I wonder if the nominee will divide the Republican party
I would say "yes" AND "no", Pitt.
If the Conservative Right get an "acceptable" candiate...the GOP Establishment may hold their noses...but they will go along.
However...if a "Rhino/Neocon" like Romney (who is ALSO a "Cultist") gets elected...you can for sure look for a division of the Party and even the support of a "Third Party" candidate.
By the way...Zeb brought up an interesting scenario...Romney carefully "navigating" the mind field he is in by taking differing stances at different times.
The only problem with this is that Romney is running as fast as he can from the label 'Flip-Flopper".
Yes, I agree a Presidential primary can be messy. But the good part is it also sharpens a candidate to debate and thinking on his feet. Obama has had an easy go of it with the MSLM. He never gets tough questions. But when he debates his republican opponent he will be getting some serious stuff thrown at him and I doubt he'll be able to handle it. In fact Hillary ate his lunch during their debates. he's just not good on his feet.
As for a third party candidate, yes one could emerge just as Ross Perot did ruining the election for Bush (Sr.).
It does look to be a very entertaining spectacle. I can hardly wait, it's the best sport going.
Wrong! As I've said many times and will maintain. There will be a huge fight if Romney is nominated---BUT when the general election rolls around there isn't any republican who will be voting for Obama. Now if there were a better choice a centrist democrat for example, sure Romney would lose votes to him or her. But as it stands the fight between the republicans will end when they realize that another four years of Obama is NOT acceptable.
He's absolutely NOT my first choice to face off with Obama. And who knows what will happen by the final primary? It's still anyone's race really, especially of those in the top 3 or 4.
HOHLEE LORD JESUS!!! LOL!!! Did Chris jist finally publicly cop to Mormons being polytheists?!?!?! Ya jist hadta wait long enough for it not to look like you were makin me right didn't ya =] Pat won't be happy after all that hoopla back then, Elder Forlife either. Maybe I'll find where I told everybody you would eventually study them enough and come back here and declare them polytheists like I had been beating you over the head with. This kind of predictability is genuinely commendable Christopher. I mean that truly. Warms my heart.
My problems with Romney have nothing to do with his most definitely polytheistic Mormonism which would not prevent me from voting for him. As some will remember I was screaming during the campaign wadda truly bad idea it was to vote for a Marxist, but there he is. The Republicans would have to nominate somebody like Nikita Khrushchev for me to vote for Obama and even that may end in a coin toss.
I don't think Romney has a prayer (pun intended) against Perry.
What about Perry or Bachmann against Obama?
I think it will be Perry vs. Obama. All the other 'official' GOP candidates are trying to break out to lead the pack, and Perry has intentionally kept himself apart and separate from the pack for as long as possible. All this 'I'm thinking about running...I'm considering running' BS is just what he's telling the press.
They say Perry is the luckiest guy in politics and a superb, shrewd campaigner. People will mistakenly think he's another Bush because he's another Republican Governor from Texas. But he's really very different and strikes me as being much more like Reagan than Bush. And if US key indicators continue to slide until election day (God-forbid), we're gonna need a faith-filled cheerleader to feed America confidence until it's on its feet and running again....a la Reagan.
Like the rest of you, I'm really looking forward to this campaign. It's going to be like the Super Bowl, World Series and World Cup all rolled into one with much higher stakes. The battle will be shaped by existing conditions (debt, unemployment, spending), candidate self-destructions, campaign implosions and probably a few surprise outside influences.
Why should religion be kept out of it?
I said religion should be kept out of the FOREFRONT, not necessarily kept out all together. The candidates position on the major issues, executive skills, leadership qualities, experience and heart are far far more important than his/her stated religion.
For example, it could be quite possible to have an excellent non-christian candidate and a terrible christian candidate. (Avoiding any catholic discussions on who is really christian or not - eye roll). We gotta get past the religious labels and get to the meat.
Now that Rick Perry has his bold and admirable Day of Prayer behind him, I think he should focus more on the issues at hand than religion. We know he's a christian (by most definitions). Now he should focus us showing us his experience, his vision and how he would LEAD.
Bachmann will be eaten alive by the MSLM. She will get the Palin treatment in spades! In fact, it's already begun. They're trying to paint her as being stupid (she's a law school scholar). The only way a woman gets fair treatment by those dogs is if she's a democrat. Also, I don't like the fact that she's a Congresswoman. Her constituency is tiny compared to a Governor. And that's why Governors get elected to the Presidency more than from any other previous office.
As for Perry he's a good looking candidate with a good track record. The only thing that the opposing side can do to him is try to say he's another George Bush by virtue of the state he's from. But I don't think that will carry much weight. If the economy continues to deteriorate the voting public won't buy into the Perry/Bush comparison. And he's already made in roads with the right by holding that prayer conference. I bet Romney hate that.
I like Perry, the Governor of any big state always has a good fighting chance.
I'm still learning more about Perry.
Didn't someone post that he had numerous political "liabilities" that would surely come out in the campaign?
One problem with putting "religion" at the forefront of your campaign and/or your POLITICAL life, is that you best hope that you don't have a few embarrassing boy-toys or hoochies in the closet.
The fall simply becomes greater and faster when people smell hypocrisy. Putting religion at the forefront is like putting political "chum" in the water.
And one thing that you can be assured of; ALL candidates are gathering all the little negative tidbits they can against all of their possible opponents; it ain't just the "MSLM".
I don't think Bachmann is being treated as dumb at all...but somewhat hypocritical.
From the farm subsidies she has received over the years (and continues to receive)...to
government Loans she received for school...to the Medicaire payments that her husband's clinic receives.
All legal and fine, for sure...but you can't go around ranting about lazy people being on the government dole or keeping the government "out of our Lives".
It has nothing to do with her being a woman, and everything to do with her having no understanding of history and making moronic statements just like her Alaskan counterpart.
If a Republican woman presented herself more rational and dignified (like Madeline Albright) and less like a bible-thumping half-wit that appeals only to the emotional aspect of a very small group of people, she would be much harder to take on.
I despise Ann Coulter but someone like her is much more difficult to tear into because as evil as she is, she does not present herself in that "Aw shucks" kinda way that 40 farmers in the midwest like but the rest of the country rolls its eyes at.
Typical "Small government Republicanism" at its finest. Speak out of both sides of the mouth while taking all you can from a system you decry and vote against.
I see no problem at all with any of that. She didn't create the programs which then created distortions in pricing and competition. And, at least she's productive instead of sitting at home watching Jerry Springer. I'm sure she, at least, actually pays taxes.
Besides, whoever it is only has to defeat Carter II.
Well, yeah. You ARE charging us for it, after all.