishii

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Yathink that all the good 'ol proletariats at the Daily Worker will be pulling the lever for BHO again? Maybe they know something that most of his other supporters refuse to acknowledge? Rob

Don’t know. It’s been a while since I sat in on a strategy meeting with the Comrades.

 

[Raskolnikov]

bbarrick8383:

Did the standardized the use of Blue Ray over the HDDVD? Nope. Free market can handle that quite easily. As a matter of fact, I think the porn industry usually standardizes what will be the next medium for video.
The state makes the market freer…I needed a good laugh. That’s like giving the umpire the power to make the rules of the game.

Private industries that standardize are typically monopolies or oligopolies of a few giant corporations that cooperate with each other (not explicitly, that would be illegal, but they do cooperate more subtly). One or a few companies avoid standardization until all smaller competitors go out of business and only one (or a few very large and cooperative) companies remain, thus, the “standard.” This doesn’t always happen. Microsoft and Apple are one example. Both (especially MS) have a large enough customer base to survive without making software or harware that is mutually compatible. Theoretically, it may imprive efficiency if the state mandated that each company standardize, so that all windows software would be compatible with macbooks. This would “free” the market by allowing all customers to buy software from whoever they want because everything would be compatible. I’m not advocating that the state do this, there may be problems, but just an example of how regulation can “free” markets, or perhaps better worded, make them more efficient. And I didn’t assert this as a general rule, as you implied, but only as the case in this particular intutry. There’s nothing laughable about it either. You just have a preconceived belief that down to its core the federal government is always everywhere inherently inefficient. This is sadly common of perspective among Americans. Rather than asking when, where, and why government is inefficient and seeking to solve the problem, they just accept it as an axiom of life and say it can’t be fixed. This is more of a self-fulfilling prophecy than an accurate belief.

Oh, and perhaps the best example of state intervention making the economy more efficient would be the standardization of currency. Or are you one of those people who thinks things would run more smoothly if not only every state but every bank issued its own currency that would have to be converted on a daily basis at the rate which money is spent today? The thing, is when the state does something right, everyone forgets about it because nobody ever notices the lack of a problem, but when it does something wrong, it becomes obvious to everyone.

Our health care costs are high, and there are remedies to that problem. But we have, bar none, the best health care system in the world. And I find it quite interesting that nobody want’s to implement the free market ideas that could bring costs down, they just want to dump it all on the government. Go ahead, it’s a joke and anyone who promotes it, get’s exactly what they deserve.

We have the best healthcare system in the world? Where did you get that idea? There are a slew of countries with national healthcare that have not become embroiled in catastrophe as you suppose they would (I assumed that’s what “get what they deserve” means?) Most of the people from those countries don’t envy us. Not the people I’ve spoken with anyway.

And which free market ideas exactly will bring costs down?

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

With all due respect, Rich, what has the president done that makes you think he deserves a second term, other than not being a Republican?

I’d agree with you that he hasn’t proven himself to be a good president, and that suspicion on my part was why I didn’t vote for him last time. But, yes, his chief virtue in my book now is that he’s not a Republican.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Well if you believe that the more “moderate” Republican would have the best chance of beating Obama (Romney, e.g.) then what you’re saying doesn’t make sense because you’ve stated that you want Obama to be re-elected.

I want the GOP candidate to be defeated, and if that fails, then a moderate Republican would be second best, to me.

 

[Raskolnikov]

RACJ:

Yathink that all the good 'ol proletariats at the Daily Worker will be pulling the lever for BHO again? Maybe they know something that most of his other supporters refuse to acknowledge? Rob

Maybe. My guess is what they knew is that Brian Moore doesn’t have a chance, so pick the lesser of two evils. Did you expect them to support McCain or something?
Rich Olszewski:

Don’t know. It’s been a while since I sat in on a strategy meeting with the Comrades.

That’s BS. He knows you’re not a registered Republican, and that means you attend every Communist Party of America meeting each week and have a poster of Lenin on your bedroom wall. Don’t try to hide the truth.

 

[ishii]

I want the GOP candidate to be defeated, and if that fails, then a moderate Republican would be second best, to me.

I understand you, but some say a more “moderate” candidate (Romney) would would be able to beat Obama.

Ishii

 

[Raskolnikov]

I want the GOP candidate to be defeated, and if that fails, then a moderate Republican would be second best, to me.

Here I think I disagree. I think I’d rather have a moderate. The way I see it, the Obama admin is somewhat neutered anyway with the loss of the House, and if they lose the senate as well that’ll seal the deal. Better perhaps to have something happen than four years of deadlock. And at the end of four years, of course, the GOP will have either fixed all the problems in the world that Obama and the Legion of Doom have supposedly foisted on America, or they will face their own reckoning.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

That’s BS. He knows you’re not a registered Republican, and that means you attend every Communist Party of America meeting each week and have a poster of Lenin on your bedroom wall. Don’t try to hide the truth.

Dang! It would take a guy named Raskolnikov to sniff out the truth.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Dang! It would take a guy named Raskolnikov to sniff out the truth.

I think your name could almost pass for Russian. (Or the Russians could say of the Poles what they said of the Ukrainians: Polish is just a dialect of Russian) Probably harder to get away with though since Polish isn’t even in the same alphabet.

Of course, Comintern is probably already upset at us for discussing party matters amid capitalists. I’d better get my cyanide pill ready before Obama and the NKVD arrive at my house.

 

[ishii]

Here I think I disagree. I think I’d rather have a moderate. The way I see it, the Obama admin is somewhat neutered anyway with the loss of the House, and if they lose the senate as well that’ll seal the deal. Better perhaps to have something happen than four years of deadlock. And at the end of four years, of course, the GOP will have either fixed all the problems in the world that Obama and the Legion of Doom have supposedly foisted on America, or they will face their own reckoning.

I think such a view avoids the fact that in many ways we are a divided country - between those who prefer the liberal way of doing things and those who prefer a more conservative approach -atleast on many of the issues. To imply that you prefer having a president who will “get things done” begs the question, “get’s *what *things done?” And of course the idea that four years of GOP rule will somehow undo all of the things that Obama did is unfair (and I sense you’re being somewhat sarcastic). How is the GOP supposed to undo the two supreme court picks of Obama without any vacancies? How is the GOP supposed to keep social security and medicare from going bankrupt, balance the budget and solve the problems that have been decades in the making? I believe that they can repeal Obama care and that alone would be a huge victory and a good thing. Perhaps at best they (and any common sense Democrats if they’re out there) can put America on the path toward the reform that this country needs - fiscal responsibility, a more realistic foreign policy and moral renewal and a turning away from the entitlement mentality that says “the government exists to make my life easier.” Unfortunately that mentality exists among those who call themselves conservatives as well as liberals.

Ishii

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

I think your name could almost pass for Russian. (Or the Russians could say of the Poles what they said of the Ukrainians: Polish is just a dialect of Russian) Probably harder to get away with though since Polish isn’t even in the same alphabet.

Right. Besides, the accent in Polish is always antepenultal, like Italian. With Russian, you never know where the accent is supposed to be - shows how confused they are.

Of course, Comintern is probably already upset at us for discussing party matters amid capitalists. I’d better get my cyanide pill ready before Obama and the NKVD arrive at my house.

Me, too.