Who will be the Republican Nominee for President in 2012?

It's a little odd that Ron Paul fans seem to come up with all sorts of excuses for why Ron Paul will not be the candidate other than the fact that Ron Paul already RAN for president and not that many people wished to vote for him. Overlooking this simple fact and coming up with all kinds of other excuses is a strong indication of what petulant unrealistic babies Ron Paul fans are.

didn't we have this thread a week or two ago?

huntsman, daniels or (if he'd run) christie would be reasonable candidates. so of course none of them have a chance.

seems like romney is the frontrunner that hardly anyone really likes.

i wouldn't be surprised to see jeb bush swoop in and grab the nomination if the field continues to be as weak as it is now.

Paul Ryan - will run on a control the deficit platform. Obama wins 59-41.

mez wrote:

I would argue that the Democrat party is the one who has become "crazed" and really cannot be distinguished from the social democrats of Europe. This has been the reason for the pushback. As far as lunatics in office alienating all but their base....well we have that right now.

Really? The Democrats in this country can't be distinguished from the social democrats in Europe? Are you serious?

The only crazy thing is how a bunch of billionaires have managed to hoodwink a bunch of people into buying into terms like socialist, redistribution of wealth, etc. to describe reasonably centrist policies. See:

Read that story if you want insight into the pushback. It mainly has to do with the gullibility of the American voter.

Meanwhile, the rich continue to get richer (See

), the middle class continues to disappear, and suddenly deficits do matter, after the last administration spent money like a bunch of drunken frat boys.

As for you alienating everyone but your base, sure, you have that right. But let's see how effective that is as a governing strategy. To gullible I would add fickle about the American voter; it doesn't take long for the honeymoon to end.

Fly Navy wrote:

McCain was not in the infantry. He was a pilot.

So McCain never saw combat? I believe he was shot down. Sounds like combat to me.

The GOP top tier candidates have just as much military experience as Obama. Funny how the Dems touted Kerry's combat (4 months of it) and yet McCain's military life and record seemed to be dismissed. I voted more against Obama (I realized what a radical leftist he is) than voting for McCain.

luv2run wrote:

The GOP top tier candidates have just as much military experience as Obama. Funny how the Dems touted Kerry's combat (4 months of it) and yet McCain's military life and record seemed to be dismissed. I voted more against Obama (I realized what a radical leftist he is) than voting for McCain.

That's funny. I think of Obama a center-right president.

I pray every night its Sarah Palin.

I don't believe McCain's service is "dismissed." It's what got him a Senate seat in the first place. But let's not forget all the innuendo in 2008 about how McCain had somehow sold out to his North Vietnamese captors came from the Right, from people supporting Republican candidates other than McCain. You know, the sdame jerks that lie all the time now. Don't even pretend otherwise.

Which INFANTRY UNIT did any of these candidates serve in ? When ? Where ?

Danny Devito

There are basically three wings to consider--there's the "old guard" wing that favors somebody like Romney, but he is not trusted by the Palinistas nor the Tea Party. Then there is the Tea Party, some of whom will support Palin if she is the nominee, but a good many of whom would really like someone besides her to emerge as a conservative alternative to a Romney or a Huckabee. Finally, the hard-core Palin faction. They'll never support a candidate who tries to marginalize her. But if a TP candidate comes out and they feel she was treated fairly, they'll support him.

The big question is which faction can coalesce quickest and start gobbling up delegates while the other side is still split (much like McCain managed to emerge last time by being everybody's 2nd choice). If the "RINO" emerges, the GOP has no chance. If a Tea Party candidate wins out, they do. If it's not Palin, the chance is much better. But even a Palin has a better chance than a candidate who alienates the base.

Everybody assumes that who gets the GOP nomination is a big deal (and if it's Palin, it may be). But by election day 2012, there should be a referendum on Obama and his record. If the economy is looking up, they could nominate Abraham Lincoln and Obama would still win. But if it still sucks, anybody, even a Palin, has a chance, and a less-polarizing candidate has a good one.

Let's not forget, a few years ago, Obama was a guy with zero resume, and Hillary was the shoe-in. But if Mickey Mouse had run as a Democrat, he would have been president after Bush's 2nd term.

My best guess at this point would be Daniels or Pawlenty. But a non-politician like Herman Cain could shuffle the deck.

Romney is not a Christian.

Can U Live with Zions in your town ? For example let's use the town Hiawatha, Iowa. Can people in Hiawatha, Iowa live under Zion ? The City Council would override any law with Zion law. The City would confiscate farms, crops, tractors, homes, commercial real estate on non-Jews and give them to Jews for free, with no compensation to the non-Jews. How would policies such as that bode with the residents of Hiawatha, Iowa ?