|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:45 pm
I'm kind of curious as to why many of you seem to favor Sarah Palin over other prospective candidates. For those of you who didn't give a reason, Which policies of hers do you like and why?
There are a lot of other possible 2012 nominees.
Mitt Romney
Mike Huckabee
Rudy Giuliani
Fred Thompson
Rep. Ron Paul
Gov. Bobby Jindal
As of right now a combination of the last three seems promising to me. I like Thompson's stance on gay marriage, it's sort of similar to Obama's in that he's against it but thinks it should be left up to the state, his voting record on Environmental policies seems level headed (based on what I've seen thus far). With Ron Paul, well I've been thinking about joining the constitution party and much of what he says is in agreement with them. A Republic is the ideal form of Government for the US at this point in time (my opinion) and Republic is based around law, our constitution is not outdated since amendments can be made (it grows as we do). I don't think Jindal is planning to run as of right now but I like how he's taken action against political corruption in his state. That's one of my biggest concerns, I want a president who is not so much a puppet of a few good to know people. Jindal seems like a man of action, and he gets things done.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:05 am
vfmacfan McCain was a Republican In Name Only; Now on what do you base that? Semiremis: I'm amazed you don't have Haley Barbour of Mississippi up there. He's at least indicated some interest in running, and in terms of a proven effective leader and communicator you needn't go any further. He ran the RNC from 1993 to 1997, the same time that we had a takeover of both houses of Congress, and he was governor of Mississippi during Katrina (and his response to Katrina was been rated highly by Mississippians). He's a conservative who still believes in the concept of the big tent, which is vital to building a national coalition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:44 pm
Lord Bitememan vfmacfan McCain was a Republican In Name Only; Now on what do you base that? Semiremis: I'm amazed you don't have Haley Barbour of Mississippi up there. He's at least indicated some interest in running, and in terms of a proven effective leader and communicator you needn't go any further. He ran the RNC from 1993 to 1997, the same time that we had a takeover of both houses of Congress, and he was governor of Mississippi during Katrina (and his response to Katrina was been rated highly by Mississippians). He's a conservative who still believes in the concept of the big tent, which is vital to building a national coalition. There's probably many others as well who would work for me but the truth is I haven't been following politics enough to know them and their views. Barbour sounds like a possibility. I'll have to check him out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:10 pm
yeah fooo
dont like Mitt Romney
dont care so much for him Mike Huckabee
ike him Rudy Giuliani
Fred Thompson
crazy weird guy NO Rep. Ron Paul
dont know him Gov. Bobby Jindal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 9:08 pm
Mitt Romney would be a very good candidate if it weren't for the fact that he's for universal healthcare. The state run healthcare in Massachusetts was his policy and it bombed.
Mike Huckabee - maybe
Rudy Giuliani - very promising
Fred Thompson - I like him a lot
Ron Paul - really awesome, but is never going to win
Bobby Jindal - would be nice if he ran
Though, to be truthful, I don't think Palin's going to win the candidacy for the president in 2012, she's way too much of a public figure covered in monkey s**t- thank you media rolleyes . And I do admit, she has more bark than bite- and I think that's one of her flaws. I think when she was brought into the VP race, she may have gotten carried away. I still like her, however, even though I disagree with the whole wolf issue- but a leader can't please everyone all the time.
I like her for the same reasons I like the other conservative politicians. I love Ron Paul, but again, he doesn't have snowball's chance in hell. Duncan Hunter is a good candidate, I'd love to see him run again. Condi Rice would be make a good president when it comes to international relations. She already knows what's going on in the world and what's happening with the war and what needs to be done. If she had the presidential seat, I'm pretty sure she could help end the war with a victory. I don't really agree with her on immigration- but then I don't agree with Mitt Romney on healthcare. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't make good U.S. Presidents.
The only problem with Ms. Rice is that she's not running and doesn't have plans for running.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 9:24 pm
vfmacfan I, personally, would be quite pleased to see Palin run for president in 2012. McCain was a Republican In Name Only; And attitudes like that will ensure the GOP becomes a fringe group for extermists. By your standards I'm sure Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt would have been communists. Quote: Palin, on the other hand, is a true conservative. A completely meaningless phrase.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 9:57 pm
DanskiWolf vfmacfan I, personally, would be quite pleased to see Palin run for president in 2012. McCain was a Republican In Name Only; And attitudes like that will ensure the GOP becomes a fringe group for extermists. By your standards I'm sure Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt would have been communists. Quote: Palin, on the other hand, is a true conservative. A completely meaningless phrase. Exactly why I created a thread about Barry Goldwater, Danski. Barry Goldwater wouldn't pass the "true conservative" test today, and would be labeled a RINO, even though he was the FOUNDER of modern conservatism. Barry Goldwater reviled the involvement of religion in politics. He routinely defended gay rights and was an ardent proponent of abortion access. If Goldwater ran in the Republican primary today he would lose the midwest for his pro-abortion and pro-gay rights views, he would lose the south due to his non-Christian heritage and views on separation of church and state, and would probably only carry the northeast and rural west on account of his comparatively moderate views and firm libertarian stance. That really says something about modern "true conservatives," that the founder of the movement would be too liberal for their tastes today. It's an oft spoken refrain from the far right that the modern GOP's ills stem from the party getting "too moderate." But anyone who has even a mildly objective eye can see that the party has lurched SO FAR to the right that it's not even in step with what qualified as conservatism 30 years ago. It's such a joke that people hold Reagan up as a paragon of conservatism given the standards held to today's politicians. Reagan 3 very specific conservative goals that he pursued, and beyond that either gave lip-service to what is called conservatism, or did the exact opposite. Reagan never made firm overtures to overturn Roe v. Wade. Reagan ran a deficit every year he was president, and for the time, huge ones. Reagan signed an amnesty for illegal immigrants into law. Reagan increased funding for the NEA (the same group that held the Mapplethorpe exhibitions). The only reason that Reagan is touted as a "conservative" is that he gave tons of lip service to issues near and dear to all conservative factions, did remarkably little for some of those factions, and walked away popular doing it. So, you're right on Danski. Anyone even mildly within the mainstream today would be called a RINO. Actually, most of the conservatives who brought conservatism to prominence in the US would have been labeled RINOs by today's standards, and the "true conservatives" of the world either don't really exist or are so far outside the mainstream that they could never hope to muster a national majority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:57 pm
Well said, Lord Bitememan.
I'm absolutely baffled by the pissants who accuse a war hero and long-time Republican of being some kind of left-wing trojan horse. McCain's a good and sensible man and I'm sure he would've put up an even better fight in the election had it not been for the intellectually-bereft deadwight round his ankles (the so-called "true conservastive"). He probably wouldn't have won, but then again, neither would any Republican. I find it hilarious that some are so blind to Bush's unpopularity that they would suggest a fellow traveller of the Religous Right as a Republican nominee for president. The GOP was once a party of intelligent men with great moral clarity like Lincoln and Goldwater. Now it's an absolute joke that has no place in the 21st century. Unless, of course, the situaiton can be turned around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:11 pm
DanskiWolf Well said, Lord Bitememan. I'm absolutely baffled by the pissants who accuse a war hero and long-time Republican of being some kind of left-wing trojan horse. McCain's a good and sensible man and I'm sure he would've put up an even better fight in the election had it not been for the intellectually-bereft deadwight round his ankles (the so-called "true conservastive"). He probably wouldn't have won, but then again, neither would any Republican. I find it hilarious that some are so blind to Bush's unpopularity that they would suggest a fellow traveller of the Religous Right as a Republican nominee for president. The GOP was once a party of intelligent men with great moral clarity like Lincoln and Goldwater. Now it's an absolute joke that has no place in the 21st century. Unless, of course, the situaiton can be turned around. although what you say is true about the GOP it is still the most best option and well the most sane out of any party an there is always a rotten apple in the bunch this basket just has more lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:06 pm
Honestly, I think anyone who can see Mother Russia from their house, would be a good president. On a serious note, I think she would be a good president. She may be low on the exp but she's got the right ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:55 pm
Ruyashie Honestly, I think anyone who can see Mother Russia from their house, would be a good president. On a serious note, I think she would be a good president. She may be low on the exp but she's got the right ideas. Your right on about being a good president, but she does/did have more experience then our president that we have now. The liberal media is what would hurt her chances.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:15 pm
Pumona Ruyashie Honestly, I think anyone who can see Mother Russia from their house, would be a good president. On a serious note, I think she would be a good president. She may be low on the exp but she's got the right ideas. Your right on about being a good president, but she does/did have more experience then our president that we have now. The liberal media is what would hurt her chances. Your right about her being more expierienced then Obama. Even though she is the more expierienced of the two, she still needs to work in the game of politics some more. The Republican/Conservative is still bigger then the liberals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 pm
Palin does not have her finger on the pulse of this nation, just the pulse of conservatives. Case in point, the NY 23 race. She backed a 3rd party candidate, Hoffman, over the Republican in the race, Dede Scozzafava. She killed the Republican's campaign. The result? The district now has a Democratic rep. This woman is too far outside the mainstream, and would be a disaster for the GOP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:11 pm
Well, even if Obama were to win the 2012 election, would it mattered if he were surrounded by a Republican congress? If the democrats lost the house, Obama is a lame duck. All he can do is veto, but even then, vetoes can be overridden.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:14 pm
Lord Bitememan Palin does not have her finger on the pulse of this nation, just the pulse of conservatives. Case in point, the NY 23 race. She backed a 3rd party candidate, Hoffman, over the Republican in the race, Dede Scozzafava. She killed the Republican's campaign. The result? The district now has a Democratic rep. This woman is too far outside the mainstream, and would be a disaster for the GOP. edit: I heard the results, Bill Owens won. But to be fair, he probably would've won anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
