Wednesday, February 09, 2011

Poorly phrased question:


This should read "Which GOP candidate would the Democrats who read CNN.com like to see nominated?"
.

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

Toss in a 5th choice:

"The rotted corpse of RR"

That'd skew some percentiles, and freak some CNN drones right the fuck out in the process. Fun!

AT

Anonymous said...

I shoulda credited Tam with that; she mentioned that choice back in early '08...any among us who think we'd be worse off right now with 100-y.o. skeletal remains in the big chair than with the apparition that resides there now?

AT

Wayne said...

THUNE!!!

dave said...

Zombie Reagan 2012! Just think of the fun the Secret Service would have reading the gun boards.

BobG said...

None of the above.

sobriant74 said...

+1 on none of the above. How about we nominate someone who can actually win instead of a Dukakis. I would vote for Bobby Jindal in a heart beat.

Montie said...

Point well taken. Most conservatives/Republicans avoid CNN and MSNBC except in doses of 5 minutes or less and then only for the comic relief. Any longer on the site and you start to have to think about the fact that they take it seriously.

Joe R. said...

I'm in the People's Republic where Romney used to hold court and I don't see why he is so popular with the Right for. Jay Serverin practically worships at the guys feet even after the Romneycare crap that was passed here! I don't care that he has business experience, or about his religion of choice. I do care that he made choices that casused me problems that he had no clue on what he were passing just so he could make points with some of the people that hate him here in MA...

Joe R.

Rabbit said...

Zombie Reagan is a better choice than any on that list for so many reasons I can't begin to list them.

I'd go for Eric Cantor before CNN's slam list.

Of course, my dream ticket would be John Bolton and Attila the Hun.

Anonymous said...

I have a 'Dig up Goldwater' cartoon that say's pretty much the same thing from the '08 election.

Ronnie would be a good choice too considering all the turnip alternatives.

Gmac

theirritablearchitect said...

Looks like I'll be staying home and not participating.

And I don't care.

perlhaqr said...

Gary Johnson!

Mattexian said...

Chuck Norris for President... of TEXAS!!! :D

Anonymous said...

Kirk & Spock, the characters - not the actors, for me!

But, if they have to be real:
Basil II Βουλγαροκτόνος (Boulgaroktonos) & Constantine XI Palaiologos (Κωνσταντίνος ΙΑ' Παλαιολόγος)

Now, these were MEN. ROMANS. WARRIORS.
Ulises from CA

Anonymous said...

Ron Paul or GTFO

Joe in PNG said...

Lord Havelock Veternari in '12.

Ed Foster said...

I don't know who I'd vote for. Maybe Tim Pawlenty. We have to strike a balance between what we want and what's marketable.

"Plasic George" Romney is ludicrous, as slick and hollow as his hair. We would just be trading one telepromter reading dummy for another, and have no more idea then than now who was doing the programming.

I admit to having been pleasantly suprised by Huckabee's commentary show on FoxNews. The man is funny and deep, but still not winnable. Being a minister from the south is too much baggage.

Rand Paul strikes me as being everything that's good in his father, without the anti-semitic flake aspect, the disconnect from reality over foriegn policy, and the hypocracy of dumping on the Federal government's excessive largess while bragging about all the pork he brought home to his district.

But he does have one huge handicap, one tarbrush of Damocles hanging over his head, which is simply that he's Ron Paul's son. Can he grow past it? I don't know, but I will stay tuned and hope for the best.

Palin and Gingrich, two very bright and only marginally flawed people I respect very much, are also too damaged by the media to be functional candidates.

We need somebody good and somebody marketable, which is why I was interested in Pawlenty. Anybody know something about him that I don't? Feet of clay, pregnant mistesses, anything?

This election will be about economics, simple as that. If somebody promises the elimination of any Federal programs that duplicate agencies at the state or local level, and promises any monies saved will be returned to the taxpayers in the form of lower income tax, it's a wrap.

Pawlenty coming into the Presidency clean, from the outside, with a history of cutting taxes and standing up to the unions isn't a bad thing, and I think the foriegn affairs aspect is running downhill. Most of the folks I know, of any political persuasion, are just a bit numb and accepting of whatever happens "over there".

Every program the media attacked Bush over has been maintain by the Obama people, usually with major increases in funding, and nobody cares.

I'm looking and listening to my kids and their friends to see what's likely and what's not. They're a well educated bunch of people, just now moving into their best earning years, and they'll vote Republican if someone interests them, or stay home and say, rightly, "They're all the same, so screw them" if we put up another Dole.

Cute factoid. If everyone who voted for Bush in 2004 had voted for McCain four years later, he would have won by something close to five million votes. Like Newt Gingrich, I thought half a loaf was better than none, and a center-lefty like McCain was better than the alternative.

I used to think the proto-teaparty types who played refusnik and stayed home to force the Democrats to reveal themselves were wrong. Now I realize that both Newt and I were the boobs, and take my hat off to them.

Although we did get some truely nasty people on the Supreme Court with Barry's climb to the throne.

Still, Ginsberg's ego will keep her there until she dies, hopefully after a Republican landslide in the next election.

DeMint? I don't know enough about him to say yet. Superficially though, the thought does please.

There is a trade-off between winability and substance. What the ratio is I simply don't know. I'm not declaring my beliefs as much as I'm asking for more information to allow me to firm them up rationally. Any commentary welcome.

Heath J said...

3rd party, if those are my options..

Bubblehead Les. said...

I'll vote for Romney when Tam votes to keep Lugar in for another go-round.

rickn8or said...

Why not Zombie Regan? After all we already have Zombie Lautenberg...

Kristopher said...

Ed Foster: Fuck media damage.

The media will savage any real conservative, so screw what they think or have done.

John said...

Reagan/Coolidge 2012!

Anonymous said...

"Palin and Gingrich, two very bright and only marginally flawed people I respect very much, are also too damaged...to be functional candidates."

Fixed it for ya, Ed...I agree with your conclusion about Sarah and Newt, but also with Kristopher's fuck the media comment. He's right, the positions of the limp, impotent dicks formerly known as Big Media are so predictable as to be comical and irrelevant.

Self-inflicted damage, otoh...

AT

DirtCrashr said...

It's like the Left doesn't even try to hide their thumb on the butcher's scale anymore. Or anybody else's dismembered thumb they use to throw the weight.
Michelle Bachmann gets a heapin' helpin' of hate worthy of Palin too - it's almost like they are afraid to say her name or invoke her presence.

theirritablearchitect said...

Bachmann.

Perfect candidate for the give-the-left-the-raised-middle-finger for '12.

I'm in.

TheOtherLarry said...

Chris Christie! in a heartbeat!

I just don't understand why we let the liberal media pick our conservative candidates.

Anonymous said...

Thompson in 12 :)

Tam said...

I still want to see Duncan and Fred on a ticket so I can put a sticker on my car that reads "Hunter/Thompson: Because this is bat country."

Anonymous said...

Didn't Romney vote for or sign an AWB in Massachusetts? If so, as far as I'm concerned, he's toast, 'cause there's no do-overs on the 2nd Amendment.

davidc said...

You don't want Jindal, this is from someone who lives in La and voted for him twice. a lot of flash but short on ethics.

Steve said...

Best I can tell, Romney thinks he should be President because he's a decent businessman and very pretty.

Huckabee's actually conservative, but had to govern in a liberal state, so has a record of compromise. He's great at thinking on his feet and articulating the conservative platform, but has to spend most of his time playing defense.

Palin - similar to Huckabee, but questionable judgment... resigning as governor, playing "Look at me!" on TV way too much.

Gingrich? Great at articulating ideas, but shot himself in the foot bucking the Tea Party.

We need more choices. Maybe one of the rising stars in the Tea Party, but we can't let the liberal media pick him/her.

And seriously, not Ron Paul. Even the conservatives spend too much saying, "Dude... what?"

Geodkyt said...

Anything can change, but I don't think Palin can rehabilitated enough in two more years to win. (Although, Reagan came back after fighting Ford for the nomination. . . two more years of the Obamessiah might set her up for a win.)

At this point, I'd almost go for whoever would appoint Fred Thompson to AG, John Bolton to SecState, etc.

Other possibles to discuss -- Palin for Interior? Darth Cheney for DCI (if he'd take it -- might as well get some Dark Sith lovin' while we're at it)? Gottlieb for SCOTUS?

It's a team sport.

Anonymous said...

This thread is by now, well, threadbare as it were...but a new contender has arisen that will most certainly be the darling of the media and their handlers to run against The One: The Donald for potus!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/04/donald-trump-for-presiden_n_749589.html

AT