Meet The Candidates: 2012 GOP Thread

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Who cares if he did... that doesn't mean he supports him blindly

True.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Who cares if he did... that doesn't mean he supports him blindly

I asked the question and I didn't say he supported Obama blindly.

But when someone responds to a post and says that essentially I'm a "dumbass", then in another post "not observant" because I made an educated assumption, that I fully believe is correct. Either man up and tell me I'm wrong or say, "I don't want to answer." (or say you were too young to vote). That's all.

But I get SS's point

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I asked the question and I didn't say he supported Obama blindly.

But when someone responds to a post and says that essentially I'm a "dumbass", then in another post "not observant" because I made an educated assumption, that I fully believe is correct. Either man up and tell me I'm wrong or say I don't want to answer (or say you were too young to vote). That's all.

But I get SS's point

I just said you weren't observant on my views. (which I didn't think you are) I apologize for making the remarks about being a dumbass if you are still voting for the GOP. I personally think we should give both the parties the finger and elect something new.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I just said you weren't observant on my views. (which I didn't think you are) I apologize for making the remarks about being a dumbass if you are still voting for the GOP. I personally think we should give both the parties the finger and elect something new.

We're all good, appreciate it. I do agree with your last sentence, unfortunately the claws of both parties are embedded in too deep.

[SmootSmack]

Unless NC is one of the declared or potential GOP candidates for President, then this thread shouldn't be about him

[JoeRedskin]

and moving on ....

[JoeRedskin]

So, back to the thread and Huntsman in particular -

Given his involvement with the Obama administration - tangential but existent nonetheless. How does he overcome those with a more direct appeal to the solid right of center? I believe he has been promoted/complimented by McCain but, frankly, I am not sure that is a particularly ringing endorsement.

[12thMan]

JoeRedskins, I don't think his affiliation with President Obama will hurt him that much, if at all. My sense is Huntsman won't say anything really negative about Obama and that just won't fly in a Republican primary. Not this time around. And if you had to choose between him and Mitt, it's the devil you know (no pun intended) vs. the devil you don't.

He'll create some buzz, the media will jock him and all, I just don't think it's his time. People are going to be surprise when they find how moderate this guy is. I honestly don't think he'll make it out the primaries.

[JoeRedskin]

Personally, I think there is nothing wrong with the two party system that an informed and attentive electorate couldn't fix.

Oh wait, I think I see the problem ...

[saden1]

You have to know "things" or at the very least have intellectual curiosity to run a country. This isnt an elitist view but a bare minimum requirement to be an effective leader. Btw, we have never had a president "from the people" and of all the presidents we have had the founders were the most elite.

We want people smarter than us in leadership positions. That is the nature of things and preferable.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by saden1

You have to know "things" or at the very least have intellectual curiosity to run a country. This isnt an elitist view but a bare minimum requirement to be an effective leader. Btw, we have never had a president "from the people" and of all the presidents we have had the founders were the most elite.

We want people smarter than us in leadership position. That is the nature of things and preferable.

True enough. It's the concept that there is a specific way to get that knowledge or to be smarter (through govt. service, graduate degrees, etc.) that the perceived elitism kicks in.

And yes ... I agree completely with your statement as to the presidents.

Again, it's just my perception as to why Palin has such a dedicated following. Dumb people exist and each candidate has their fair share of them on their side. While much of Palin's support (maybe the vast majority) comes from the "not so deep thinkers" crowd, to suggest that you have to be a moron to find her message attractive is, to me, short sighted - certainly for anyone who wants the Republican nomination.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

True enough. It's the concept that there is a specific way to get that knowledge or to be smarter (through govt. service, graduate degrees, etc.) that the perceived elitism kicks in.

And yes ... I agree completely with your statement as to the presidents.

Again, it's just my perception as to why Palin has such a dedicated following. Dumb people exist and each candidate has their fair share of them on their side. While much of Palin's support (maybe the vast majority) comes from the "not so deep thinkers" crowd, to suggest that you have to be a moron to find her message attractive is, to me, short sighted - certainly for anyone who wants the Republican nomination.

You don't have to be dumb to support Palin and I would argue that the expectation on the left isn't that you go to the best schools in the country but rather you can freely discuss any topic related to governing without guttering the discussion with nonsensical statements. Trump is a perfect example of someone who couldn't possible lead with statements like "you're not gonna raise that ****ing' price!" Frankly such statements and much of what Palin says are deeply insulting much in the same way as someone spitting in your face. I suppose we could strive to be less easily offended much like Palin's supporters.

Speaking of someone who is insulting, Anthony Weiner is another politician who couldn't possibly lead not because of his indiscretions but because of this:

[Beemnseven]

I really wish Gary Johnson would gain some traction. He was voted in for two terms in a state that is 2 to 1 democrat, is pro-choice (through the first trimester), a dedicated spending slasher, wants to end the wars, quit the expensive, tax-consuming "war" on marijuana, and has the business acumen to get the economy rolling again.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I really wish Gary Johnson would gain some traction. He was voted in for two terms in a state that is 2 to 1 democrat, is pro-choice (through the first trimester), a dedicated spending slasher, wants to end the wars, quit the expensive, tax-consuming "war" on marijuana, and has the business acumen to get the economy rolling again.

Gary Johnson Not Invited to New Hampshire GOP Debate ~ New World Radical

Do you really think Johnson would end the wars any faster than Obama? I doubt it...I seriously doubt it. He wouldn't end it any faster than the Generals on the ground would permit it.


Obama says Iraq war is ending, his promise is kept | Reuters

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Gary Johnson Not Invited to New Hampshire GOP Debate ~ New World Radical

Do you really think Johnson would end the wars any faster than Obama? I doubt it...I seriously doubt it. He wouldn't end it any faster than the Generals on the ground would permit it.


Obama says Iraq war is ending, his promise is kept | Reuters

Well, considering the generals work for the president, if he says it's time to leave, then it's time to leave. And yes, considering we can't afford the wars anymore, I'd place my bets on both Johnson and/or Ron Paul getting out as fast as possible.

If that's true about the debate, then it's over for Johnson. And so much for the Tea Party... if they really want to roll back government and slash spending, Johnson and Ron Paul should be gaining momentum. Instead they're salivating over Palin and Bachmann.