Ron Paul Cannot Win, Here Is Why.......

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

Well no doubt electability is pretty important considering the direction this country is heading. Romney hasn't denounced his health care plan and he's been fairly timid in his criticisms of Obama. But pundits keep regurgitating the Buckley Rule which is nominate the most conservative candidate that is deemed by Establishment Republicans to be electable. Which would've disqualified Reagan in 1980 and obviously Democrats don't have a similar rule.

I don't see the "Tea Party types" having as much influence as you say. This isn't a mid term election where hardly anyone shows up (and unions usually have their way.) Tea Party leaders like Bachman and Senator DeMint were kicked to the curb for leadership positions, and Bachman basically came in last in Iowa, beating only Mr. "Iowa picks corn, New Hampshire picks presidents."

Romney has run a crap campaign, which is why he can't get above about 25 per cent of the vote, save maybe in ultra liberal New Hampshire. But since he has so many opponents at this stage, he's able to keep a razor thin lead. People like the fact that he's beating Obama in some polls, but that doesn't take into account Obama's billion dollar attack campaign (though TBF he doesn't have a choice, his record is abysmal.)

I think you over estimate the other candidates to be honest. The Republicans have not had the break out candidate that everyone in their party expected and I think Romney will take an even bigger lead in the coming weeks.

Gingrich wasn't going to last long because once the debates got personal, he was going to get the worst of it because he has more skeletons in his closet than a cemetery.

Huntsman is an unknown and has zero charisma.

Bachman is too looney even for looney conservatives. Plus she might be the creepiest woman on the face of the earth.

Paul has always been looked upon as "fringe" by conservatives even though when you look at most of his policies (especially foreign and economical) he is more of a true Republican than anyone up there. Conservative news media has done a great job in making his opinions look like he's crazy.

Santorum has gained ground simply because he is SO conservative but he still was a relative unknown until a few weeks ago. He won't get the vote of the independent because he's so radical on gay marriage, the war, abortion and things like that imo.

Romney has taken advantage of this and his lead will grow. He seems like the most viable candidate even though I think Obama wipes the floor with him head to head in a debate. He does have a lot of money though to campaign.

[Grand Champ]

This was in 2002,

Crazy predictions. Like a prophet in this one

[Jim Jeffries]

I think you make some interesting points, as for Romney, he has the corporate backing (including of the media establishment) and that's why he'll be the nominee.

Corporate backing is also likely to carry Obama to reelection (that and the lack of viable alternatives--where did they find this collection of clowns is all I want to know).

Yeah I have no idea out of a country of 300+ million people how we end up with such a collection of misfits as candidates. Hell they've even been struggling to get 500 lb newbie Chris Christie and Jeb fricken Bush to join the field, to make it "better."

I still like Paul Ryan and Bobby Jindal, would take Indiana gov Mitch Daniels in a pinch and am holding out till 2016 for Marco Rubio.

Questionable whether Romney has as much corporate backing as Obama and even with a couple hundred mill of his own money, he doesn't have a chance. Because he's not as charismatic and doesn't present a clear enough alternative.

[Jim Jeffries]

I think you over estimate the other candidates to be honest. The Republicans have not had the break out candidate that everyone in their party expected and I think Romney will take an even bigger lead in the coming weeks.

Nothing to do with the other candidates. The anti-Romney sentiment is so strong he would lose to Rick Perry at this point if everyone else dropped out.

Gingrich wasn't going to last long because once the debates got personal, he was going to get the worst of it because he has more skeletons in his closet than a cemetery.

Newt has played it pretty smart. Was able to keep candidates from attacking each other for quite some time (because he had the most dirt under his fingernails.) Between that and some pretty decent debate performances he rocketed into the lead. But with a couple week break from debates and some pretty brutal attack ads from Paul and Romney, that lead was soon eviscerated.

Huntsman is an unknown and has zero charisma.

Agreed. The only people that seem to like him are ones that would vote for Obama heads up.

Paul has always been looked upon as "fringe" by conservatives even though when you look at most of his policies (especially foreign and economical) he is more of a true Republican than anyone up there. Conservative news media has done a great job in making his opinions look like he's crazy.

It doesn't help that Ronald Reagan inspired his to go third party.

Santorum has gained ground simply because he is SO conservative but he still was a relative unknown until a few weeks ago. He won't get the vote of the independent because he's so radical on gay marriage, the war, abortion and things like that imo.

Santorum is far too socially conservative for my liking and not fiscally cons enough. I liked his last speech in Iowa though.

Romney has taken advantage of this and his lead will grow. He seems like the most viable candidate even though I think Obama wipes the floor with him head to head in a debate. He does have a lot of money though to campaign.

Well Obviously Mitt wins New Hamphsire, but I'll wait and see how he does in more conservative states (Iowa voted for Obama FFS.) And since Barry didn't even "wipe the floor" with a half senile McCain, I doubt he'll do so with anyone, except maybe Perry.

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

Can't argue your assessment Jeffries but you have to admit, the Republicans haven't produced that candidate they expected at this point.

About a year ago I thought Obama had no chance, now I think he has a very good chance in getting his second term.

[Jim Jeffries]

Can't argue your assessment Jeffries but you have to admit, the Republicans haven't produced that candidate they expected at this point.

About a year ago I thought Obama had no chance, now I think he has a very good chance in getting his second term.

I agree, Obama's popularity has been steadily rising since it bottomed out at the low 40's. Unemployment has gone down a couple months in a row. And sometimes the evil you know is better than the evil you don't know. I certainly wouldn't bet on him at this stage and it doesn't look like anyone else is going to get into the race. Plus he might just run with Hillary as his VP if things are looking close.

Worries me though. If Obama is making "recess" appointments, when the Senate is not actually in recess, during an election year, what the hell is he going to do in his next term, when he's not concerned about reelection?

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

I agree, Obama's popularity has been steadily rising since it bottomed out at the low 40's. Unemployment has gone down a couple months in a row. And sometimes the evil you know is better than the evil you don't know. I certainly wouldn't bet on him at this stage and it doesn't look like anyone else is going to get into the race. Plus he might just run with Hillary as his VP if things are looking close.

Worries me though. If Obama is making "recess" appointments, when the Senate is not actually in recess, during an election year, what the hell is he going to do in his next term, when he's not concerned about reelection?

Good question but if he does get re-elected I think the second term will be much more telling of his legacy than the first.

Even though it's something conservatives never want to talk about he was given a **** sandwich and had to take a huge bite.

[Jim Jeffries]

Good question but if he does get re-elected I think the second term will be much more telling of his legacy than the first.

Without a second term, he doesn't have much of a legacy.

Even though it's something conservatives never want to talk about he was given a **** sandwich and had to take a huge bite.

Absolutely. And for someone to beat him they need to emphatically distinguish themselves from Obama and Bush (who almost doubled the size of government and did double the national debt.)

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

Without a second term, he doesn't have much of a legacy.



Absolutely. And for someone to beat him they need to decidedly distinguish themselves from Obama and Bush (who almost doubled the size of government and did double the national debt.)

Well Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, George Bush Sr. all were 1 term presidents and they left a pretty lasting impression, not a good one necessarily but non the less a lasting one.

I think if Obama doesn't get re-elected, his legacy will be crushed by the conservative media. I mean listening to the debate the other night, all the candidates basically blamed Obama for the war, recession and I believe the rotation of the earth...lol

Obama will have a legacy simply because he is the first black president, so for that reason alone I want the man to do well. I hope you understand that statement as nothing to do with being pro black or anti white just want the pioneer in the game to show leave something positive.

[Jim Jeffries]

Well Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, George Bush Sr. all were 1 term presidents and they left a pretty lasting impression, not a good one necessarily but non the less a lasting one.

I think if Obama doesn't get re-elected, his legacy will be crushed by the conservative media. I mean listening to the debate the other night, all the candidates basically blamed Obama for the war, recession and I believe the rotation of the earth...lol

Obama will have a legacy simply because he is the first black president, so for that reason alone I want the man to do well. I hope you understand that statement as nothing to do with being pro black or anti white just want the pioneer in the game to show leave something positive.

Well Obama has certainly had a positive effect showing minorities in this country that anything is possible, even the presidency. Which until we learn to look past race will certainly distinguish him from other failed presidents, like his predecessor. I always want my president to do well, because I want my country to do well. There just isn't anything that he's done in his first term to inspire confidence in another. He's so narcissistic that he honestly believes that he hasn't made a single mistake and will continue trying to make us more like a failing European model, regardless of the consequences.