Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
I think most of us realize that our perfect presidential candidate is not on the playing field right now (those of you who think Palin is the perfect candidate need a serious reality check). However, is the field really that bad?
Rudy, Mitt, Daniels and Pawlenty are as good as any candidate the Republicans have nominated since Reagan. Are you going to tell me that McCain, Bush I or II or Dole was any better than those four?
Are any of them ideal? Heck no! But which Republican candidate of the past 20 years has made you swoon? This is politics, people, the art of the possible not the ideal. (and no, I'm not Mike Murphy in disguise). Let's face it, you've got to be a little nuts to run for president in this day and age, given all that entails. Our 24 hr cable coverage, celebrity soaked Youtube society has seriously changed the game in the past 10 years. Our population demographics are much different than the 1980s.
Even Reagan wouldn't be Reagan today (Could Christie be an east coast Reagan? Maybe, but he needs some more seasoning. I think 2012 is too early for him.)
Let's stop the whining and get the candidates to seriously flesh out their platforms and skills and may the best man (or woman) win.
- Comment (65)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
The problem, as I see it, is that the least qualified candidate - and the one mostly likely to lose to Obama - has sucked all the oxygen out of the discussion.
So long as Sarah Palin continues to revel in the spotlight, it's hard to think about the other candidates in any context other than whether they can stop her.
Sep '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
Good points, but I think the difference is that we are at a turning point.
We certainly can't afford to lose, but we also can't afford to have the wrong Republican President. A lot of us were blindsided by the McCain nomination and are vowing to keep that type of thing from happening again.
We have to reverse the size and power of government, and we must also win the battle of ideas. Now is the time to have the ideological debate between free market (not crony) capitalism and socialism, because we stand on the tipping point and ordinary Americans for the first time, sort of get it. The Democrats have exposed their true agenda these last several years. And the time is ripe.
So we need a coherent, articulate advocate for conservatism. This is why everyone is pining for Ronald Reagan.
Certain candidates can't win, others might win but won't fight the creeping socialism, and none that I can see can even articulate conservatism very well. I'm not whining, I'm just being very careful because it is important.
Aug '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
Franco,
Unfortunately Republicans have been assenting to creeping socialism for a long time. Reagan slowed it a bit but we still went down that path even during his term. Now that Obama has given us flat out galloping, pedal-to-the-metal socialism the country is spooked somewhat.
However, I still don't believe the majority of voters in this country are educated enough in constitutional government to stop socialism - let alone reverse it. We've become a wimpy, feel good society that can't even bear to properly prosecute a war if it means civilians might be killed. Suffering is when your iPod breaks and you have to go 48 hours without listening to your favorite tunes. Sacrifice means downscaling your Direct TV package to eliminate HBO and Showtime because your kid's hockey league raised their fees.
Call me cynical but I'm afraid the best we can hope for is to go back to the creeping socialism of the past 80 years...
Sep '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
If Rudy or Mitt were half as good of candidates as you claim, wouldn't one of them have coasted past the incredibly old, incredibly dull, incredibly non-conservative McCain in a partisan primary campaign?
Aug '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
Mark Belling Fan
If Rudy or Mitt were half as good of candidates as you claim, wouldn't one of them have coasted past the incredibly old, incredibly dull, incredibly non-conservative McCain in a partisan primary campaign? · Jan 7 at 2:03pm
Two words my friend - evangelicals and Huckabee!
Jul '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
Frozen Chosen
Mark Belling Fan
If Rudy or Mitt were half as good of candidates as you claim, wouldn't one of them have coasted past the incredibly old, incredibly dull, incredibly non-conservative McCain in a partisan primary campaign? · Jan 7 at 2:03pm
Two words my friend - evangelicals and Huckabee! · Jan 7 at 2:09pm
And open primaries.
Sep '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
Right, and since evangelicals are a significant voting bloc for the R's, Huckabee might actually win this time.
Sep '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
Frozen Chosen: Franco,
Unfortunately Republicans have been assenting to creeping socialism for a long time. Reagan slowed it a bit but we still went down that path even during his term. Now that Obama has given us flat out galloping, pedal-to-the-metal socialism the country is spooked somewhat.
Call me cynical but I'm afraid the best we can hope for is to go back to the creeping socialism of the past 80 years... · Jan 7 at 1:59pm
You may be right. But once socialism reaches a certain mass it envelops everything. Government can never be satisfied and we are seeing it metastasize. Freedom is almost completely gone. Really. There are too many laws, too many regulations and too many government busybodies taxing us, fining us, penalizing us for breaking their myriad of (often) ridiculous rules.
I hate to say it, but at this rate I start to question whether it is worth defending as such. Freedoms, and a lot of them, need to be restored and government needs to be scaled back or we are doomed. What makes America great is freedom, once that is gone America is just... where I live.
May '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
The problem with those 2008's selection of primary candidates was that each represented a different priority, so the larger conservative wing of the party was divided and the moderate candidate won.
If none of our candidates this time around are stellar, that's acceptable. But hopefully we won't see a repeat of the situation where the winning candidate leaves a bad taste in the mouths of half the party and kills enthusiasm in the main election.
Whoever wins, it must be someone with the spine and boldness to address all the entitlement reforms that other presidents have dodged. If we go back to creeping socialism/fascism, then this government won't survive another half-century.
For now, my support's tentatively behind Bolton.
May '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
Frozen Chosen
Mark Belling Fan If Rudy or Mitt were half as good of candidates as you claim, wouldn't one of them have coasted past the incredibly old, incredibly dull, incredibly non-conservative McCain in a partisan primary campaign? · Jan 7 at 2:03pm
Two words my friend - evangelicals and Huckabee! · Jan 7 at 2:09pm
C'mon now! I'm an evangelical and have never been enamored of Huckabee. Fred Thompson was the one to make me swoon. A lot of evangelicals I know weren't too hot on Huckabee, either. In fact, on a private social network for evangelicals (former missionary kids) we more or less told a fellow evangelical trying to proselytize us on the wondrousness of Huckabee to take it elsewhere.
Oh please, oh please, oh please can we have Bolton?
Oct '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
How about, "those of you who think (fill in the blank) is the perfect candidate need a serious reality check?" Why single out Palin? I'm no fan of her candidacy (yet...) but it seems gratuitous and unnecessary to slam her and her alone.
Aug '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
Bolton would be great for VP or maybe Sec State but I'm afraid in terms of economic expertise (and domestic issues in general) he's another McCain...
Jul '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
You miss my point. The current dynamic, driven by Palin, Social cons and the MSM, is that the nomination is hers to lose. That means the other candidates are portrayed as moderates, fiscal cons or stalking horses, at Palin's mercy.
It means it becomes the usual media horse-race frenzy, rather than a thoughtful examination of what other candidates bring to the table.
In short, it's now about "Can Mike Pence hold his own against Palin with evangelicals?" rather than, "What does Mike Pence (just as an example) stand for? What makes us think he would be a great President?"
Capice?
Dec '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
I don't know why everybody dumps on McCain. Presumably because he lost. But let us not forget that he came close, and would have been a lot better than Obama. I supported him against Bush in 2000 and thought he was right on the issues. I suppose I'd go for Romney or Bolton because I see them supporting a lot of the same foreign policy positions as McCain did. I'd like to see another cantankerous old buzzard from Arizona along the lines of McCain and AuH20.
Aug '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
FeliciaB
C'mon now! I'm an evangelical and have never been enamored of Huckabee. Fred Thompson was the one to make me swoon. A lot of evangelicals I know weren't too hot on Huckabee, either. In fact, on a private social network for evangelicals (former missionary kids) we more or less told a fellow evangelical trying to proselytize us on the wondrousness of Huckabee to take it elsewhere.
Let me clarify; while it's true that many or perhaps even most evangelicals supported candidates other than Huckabee I believe most of his support did come from evangelicals, some of whom were against Romney because of his religion.
Since evangelicals make up a significant portion of the Republican primary voting block, those Huckabee/Anyone-but-a-Mormon evangelicals probably bled enough votes away from Romney to keep him from getting the nomination.
Just a theory of course...
Aug '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
I only singled out Palin because I feel that some of her supporters seem to be wearing rose colored glasses and fail to admit her deficiencies while those of us who support other candidates are more open about those candidates flaws.
I think Sarah Palin is great, btw. I love her toughness and life story. I just don't think she would make a particulary good president.
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
I suspect that Sarah Palin's star is fading. She has remarkable political instincts, and she went for the jugular while the rest of the herd remained silent. But she has chosen celebrity rather than gravitas.
The regulars prefer Mitt Romney. In the Republican Party, the nominee is usually the fellow whose turn it is, and if it is anyone's turn it is Mitt's. But let's face it: he is a man of no principles. If you want a guy friendly to abortion, he's your man, but he can change his spots in a trice. And he is the proud father of Romneycare, which was a stalking horse for Obamacare. If he were the nominee, I would wonder -- as I wondered with McCain -- which is better: to win or to lose.
Huckabee is a big-government conservative apt to be lead by compassion into folly. He released a murderer from prison who murdered again. Giuliani is past it. He did not have the energy in 2008 to mount a proper campaign.
We need to look elsewhere -- at men like Mitch Daniels, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, Mike Pence, Tim Pawlenty, John Thune, and Marco Rubio.
Sep '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
I watched the 2008 primary about a closely as anyone could. Huckabee was a stalking horse to split conservatives away from Romney, and he was clearly complicit with McCain.
Everyone wanted McCain, the media, the moderates, the so-called independents, and he was nominated. Each of these groups subsequently abandoned him.
Concurrently, McCain realizes he needs conservative votes as his former promoters wane in enthusiasm, he reaches to pick pretty Sarah Palin.
Now he has energized the only people who will actually go out and vote for him, but he has just given the left the excuse they were looking for to go back on years of their approving support of McCain being moderate and reasonable.
He went on to botch the campaign, do exactly the wrong things at the wrong times.
What I saw of Huckabee in the primary was revolting. Huckabee is out for me.
Jun '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
Right now I'm backing Gary Johnson, former governor of New Mexico. He used his veto pen like a rapier while in office, thwarted the Democratic state legislature at every turn, and left the state with a large budget surplus. Maybe America isn't ready for a libertarian president, but we'll know early on if this is the case. He's down to earth and plain-spoken like Palin without the celebrity baggage. He's competent like Mitt when it comes to business. And he's got eight years of proven executive experience. I'm starting to take his candidacy seriously given the alternatives.
Jun '10
Re: Are We Being Too Hard on the Republican Presidential Field?
Kenneth: The problem, as I see it, is that the least qualified candidate - and the one mostly likely to lose to Obama - has sucked all the oxygen out of the discussion.
So long as Sarah Palin continues to revel in the spotlight, it's hard to think about the other candidates in any context other than whether they can stop her. · Jan 7 at 1:18pm
Why does she suck the celebrity oxygen out of the room? Thank the Left for that, and to some extent people like you. Stop shooting so many gratuitous arrows at her, and offending America's blue-collar conservatives in the process. Then, the working-class Christian conservatives that love her might stop circling the wagons around her, stop giving her more adulation than she deserves. You've helped create the problem. The great attraction to Sarah is that the Left (and other self-proclaimed sophisticates) hate her guts. For a lot of people in America, that's just proof that she's on the right track. If you want Palin to be the nominee, belittling her is a great way to achieve it. If you want her to go away, just ignore her.