I assume I'll be writing in "No confidence" again? I'm getting pretty tired of that...I'd really like for a fiscal conservative to be on the ticket--preferably one who isn't a social right-wing nutjob (but I'd probably even tolerate a moderate amount of that for someone on the right page fiscally).

Should I just give up now and wait for 2016, or is there someone on the horizon I haven't thought of?

3/25/2010 10:39:33 PM

this has been done before

I suggested Luis Fortuno

3/25/2010 10:46:50 PM

While saying nothing about quality, I think the first guy who speaks in this video is a likely candidate:



I don't see someone like Ron Paul getting the GOP nod with the Fox blessing, and he certainly doesn't have that:



[Edited on March 25, 2010 at 11:43 PM. Reason : .]

3/25/2010 11:37:10 PM

Ron Paul wouldn't get the GOP nod with Jesus' blessing. Kucinich is as likely to get the Democratic nod.

I like what he (Paul) stands for a LOT, and like that he got so much support from the young, but he's a little out there on some specific issues, even for me...much less the GOP masses who aren't really libertarian at heart to begin with. That, and he doesn't look or talk the part...and he wears sneakers with suits. I mean, I'm very thankful that he's in Congress, but there is no fucking way he will ever be President.

[Edited on March 25, 2010 at 11:54 PM. Reason : I won't swear that I wouldn't vote for Romney, but he doesn't excite me at all.]

3/25/2010 11:42:46 PM

god help the GOP if Sarah Palin gets the nomination

3/25/2010 11:44:18 PM

I'm liking Paul Ryan a lot right about now.

3/25/2010 11:51:44 PM

^Who is that?

3/25/2010 11:55:44 PM

He's a Congressman from Wisconsin. He was an economic analyst and is now on the Committee on the Budget.

http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/
http://www.house.gov/ryan/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Ryan_%28politician%29
http://www.ryanforcongress.com/Home.aspx

[Edited on March 26, 2010 at 12:03 AM. Reason : ]

3/25/2010 11:58:35 PM

eh, I just read up on him. Not at all what I'm looking for.

3/26/2010 12:04:14 AM

Hmm... he's not very socially conservative, I thought you might like that. What kinds of things are you looking for then?

3/26/2010 12:08:08 AM

How 'bout..

3/26/2010 12:20:33 AM

^We've avoided another great depression, the Health Care Reform campaign promise is delivered, the president advocates for science in our schools, he supports stem cell research, the president ordered a return to the Army Field Manual rather than enhanced torture techniques, he supports repealing DADT, the president signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, he signed a bill to expand veteran benefits, he signed kids tobacco legislation, he signed a major land protection act, and we finally have a time-table (a word fiercely opposed by the last administration) for getting out of Iraq. Even for all that I think President Obama is a very bad fit for this thread for an obvious reason.

3/26/2010 12:36:03 AM

I'd vote for Schwarzenegger if it weren't for all of those rumors about him being born in Kenya or some shit.

3/26/2010 12:36:40 AM

You sound like Bush supporters in 2003 and 2004. Your guy is in office, and he can do no wrong. In 4 years, when everything is still completely shitty, we're going to have to find real solutions, and undo the damage that was done, if it's even possible to do so. It's also a little presumptuous to say that we've "avoided the Great Depression," when we're in the worst recession since the Great Depression, and things are only getting worse.

3/26/2010 12:40:48 AM

^^roflmao

[Edited on March 26, 2010 at 12:41 AM. Reason : ^^]

3/26/2010 12:40:53 AM

how is it presumptuous to assume we've missed another great depression when we only got as bad as a terrible recession? by their very definitions you don't have to assume, you just realize we got hit bad but it could have been worse

3/26/2010 12:54:18 AM

Obama kept us from being hit by an asteroid too.

Well, I don't see any fucking craters, do you?

3/26/2010 12:55:49 AM

Your wikipedia link says Paul Ryan introduced legislation to "ensure universal access to health insurance" which I surprises me to see a republican saying the government has a role in using legislation to reach for universal health insurance, and from reading up on him it looks like he also voted for the bank bail out.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

3/26/2010 12:56:03 AM

^^ i believe both the original quote and myself said "we" and not "Obama", it's a little presumptuous of you to think we depend on him to save the day for everything

3/26/2010 12:59:03 AM

Quote :

"how is it presumptuous to assume we've missed another great depression when we only got as bad as a terrible recession? by their very definitions you don't have to assume, you just realize we got hit bad but it could have been worse"

That's basically like saying, "Oh, my temperature is 101 and rising steadily. Well, at least I avoided getting even more sick!" I know the "consensus" among average people is that we've seen the worst and it's going to get better, but I don't think that's true. Time will tell, I suppose.

3/26/2010 1:10:01 AM

the great depression was a GDP decrease of about 33%. find me one person who estimates we will come close to that.

3/26/2010 1:19:34 AM

In the Great Depression, we didn't create money to fuel phony growth. Why not look at something other than GDP, like unemployment?

3/26/2010 1:22:31 AM

ok done. we would have to be TWICE as bad as right now to match the levels of the great depression which maxed out about 23%.

3/26/2010 1:28:55 AM

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has multiple unemployment numbers. The popular unemployment rate that you hear about (10-11%) is not the real unemployment. If you include underemployment or discouraged workers, which they used to, it's closer to 18-19%. So, we're not all that far off.

3/26/2010 1:33:55 AM

i guess you'll have to help me dig up the "real" unemployment numbers in 1932 then as well, i'm off to bed though now

3/26/2010 1:38:27 AM

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2010-03-19T10%3A25%3A00-05%3A00&max-results=10

Quote :

"Romney leads tight Republican race Friday, March 19, 2010 Our first national look at who Republicans would prefer as their 2012 Presidential nominee confirms the wide open nature of the field. The leading candidates are all within the margin of error of each other, with Mitt Romney leading at 28% followed by Mike Huckabee at 24% and Sarah Palin at 23%. Ron Paul pulls 11%, 9% say they're undecided, and 6% say their preference would be someone else. Romney's lead speaks to the fact that moderates could actually pick the GOP nominee in 2012. That's because there's gridlock among conservatives about who their preferred candidate is. Huckabee leads with 28% to 27% for Palin and 25% for Romney. But the former Massachusetts Governor has a large advantage with moderates, getting 35% to 17% for Palin and 16% for Huckabee. That significant edge with them gives him the overall lead. Palin is the most popular candidate with self identified Republican voters, as 69% have a favorable opinion of her compared to 58% for Romney and 54% for Huckabee."

3/26/2010 1:43:28 AM

I'm gonna go ahead and make a call here and now:

Predicting some unforeseen catastrophe, the democrats will take a hit in congress but Obama will win a second term fairly comfortably.

For one thing, so far it looks like he'll get to run against some moron like Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee, who needs to just found a church in Kansas or something. I'm reasonably certain that I could run a basset hound with a cross around its neck against Huckabee and win just because so many people got confused by the resemblance.

For another, it looks pretty fucking certain that he's going to get to claim that he won the health care battle, as well as several pertaining to recovery efforts. Sure, it's up in the air whether those are good things, but they're changes and they sound good to angry poor people.

Plus, it's my bet that because of/in spite of/irrelevant to his efforts, the economy will probably enjoy at a least a slight uptick by 2012.

---

Also -- and let me be very clear on this -- if Mike Huckabee or Sarah Palin run for president under any party's name, I will not vote for them. I might, out of desperation, vote Romney, but I wouldn't be fucking happy about it. I will not rule out voting for Ron Paul just for the fuck of it.

3/26/2010 3:18:05 AM

^I can definitely see that happening. I would never vote for Sarah Palin, and frankly, it astounds me that so many people are throwing themselves behind her. I'd love to be able to vote for Ron Paul, but he's not a feasible choice for Pres. I like Paul Ryan, but he's too fiscally conservative to garner dem votes, and he's too socially conservative to completely win over the republicans. I could vote for Huckabee or Romney, but I'm not happy with that choice, and I wouldn't want the two of them on the same ballot.

3/26/2010 9:35:45 AM

If Romney is their nominee it's going to be REALLY hard to for the Republicans to believably run on repealing HCR since Romney has instituted very similar laws in his state as governor.

Of course, they might have gotten over the "Repeal the bill" mantra by 2012, so who knows.

3/26/2010 10:11:04 AM

3/26/2010 10:26:17 AM

Quote :

"how is it presumptuous to assume we've missed another great depression when we only got as bad as a terrible recession? by their very definitions you don't have to assume, you just realize we got hit bad but it could have been worse"

And it also could have been better. See, I can play this game too.

3/26/2010 10:29:02 AM

Quote :

"If Romney is their nominee it's going to be REALLY hard to for the Republicans to believably run on repealing HCR since Romney has instituted very similar laws in his state as governor."

Yeah.

Supposedly, the HCR bill is their silver bullet. Now they're considering the one person in their ranks who is in no position to use it.

I see it accidentally working for them, though. By 2012 the HCR will be popular, and Romney can do another flip-flop and champion the fact that he too has passed significant health care reform.

3/26/2010 10:39:01 AM

Quote :

"I will not rule out voting for Ron Paul just for the fuck of it."

Grumpy.. voting for a libertarian? Has Hell frozen over?

I have seen a couple of pres. nominees come almost out of nowhere to go on to win. Carter, Obama, even Reagan to an extent. I'm hoping the GOP can get a young, well-spoken person who can compete with Obama. An fairly unknown person might be good, like Obama...a blank slate on which to paint your own conservative ideals.

3/26/2010 10:50:13 AM

They already tried the blank-slate counter with Palin, who seems to have had every far-right belief grafted onto her and has been more than willing to accept those stances.

Who would they be able to tap now in order to try it again?

3/26/2010 10:59:13 AM

Quote :

"Palin is the most popular candidate with self identified Republican voters, as 69% have a favorable opinion of her compared to 58% for Romney and 54% for Huckabee."

Well, I guess we have nothing to worry about in 2012.

3/26/2010 11:06:46 AM

of those three Romney is the best. However, him putting in a similar plan in mass as O put in, doesnt give him any ground to attack O on healthcare. imo

I bet the repubs will find a fiscal conservative with business experience to run by 2012. Its still a long ways out. They need to find a candidate that the teaparty people will support.

If O gets his amnesty, it wont matter. Youll have to run carlos mencia to have a snowballs chance.

3/26/2010 10:54:04 PM

what about Sanford?

3/26/2010 11:23:33 PM

Quote :

"I bet the repubs will find a fiscal conservative with business experience to run by 2012."

You really think they will, or do you just think they [user]should[/user]? Those are two very different things.

3/27/2010 12:41:36 AM

Hope, is more like it. I think that is what they will need to show the differences. Personality wont matter much. They just need to be able to say, you voted for personality with no experience in 2008, look how well that went.....then list thier experience.

I do think they will have to run a more fiscal conservative to keep the teaparty from splitting votes.

[Edited on March 27, 2010 at 8:52 AM. Reason : .]

3/27/2010 8:51:51 AM

if its huck, palin, and romney as the 3 leading contenders in the primaries, then Palin will unfortunately come out on top. Huck will anti-mormon all the conservatives again, and romney will take the fiscal conservative/social moderates ... leaving everyone else to vote for palin because she will be able to run a clean campaign (and get lots of womens votes), while huck and romney punch each other daily in a nasty brawl (with huck acting like hes the honest, innocent preacher the whole time).

[Edited on March 27, 2010 at 9:04 AM. Reason : .]

3/27/2010 9:02:36 AM

I voted for huck in the primaries bc he supports the fairtax.

I can see what you said happening. But I think Romney is the best chance.

3/27/2010 9:19:58 AM

please go away sarah palin. i would vote for BO before her...and i really dislike BO

3/27/2010 9:38:08 AM

Quote :

"If O gets his amnesty, it wont matter. Youll have to run carlos mencia to have a snowballs chance."

Wow.

3/27/2010 11:40:43 AM

Bush billed himself as a fiscal conservative with business experience. And i’m pretty sure every repub running last time said they were fiscally conservative.

3/27/2010 11:46:15 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/10/republican.conference/index.html

Quote :

"Romney nips Paul in Southern GOP straw poll ew Orleans, Louisiana (CNN) -- Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney defeated Texas Rep. Ron Paul by a single vote in the Southern Republican Leadership Conference's 2012 straw poll on Saturday. Romney did not appear at the New Orleans conference, but received 439 votes -- or 24 percent -- of the 1,806 ballots cast by delegates at the conference, held in New Orleans. Paul earned 438 votes. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tied for third place with 18 percent of the vote."

Quote :

"A group, "Evangelicals for Mitt," was there, as were many college-aged Paul supporters"

Paul & Romney were first & second at CPAC, and now those positions are flipped, so they both are doing pretty well. Given that the GOP would never consider running Paul, it looks more and more like Romney is the guy.

4/11/2010 12:05:16 PM

Obama is a lock for reelection. 2012 is sacrificial lamb year. Get rid of the people they dont want running in 2016

4/11/2010 12:22:07 PM

If you dig into what exactly it is specifically that Ron Paul believes about economics and money, he looks about as blindly ideological as an actual orthodox Marxist (this analogy only works for people who actually have read Marx and don't think Obama is some sort of Marxist). Of course, some people in here insist on believing that the solution to debt and spending isn't just austerity but rather allowing money to exist in the market the same way wheat does (wheat can be money now! yay! hope you follow the Chicago Board of Trade like my family did) and entertaining some of the dumber notions about product safety (we should get rid of it b/c it doesn't allow me to sell whatever I want as a miracle drug. The market will prove me right or wrong when the first person dies).

Me? I'd rather vote for a secessionist or constitutionalist who'd put the responsibility on states and localities to provide services (there should still be public welfare, it should just be devolved as much as possible, ala communitarianism) than someone who would promote a national economy based on the gold standard and whatever garbage alternative medicine people believe in this week.

Paul Ryan looks like Eddie Munster and has gone on record as an admirer of Ayn Rand. Anyone who likes her needs to stay in the basement.

Another disqualifier for me is this whole thing of mocking those who think we should be trying to reduce our carbon footprint. This takes many forms (love for coal, climate change denial), but isn't antithetical to conservatism. Why doesn't someone run on a platform of conserving on all levels, from energy industries to government? It doesn't have to be a regulatory approach, just come out and say "we are too fucking greedy and spoiled for our own good and we need to live simply."

Gary Johnson was on Real Time with Bill Maher and was being all coy about saying whether or not he believed climate change was real, doing the whole "well....let's assume it is, what can we do?" He then pitched essentially the Copenhagen Consensus, which is great imo and I personally favor, but it sounded like he was trying not to say it was real so as to not scare Repubs off. Wonderful, people now pander to the whole "how can climate change be real when it snowed in February in DC!?!?!" troglodytes.

I'd vote for Jesse Ventura if he wasn't a Truther. Maybe Nader if he ran again. People misread him all the time, though.

Whatever, I'm going to vote for someone irrelevant in the end.

[Edited on April 11, 2010 at 4:32 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2010 4:19:22 PM

2012 is sacrificial lamb year. Get rid of the people they don't want running in 2016

4/11/2010 5:21:08 PM

^If that does end up being the case, I sincerely hope we end up with Obama vs Palin 2012.

4/11/2010 5:22:58 PM

^^^ I agree with most of your statements about Ron Paul...that's why I've never really been on the Ron Paul bandwagon.

I mean, I have a positive opinion of him, just because of what he very roughly represents, and because he's at least a small counterweight to the other 99% of Washington. I wouldn't want for him to be President, though, even if there was a snowball's chance in hell to begin with.

Jesse Venture is crazier than hell. I mean, he's been somewhat off the beaten path since day 1 of his life in the political arena, but he's gone completely berserk over the last few years. Again, I agree with some of what he represents (and somewhat more of what he represented when he initially got elected), but nowadays, he mostly just represents crazy.

Fuck Ralph Nader.

[Edited on April 11, 2010 at 5:38 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2010 5:37:40 PM