The 2012 GOP Presidential Field Is Set

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, first Cmatt I do appreciate you taking the high road. I would, in non-specific terms say that what has recently been posted amounts to little more than “wouldn’t you agree that I’m right and you’re wrong?”

Hmm, I have seen a few people say that Pawlenty would definitely have gotten some momentum, but then they discredit it and say he would never have gotten to first tier. But, idk, I was certainly open to Pawlenty myself. Chances are that if he were more inspiring than Mitt Romney, with this fickle of an electorate there may have been a contest among the moderate candidates as well as the conservatives.

It might’ve looked like a semi-finals line up
Pawlenty vs. Romney Cain vs. Perry vs. Gingrich vs. Bachmann
_________ moderate vs. _____________ conservative

As for Bachmann, all I have to say is that it is easy to in retrospect call her the “Romney-challenger”, and a lot of media frequently like to simplify the race so far by saying “it was Bachmann than Perry and now Cain”. All I have to say is that her numbers were never as high as Perry or Cain. So, while she mounted a challenge, many conservatives wouldn’t get on board even for a brief period (leaving her 10ish points below Romney). Having gone from 2nd behind Romney to polling 4% and 3%, she needs to drop out.
Thanks Semper. I guess I was thinking had Pawlenty remained in, perhaps he by now would have been up in Iowa, and had he actually won the caucus, the race would have gone to NH and beyond between him and Romney. I always looked at Pawlenty as a possible candidate who might have been able to unite conservatives and moderates in the GOP rather early on if he had been able to take Iowa. But oh well, it should be an interesting few mos to see how it all shakes out for the field that much is sure.
 
Romney can’t deliver Michigan or Massachusetts. Romney’s ground game really only gives him an advantage in New Hampshire. Cain has better local appeal in North Carolina and Florida.

Most of the other states that are in play are in play for any generic Republican ballot as a referendum against the failed Obama Administration. Romney probably has an easier time plying the Independent vote in those states, but a conservative alternative will turn out the base in a way that the McCain campaign failed to do. In the end, Romney can probably get more votes.

However, once you pass the electoral majority mark it doesn’t matter how much you win by. Then the question is what will you do once in office. If the choice between Romney and not-Romney doesn’t present significantly increased risks of losing the general election then Romney’s hurt by the fact that he’s seen as an unreliable conservative, a G. H. W. Bush or Rockefeller type rather than a Reagan or Goldwater type.

You don’t get more reform done with a larger margin of victory. You get more reform done by winning with the candidate you can rely on ideologically.
  • Marty Lund
 
What is interesting and sad…

The top three consist of two avowed warmongers who refused to sign the Pro Life pledge.
And one distinguished gentleman who signed the Pro Life pledge, introduced the Sanctity of Life Act, actually served in the military, and is against war.

This is supposed to be a “Catholic” forum right?
 
What is interesting and sad…

The top three consist of two avowed warmongers who refused to sign the Pro Life pledge.
And one distinguished gentleman who signed the Pro Life pledge, introduced the Sanctity of Life Act, actually served in the military, and is against war.

This is supposed to be a “Catholic” forum right?
I normally rely on the RealClearPolitics average to determine who the frontrunners are.
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

And, one of the three frontrunners right now has signed the Pro Life pledge, and he is Catholic. I’m talking about Newt Gingrich of course.
_Abyssina:
California: Obama 45%, Generic Republican 41%

In reliably Democratic California, the president’s Job Approval rating has fallen below 50%, and he holds only a modest lead over a Generic Republican candidate.
Wow!! I hope the GOP candidates hear about this. If a Republican could take those 55 votes from California, he would almost be ASSURED to win. If he could do it.
 
What is interesting and sad…

The top three consist of two avowed warmongers who refused to sign the Pro Life pledge.
And one distinguished gentleman who signed the Pro Life pledge, introduced the Sanctity of Life Act, actually served in the military, and is against war.

This is supposed to be a “Catholic” forum right?
Pro-life pledge? Sanctity of life Act? We have a chance to go beyone symbolic measures that do nothing to outlaw abortion and actually achieve the overturning of Roe V Wade which is the biggest obstacle to reforming our abortion laws. Romney has said that as president he would nominate justices “in the mold of Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, and Roberts.” One would hope that catholics would be interested in measures that actually have an effect on things.

Ishii
 
Romney has said that as president he would nominate justices “in the mold of Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, and Roberts.” One would hope that catholics would be interested in measures that actually have an effect on things.
It’s worth noting that Herman Cain also came out and said explicitly that he’d appoint solid pro-life, constructionist justices to the Supreme Court as president.
  • Marty Lund
 
It’s worth noting that Herman Cain also came out and said explicitly that he’d appoint solid pro-life, constructionist justices to the Supreme Court as president.
  • Marty Lund
I think that matters more than signing a symbolic pro-life pledge. That said, I never thought Cain to be a serious contender, and his current troubles, even if proven unfounded, will hurt his chances further.

Ishii
 
I think that matters more than signing a symbolic pro-life pledge. That said, I never thought Cain to be a serious contender, and his current troubles, even if proven unfounded, will hurt his chances further.
Well, they certainly have helped his fundraising, which was apparently the main negative for his campaign to start with.

However, if our political system will be decided by who has the most popular gossip and calumny spread by conspicuously avoiding any objective findings of fact (IE - civil or criminal courts) then it is just one more strike against our moral character as a nation.
  • Marty Lund
 
Wow!! I hope the GOP candidates hear about this. If a Republican could take those 55 votes from California, he would almost be ASSURED to win. If he could do it.
California, this surely must be one of the if not the most Democrat state in America, huge Hispanic population, yet approval rating for Obama is below 50% and a generic Republican candidate must be in the margin of error with Obama.
 
What is interesting and sad…

And one distinguished gentleman who signed the Pro Life pledge, introduced the Sanctity of Life Act, actually served in the military, and is against war.
It is a calumny against the military to imply that is unusual for a veteran to be against war. Nearly everyone who serves in the military or has served in the military is against war, for they have the most to lose in the event of war. However, they recognize that war is sometimes necessary, and they are generous enough to risk their lives to protect those who will not protect themselves. They are not warmongers, and they are not morally inferior for recognizing and acting on the need to maintain national security. Every nation holds this to be true.
 
So who won tonight’s debate? I only watched until they started talking about corporations can make a profit and create jobs. And I’m sitting their thinking well I see half of that equation. Profits being made. I imagine someone mentioned not raising taxes on the wealthy and repealing “Obamacare”. I know they must realize cutting taxes for the weathiest hasn’t produced jobs and the Affordable Healthcare Act (aka Obamacare around here) hasn’t even been fully implemented and hadn’t even been on the scene when the recession began. I heard Mitt say the other day he would repeal “Obamcare”! Which is good meat for the base. But unless they have 60 lock step votes, they might need Democrats to help them repeal.

Anyway usually the concensus is Romney seems to do well in these things. How did he do tonight?
 
So who won tonight’s debate? I only watched until they started talking about corporations can make a profit and create jobs. And I’m sitting their thinking well I see half of that equation. Profits being made. I imagine someone mentioned not raising taxes on the wealthy and repealing “Obamacare”. I know they must realize cutting taxes for the weathiest hasn’t produced jobs and the Affordable Healthcare Act (aka Obamacare around here) hasn’t even been fully implemented and hadn’t even been on the scene when the recession began. But I know the other day I heard Mitt say I will repeal “Obamacare”! Which was good meat for the crowd. But unless they have 60 lock step votes, they might need Democrats to help them repeal.

Anyway usually the concensus is Romney seems to do well in these things. How did he do tonight?
 
So who won tonight’s debate? I only watched until they started talking about corporations can make a profit and create jobs. And I’m sitting their thinking well I see half of that equation. Profits being made. I imagine someone mentioned not raising taxes on the wealthy and repealing “Obamacare”. I know they must realize cutting taxes for the weathiest hasn’t produced jobs and the Affordable Healthcare Act (aka Obamacare around here) hasn’t even been fully implemented and hadn’t even been on the scene when the recession began. I heard Mitt say the other day he would repeal “Obamcare”! Which is good meat for the base. But unless they have 60 lock step votes, they might need Democrats to help them repeal.

Anyway usually the concensus is Romney seems to do well in these things. How did he do tonight?
I work for a corporation that makes profits and creates jobs. Why is it that you can’t comprehend such a thing? Or do you think only the government can create jobs?

Socialized medicine of the type you want can only be passed incrementally. To try to pass it all at once would cause a revolt so the only way is to pass it piecemeal. Obama took a big first step. The GOP might well win the Senate, but hard to say whether they will get to 60. If Romney campaigns on repealing Obamacare and wins the presidency, and the senate obstructs its repeal, then I would predict more Democrat losses in the next mid-terms.

Didn’t watch the debate, but I did hear about this big gaffe by Perry, whose campaign is becoming a train wreck:

youtube.com/watch?v=EZYQ9IYeOlU

Given how things are going, and that Cain and Perry are probably on their way out, it seems to be shaping up as a race between Romney and Gingrich. Either could do well against Obama. I think the Obama/Democrat/MSM smear campaign could smear Gingrich (considering his past) more easily than they could smear Romney for being Mormon or for his flip-flops.

Ishii
 
Newt Gingrich gets my vote! He is brilliant, with concise lists of specific solutions to issues and concrete information to back them up.
 
Given how things are going, and that Cain and Perry are probably on their way out, it seems to be shaping up as a race between Romney and Gingrich.
Perry is on the way out. His debate performances killed it. The rest of that is unlikely, though.

Cain’s not going anywhere thanks to the overreach on this scandal. Two of accusers went public and in less than a week half-hearted scrutiny has destroyed all credibility on their claims, which only drastically reinforces the “establishment is out to lynch Cain” narrative.

Meanwhile Newt’s caught in the flip-side of the equation - he’s moving forward by benefiting from a lack of scrutiny. Yes, he’s the smartest guy in the room, but in the end, he can’t go toe-to-toe with Mitt Romney in the primary because he’s an also-ran to Romney with the establishment crowd, Ron Paul’s people aren’t going to support him, and the non-Romney bandwagon will spit him back out because of his unfaithfulness to conservative interests between his exit from congress and his presidential run. Making an ad with Nancy Pelosi to help legitimize the cap-and-tax movement was a huge mistake. Taking an easy $300,000 took from infamous GSE’s Fannie and Freddy for “advisement” looks bad too, and then there is the unfunded Medicare Part D expansion that people always criticize Bush for that Newt endorsed.

And that’s not starting with the “baggage” Newt carries strung around his neck like an albatross.
Either could do well against Obama.
Newt could mop the floor with Obama in debates, but Obama’s paid advertising and partisan media support would crucify Newt in the majority of air-time where he’s not allowed to defend himself. All Obama has to do to beat Newt is keep debates to a minimum and in bad time spots while letting the DNC machine keep reminding people over and over how Newt resigned from his congressional position in “disgrace” or pound on any number of narratives about his divorces and affairs.

Seriously, Team Obama will play the “hypocrite for going after Clinton while seeing your own mistress on the side” and “started a divorce on his first wife while she was in the hospital after tumor surgery” and then the “Republicans are just corrupt old white men with no hearts,” narrative sticks to Newt like a rare-earth magnet.

It isn’t true or fair, but David Axelrod isn’t interested in truth or fairness.

In the end, if Romney can be called the Man of Plastic then Newt is the Man of Clay. The establishment won’t back him because he’s fragile. The conservative base won’t embrace him whole-heartedly because he’s a political porcupine and they still haven’t pulled out all the quills from last time. Newt is going to make someone a very good VP or cabinet secretary, but he’s not going to top a Republican ticket.
  • Marty Lund
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top