The 2012 GOP Presidential Field Is Set

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Axe_Swipe said:
I’m still praying for Chris Christie to throw his hat in the ring. :crossrc:
Click to expand...
How long will you keep doing that? The primaries are only 45 days or so away.

I’m praying that whoever the nominee is, he can rally and motivate the base. I don’t have a favorite, yet. My attitude is “I would vote for him/her in the general election, but they wouldn’t be my first choice for the nominee”.
 
scipio337 said:
How long will you keep doing that? The primaries are only 45 days or so away.
Click to expand...
Until the last possible moment! 😉

Doesn’t mean I’m ignoring those already on the field, I just don’t like the potential in any of them as much.
 
Tsuwano said:
I absolutely agree with you. In fact, I would even categorize the pro life position as a classical liberal position (Yes, I understand that this is a heretical statement on this forum) in that it expands the traditional bounderies of human rights and who has them in society. We (Catholics and other people of faith) have to do a better job of confronting those who would label the pro life position as extremist. It is not extremist in the least.
Click to expand...
I am a classical liberal (also known in America a libertarian) and very pro-life. In fact, the libertarian position of non-aggression is fundamentally pro-life.
 
_Abyssinia said:
How strange then it is mostly liberals impinging on the human rights of the unborn.
Click to expand...
Well, “liberal” is the name they adopted in the 60s when “progressive” became too closely affiliated with “communist”. Now that the stygma of “progressive” is gone, they are starting to refer to themselves with that name rather than liberal.
 
I’ll be voting for Obama, but it is certainly entertaining to watch the gaffes by the Republican candidates. For pure entertainment value, my vote is for Herman Cain, although Perry, and before him Bachmann, have been strong contenders for wacko statements and public meltdowns. I don’t find repeated (and inconsistent) denials of sexual harassment claims entertaining, but there was a recent bright spot for Cain in his reply to a reporter’s question on Libya. Obviously, he doesn’t read the newspaper, let alone pay attention to briefings on current affairs. Thanks for the chuckles, Herman!

From their approach to the campaign it was clear from the outset that Palin, Gingrich, and Cain were out to improve their brands and make more money on book sales or the lecture circuit, which makes it hard to take them seriously except as spoilers in the anyone-but-Romney race. Romney himself? Perpetual candidate, no real heart-felt positions on the issues except the issue of getting elected to the Presidency. And he offers no entertainment value - when you’ve seen 1,000 backflips, one more is just boring.
 
Alan55 said:
I’ll be voting for Obama, but it is certainly entertaining to watch the gaffes by the Republican candidates. For pure entertainment value, my vote is for Herman Cain, although Perry, and before him Bachmann, have been strong contenders for wacko statements and public meltdowns. I don’t find repeated (and inconsistent) denials of sexual harassment claims entertaining, but there was a recent bright spot for Cain in his reply to a reporter’s question on Libya. Obviously, he doesn’t read the newspaper, let alone pay attention to briefings on current affairs. Thanks for the chuckles, Herman!

From their approach to the campaign it was clear from the outset that Palin, Gingrich, and Cain were out to improve their brands and make more money on book sales or the lecture circuit, which makes it hard to take them seriously except as spoilers in the anyone-but-Romney race. Romney himself? Perpetual candidate, no real heart-felt positions on the issues except the issue of getting elected to the Presidency. And he offers no entertainment value - when you’ve seen 1,000 backflips, one more is just boring.
Click to expand...
Can anybody who thinks Mitt Romney is a flip flopper provide examples of Romney promising something in his campaign for governor and then changing his position when he was elected?

It can be good to flip your position on an issue if you have good reason and experience.

Obama however, is a flip flopper in the worse sense in that he made campaign promises and then went back on them:

youtube.com/watch?v=ft_Mb-4nXJk

Obama has made his own gaffes, he recently called Hawaii ‘Asia.’
 
_Abyssinia said:
Can anybody who thinks Mitt Romney is a flip flopper provide examples of Romney promising something in his campaign for governor and then changing his position when he was elected?

It can be good to flip your position on an issue if you have good reason and experience.

Obama however, is a flip flopper in the worse sense in that he made campaign promises and then went back on them:

youtube.com/watch?v=ft_Mb-4nXJk

Obama has made his own gaffes, he recently called Hawaii ‘Asia.’
Click to expand...
Is there any politician in the USA who is not a flip flopper?
 
Alan55 said:
I’ll be voting for Obama, but it is certainly entertaining to watch the gaffes by the Republican candidates. For pure entertainment value, my vote is for Herman Cain, although Perry, and before him Bachmann, have been strong contenders for wacko statements and public meltdowns. I don’t find repeated (and inconsistent) denials of sexual harassment claims entertaining, but there was a recent bright spot for Cain in his reply to a reporter’s question on Libya. Obviously, he doesn’t read the newspaper, let alone pay attention to briefings on current affairs. Thanks for the chuckles, Herman!

From their approach to the campaign it was clear from the outset that Palin, Gingrich, and Cain were out to improve their brands and make more money on book sales or the lecture circuit, which makes it hard to take them seriously except as spoilers in the anyone-but-Romney race. Romney himself? Perpetual candidate, no real heart-felt positions on the issues except the issue of getting elected to the Presidency. And he offers no entertainment value - when you’ve seen 1,000 backflips, one more is just boring.
Click to expand...
So, backflips and entertainment value are why you are voting for Obama, or just comfort in the knowledge that with him the genocide of abortion will continue unabated?
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
So, backflips and entertainment value are why you are voting for Obama, or just comfort in the knowledge that with him the genocide of abortion will continue unabated?
Click to expand...
A lot easier to mock his opponents than face the reality of the evil he supports.
 
estesbob said:
A lot easier to mock his opponents than face the reality of the evil he supports.
Click to expand...
How anyone who considers himself Catholic can even consider voting for a man who refused to vote to protect infants that are born after an attempted abortion just has something wrong inside him. 🤷 I’ve “defriended” everyone that I know personally who voted for Obama and continues to support him, and that includes a hefty number of family members.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
How anyone who considers himself Catholic can even consider voting for a man who refused to vote to protect infants that are born after an attempted abortion just has something wrong inside him. 🤷 I’ve “defriended” everyone that I know personally who voted for Obama and continues to support him, and that includes a hefty number of family members.
Click to expand...
Archbishop Chaput describes Pro-choice Catholics as engaging in mental gymnastics worthy of an Olympic Gold medal
 
estesbob said:
Archbishop Chaput describes Pro-choice Catholics as engaging in mental gymnastics worthy of an Olympic Gold medal
Click to expand...
I mean, put the abortion issue aside and this guys is STILL an epic disaster as a President.
 
louis91766 said:
Is there any politician in the USA who is not a flip flopper?
Click to expand...
I think to call Mitt Romney a flip flopper is a red herring; what politician, Democrat or Republican has not changed their minds on issues once they received new information.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
How anyone who considers himself Catholic can even consider voting for a man who refused to vote to protect infants that are born after an attempted abortion just has something wrong inside him. 🤷 I’ve “defriended” everyone that I know personally who voted for Obama and continues to support him, and that includes a hefty number of family members.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand how any Catholic can look at the teachings of the Catholic Church and square them with Obama’s beliefs and policies.

The Catholic Church’s teaching and Obama administration clash on many issues; abortion, embryonic stem cell research, conscience rights, marriage. It seems party politics comes first before Church teaching for some Catholics.
 
_Abyssinia said:
How strange then it is mostly liberals impinging on the human rights of the unborn.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is very strange. One would think that the classic liberal would recognize that the unborn, as human, has rights in the same way that abolitionists at one time recognized that Black slaves had human rights that should be preserved in law. Supporting abortion actually goes against the liberal impulse which usually supports the expansion of rights to all segments of society. It is cynical and opportunistic for liberals to support abortion.
 
Now it appears that Gingrich was well paid by Freddie Mac or whatever - a lobbyist? Sorry, but Newt is only motivated by his own interests and advancement. Any principles? I have to doubt it. A financial scandal while in Congress. Left two wives and married a third. A huge credit at Tiffany’s. His key staff people quit, Etc. Probably more dirty laundry to come out.
Code: 
What an atrocity for America (and Catholicism) if he becomes our president. He seems to have lived a shameless life, conniving quite cleverly (he is smart) to get ahead, trying desperately to cover his sordid past, now doing his best to proclaim himself a new and redeemed man who had learned his lesson!  Just possibly he could fool enough well-intentioned and uninformed people to get elected. I pray not. 

 No, I'm not being charitable. We're talking about professional politicians here, and as patriots we need to speak the truth to help save our nation from them.
 
Roy5 said:
Now it appears that Gingrich was well paid by Freddie Mac or whatever - a lobbyist? .
Click to expand...
i thought that the Republicans were strongly opposed to government sponsored enterprises such as Freddie Mac?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top