Republican Candidates

[Dylflon]

Is it just me, or is every Republican candidate that has been considered by the media to be "viable" completely terrible?

Not just referring to the past hopefuls (Perry, Bachman, Cain) but also the three guys winning primaries now (Gingrich, Santorum, and Romney).

These candidates are all ridiculous and they make me wonder just how high America's threshold for silly nonsense is.

[Neo]

What would a not-terrible Republican look like?

[Vampyr]

Originally Posted by Neo

What would a not-terrible Republican look like?

McCain wasn't that bad, until he got Palin.

I feel like I'm watching a circus this year.

[Jason1]

With the huge tools the Republicans are running, they have 0 chance of winning. I am looking forward to 4 more years with Obama!

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Dylflon

Is it just me, or is every Republican candidate that has been considered by the media to be "viable" completely terrible?

Not just referring to the past hopefuls (Perry, Bachman, Cain) but also the three guys winning primaries now (Gingrich, Santorum, and Romney).

These candidates are all ridiculous and they make me wonder just how high America's threshold for silly nonsense is.

They're only "viable" because the media needs shifting dynamics to fill its 24/7 programming.

There have only ever been two viable candidates: Romney (was and continues to be) and Perry [before debate debacle(s)].

The Republicans have some good potential candidates in the pipeline, but all of them are not dumb enough to try and challenge a sitting President (very difficult to do in recent political history).

[KillerGremlin]

To echo what Bond said, given how hard it has been in recent history to dethrone a sitting President from his second term....

You have to factor in Obama's great campaign team and his ability to speak publicly and debate publicly. The guy is a wordsmith. He knows how to capture an audience by saying very little in terms of sustenance. Even in this down trodden economy, it already feels like there is more momentum behind Obama than anything the Republicans have.

[Professor S]

One problem is that Romney simply isn't exciting Republican moderates and fiscal conservatives, and that is his support center. Turnout has been very low across the country, allowing social conservatives (who are always motivated because the basis of their opinion is emotional) to have more impact than they would otherwise. I get the feeling Romney simply isn't the candidate "North East Republicans" wanted this year. If Christie, Daniels, or Ryan had run, I think you'd see a far different primary election.

[Typhoid]

*NOT A REAL THOUGHT ALERT*



It sort of seems like everything the Republicans do has so much behind-the-scenes scheming that nobody thinks about or notices.

The recent Republican candidates have been sort of the antithesis of Democrats - but not in a "Well, duh" way - but more of a "It works out way too fittingly" way.

It's like a game of Pokemon.

You have Clinton. Democrat, you could say he was pretty financial would rather reduce the deficit than cut taxes, the businessman of Democrats. So the Republicans run (and win with) George Bush. A good 'ol American Everyman, who can connect with America on taxes being too high, who juuust so happens to be the son of the man Clinton defeated for presidency. So the Democrats run Obama. A black intellectual from Hawaii, based on core-American values, helping educate all children, ending war. Critical hit! Financial Meltdown! The Republicans can now choose between A) Romney. A rich white guy who knows how to get money. That much is obvious in not only everything he says all of the time, but in the simple fact he is a very rich white guy. and B) Rick Santorum. The frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Professor S

One problem is that Romney simply isn't exciting Republican moderates and fiscal conservatives, and that is his support center. Turnout has been very low across the country, allowing social conservatives (who are always motivated because the basis of their opinion is emotional) to have more impact than they would otherwise. I get the feeling Romney simply isn't the candidate "North East Republicans" wanted this year. If Christie, Daniels, or Ryan had run, I think you'd see a far different primary election.

Yes. And in other words, Obama cruises to a second term.

The economy is going to recover just enough to seem as though things are improving, which will destroy Romney's main argument to be elected.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Bond

The economy is going to recover just enough to seem as though things are improving, which will destroy Romney's main argument to be
elected.

Add to that the seeming inability for any of the candidates to intelligently address the economy or unemployment. It's all boiler plates and ad hominem attacks. "Obama's policies are ruining the economy!" How? Why do these policies hurt the recovery? Be specific. WE'RE NOT STUPID.

Example: The unemployment rate has gone down recently, but the total number of employed Americans has steadily decreased over the same time period. Why? Because the survey, yes unemployment is determined by a survey, the rate is based on only counts those that are currently looking for work. The fact is many have simply given up. To me, this is a greater indictment of our current economy and economy policies than the unemployment rate, but so far none of the candidates have been able to effectively express this SIMPLE fact.

That, and Romney also seems unable to make a case for himself as a candidate beyond boiler plates. Yes, he is Mr. Fixit, but I still don't understand what his vision for America looks like.