DRSmith Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 You seem way to hung up on the fact that some are Mormons. I really doubt that a candidate's religion would have much impact on most voters. Of course, there will always be some who make that an issue, but it's not a huge percentage of the overall voting populationIt's their principles, historical actions and future plans that most are concerned with. Because I watched what happened when Romney won I have seen the things said about Mormons, the question does the religous right ignore it? If people's religion did not matter in Ameirca then there would be no talk of Obama being Muslim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoEd Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I'm not in the loop as much as most of you guys and really don't follow candidates until it's closer to election time. But for me, the Republican that I really like is Michael Steele. I have yet to see this guy talk and really disagree with anything he says. I don't know too much about his platform or where he stands on all issues but I think he's a likable guy that people could get behind. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Steele Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I'm not in the loop as much as most of you guys and really don't follow candidates until it's closer to election time. But for me, the Republican that I really like is Michael Steele. I have yet to see this guy talk and really disagree with anything he says. I don't know too much about his platform or where he stands on all issues but I think he's a likable guy that people could get behind. They just ran him out as chair I do not see them getting behind as the nominee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Because I watched what happened when Romney won I have seen the things said about Mormons, the question does the religous right ignore it?If people's religion did not matter in Ameirca then there would be no talk of Obama being Muslim You are applying normality to the fringe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 You are applying normality to the fringe. Aka the base of the Republican party right now, the same people that think Palin and Bachmann are smart and Rush is being funny when making the a persons race an issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnLockesGhost Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Romney's just too plastic. Palin's just too vacuous. Huckabee's just too Magoo. I really like Newt. He's brilliant, but I'm afraid his past makes him unelectable. Thune and Pawlenty should be your standard, cookie-cut, Republican candidates with nice families and haircuts. I'm interested in learning more about Huntsman. I'll say something that should be a little controversial: I think, Barbour's southern accent makes him unelectable. If he were a Democrat it would be an asset, but not as a Republican. I'd really like a dark horse to emerge that I can get behind like Jeff Flake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoEd Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 They just ran him out as chair I do not see them getting behind as the nominee I'm just saying I like the guy. And the reason they ran him out, kind of agree with what he said. I'm in the military and I don't agree with the way we're handling Afghanistan and I think it was a political move by Obama as well. Obama wanted to give the American people the illusion of "pulling out of Iraq" but all we did was move from one place to another. Once he gained office he realized we couldn't simply leave the Middle East but he made an attempt to please his base by "ending" the Iraq war. BTW, there are still a lot of us in Iraq and probably will be for a very long time. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 As a religious rightie I have no problem with him....hell it's not like he's a Episcopalian:pfft: JLG I think you will see some dark horses ,not familiar with Flake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnLockesGhost Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 As a religious rightie I have no problem with him....hell it's not like he's a Episcopalian:pfft:JLG I think you will see some dark horses ,not familiar with Flake Younger, well-spoken libertarian Congressman from Arizona. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNij_WFf8Ho&feature=relmfu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Where's Paul Ryan on the list? Isn't he considered a rising star? He was tapped to deliver the Republican response to Obama's SOTU address, he's from the heartland (Wisconsin), looks like a young Ronald Reagan, and is considered an influential conservative congressman, ... Maybe he's too young for the top of the ticket, but could be a veep candidate. ---------- Post added February-1st-2011 at 09:22 AM ---------- I'm just saying I like the guy. And the reason they ran him out, kind of agree with what he said. I'm in the military and I don't agree with the way we're handling Afghanistan and I think it was a political move by Obama as well. Obama wanted to give the American people the illusion of "pulling out of Iraq" but all we did was move from one place to another. Once he gained office he realized we couldn't simply leave the Middle East but he made an attempt to please his base by "ending" the Iraq war. BTW, there are still a lot of us in Iraq and probably will be for a very long time. Just saying. Steele might make a good vice presidential candidate, but realistically he's poison after getting dumped as RNC chair. BTW, when you say Obama gave "the illusion of pulling out of Iraq" and "but all we did was move from one place to another" are you talking about the shift in focus to Afghanistan? You do know that he campaigned on doing just that, right? I don't think anybody thought we would just abruptly pull out of Iraq entirely. Didn't most everybody acknowledge that there would have to be a U.S. presence there even as the drawdown continued? How would you have done things differently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONAWARPATH Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I'll say something that should be a little controversial: I think, Barbour's southern accent makes him unelectable. Personally, I'm more concerned about some of his views on race relations. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison Redskin Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Where's Paul Ryan on the list? Isn't he considered a rising star? He was tapped to deliver the Republican response to Obama's SOTU address, he's from the heartland (Wisconsin), looks like a young Ronald Reagan, and is considered an influential conservative congressman, ... Maybe he's too young for the top of the ticket, but could be a veep candidate. I used to live is Madison, Wisconsin, so I am pretty familiar with Ryan. He is articulate, intelligent, and informed. When he speaks, I listen, even if I disagree with many of his positions. Ryan is someone to watch out for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 And young,it will be interesting how he does as chairman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
December90 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 At this point I think the ABO (Anyone But Obama) factor will be a key factor come election time. I give the WP little credibility when it comes to reporting on GOP politics. They have an agenda to keep BO in office and will push for the weakest GOP nominee. (Much like many in the GOP pushed for the weakest Democrat in 2008 and the result was we punished the country with the election of Obama:() Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 At this point I think the ABO (Anyone But Obama) factor will be a key factor come election time. I give the WP little credibility when it comes to reporting on GOP politics. They have an agenda to keep BO in office and will push for the weakest GOP nominee. (Much like many in the GOP pushed for the weakest Democrat in 2008 and the result was we punished the country with the election of Obama:() What a crock of ****. Seriously, come up with your own list if you think the WP list is that agenda driven. And don't look now, but the whole "Anyone But Obama" thing is SO 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoEd Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Steele might make a good vice presidential candidate, but realistically he's poison after getting dumped as RNC chair. BTW, when you say Obama gave "the illusion of pulling out of Iraq" and "but all we did was move from one place to another" are you talking about the shift in focus to Afghanistan? You do know that he campaigned on doing just that, right? I don't think anybody thought we would just abruptly pull out of Iraq entirely. Didn't most everybody acknowledge that there would have to be a U.S. presence there even as the drawdown continued? How would you have done things differently? We still have a pretty sizable footprint in Iraq but the media, 48K as of November 2010. That's more than a prescence. But the American people were appeased and it made Obama look good on his promise of withdraw. Since when is just under 50K a withdraw? How would I do things differently? Afghanistan is the right move but why lie about the prescence in Iraq? It's bull**** political retoric. I knew in 2007, and even posted it here on ES, that we were never going to withdraw from Iraq and even stated that we will probably have a prescence there similiar to that in S Korea. As far as Afghanistan goes, I still feel as if our servicemembers hands are tied in terms of their ability to sufficiently do their job. When you allow political interests to interfere with military tactics you're fighting a losing battle. I personally feel, if you're not going to allow the military to do the job the way it's supposed to be done then there's no sense fighting it, pull us out completely and bring us home. This has been going on for over 7 years, it's time to **** or get off the pot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 We still have a pretty sizable footprint in Iraq but the media, 48K as of November 2010. That's more than a prescence. But the American people were appeased and it made Obama look good on his promise of withdraw. Since when is just under 50K a withdraw? How would I do things differently? Afghanistan is the right move but why lie about the prescence in Iraq? It's bull**** political retoric. I knew in 2007, and even posted it here on ES, that we were never going to withdraw from Iraq and even stated that we will probably have a prescence there similiar to that in S Korea. As far as Afghanistan goes, I still feel as if our servicemembers hands are tied in terms of their ability to sufficiently do their job. When you allow political interests to interfere with military tactics you're fighting a losing battle. I personally feel, if you're not going to allow the military to do the job the way it's supposed to be done then there's no sense fighting it, pull us out completely and bring us home. This has been going on for over 7 years, it's time to **** or get off the pot. Who is lying about the continued U.S. presence in Iraq? As to Afghanistan, I agree that the situation is untenable there from a military standpoint. It was never going to be a conventional war there, and it is too much to ask the U.S. military to be soldiers fighting the Taliban in addition to peacekeepers, law enforcement officers, community conflict meditators, and disbursers of government largesse. But by the same token, I don't know how you can have the military "do its job the way it's supposed to be done" because it is not a conventional war there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.