News and Current Events - 2011

[doodler]

Is there a Republican, ANY live Republican, that would be acceptable as a presidential candidate in 2012 and possibly, dare I say it here, President of the USA?

[fritzkep]

To whom?

To the Tea Party, probably a number of them.

To me, Jon Huntsman would make a fairly decent President.

[fofol]

Is there a Republican, ANY live Republican, that would be acceptable as a presidential candidate in 2012 and possibly, dare I say it here, President of the USA?

Unfortunately, any Republican candidate would be a Republican president.  So far, these are the folks who are saying it would be to cruel to take back the tax break the wealthiest Americans got under Bush II, but not so bad if they raise the tax rate for the rest of us back to pre-Bush days.  I think that they may have found a concept too stupid for the American voter.  Has any money given to a corporation or a rich American ever trickled down to the rest of us.  Ooooh, wait, ummm, no - when they get a lot more money, they buy foreign cars and take trips out of the country...duh.

[garyd]

Is there a Republican, ANY live Republican, that would be acceptable as a presidential candidate in 2012 and possibly, dare I say it here, President of the USA?

I agree with Fritz regarding Jon Huntsman.  He is smart, moderate, excellent executive leadership skills, and knows Washington well enough to understand how to get things done.  I don't know why he is not getting "traction" except for the fact that he is too pragmatic (read, "not conservative enough" for the right wing nut cases who control the nomination process) to get nominated. 

Romney would not be the end of the world but he scares me, at a certain level, for some reason.  I suppose because his views on social issues (which I do not think belong in Federal politics to begin with) such as same sex marriage, abortion, do not skew with my own views. 
The rest of the current crew are just too stupid and radical or too smart and radical to be put in any sort of important leadership position. 

That leaves me with President Obama.  He is feckless but his wife is gracious and the kids are cute.
He won't get anything done but, with luck, he won't screw up anything either.
Consequently he will totally piss off the far left and to overcompensate the Dem's will nominate somebody like McGovern in 2016 and the R's will be a shoo-in.
OR, maybe by then the Koch brothers will own just about everything and they will simply buy Washington D.C. and turn it into a subsidiary.
Oh wait, they already have. 

[Tony_]

  Again from Yahoo news, and the AP:

  Hugo Chavez had said he wasn't accusing the U.S. and didn't have any proof.  But, referring to the statistically strange explosion of sudden cancers in leftist government leaders in South America, he had wondered if the U.S. could have developed a way to induce cancer, and how strange that would be.
 The State Department has called these ponderings "horrific and reprehensible" and would not discuss the matter further.

  Gee, couldn't they just have said....no?  I didn't hear a "no" in that response.  More like indignation and, we don't wanna talk about it. Methinks they doth indignate too much  .

[Lyle (Mooska)]

Is there a Republican, ANY live Republican, that would be acceptable as a presidential
candidate in 2012 and possibly, dare I say it here, President of the USA?

As people have queried, it depends what you mean as acceptable and to whom.

If I had to pick someone that wouldn't totally drive me nuts I suppose I'd agree with Huntsman.

I wouldn't mind a Republican who can deal with gay or other social issues in a reasonable manner,
either, like Susan Collins or perhaps Olympia Snowe.

Maybe the witch in Delaware.  At least she'd be entertaining.

Has any money given to a corporation or a rich American ever trickled down to the rest of us.

I want to know what jobs Albert Pujols is going to create with his new $300 million dollar contract.

[oilgun]

 Again from Yahoo news, and the AP:

  Hugo Chavez had said he wasn't accusing the U.S. and didn't have any proof.  But, referring to the statistically strange explosion of sudden cancers in leftist government leaders in South America, he had wondered if the U.S. could have developed a way to induce cancer, and how strange that would be.
 The State Department has called these ponderings "horrific and reprehensible" and would not discuss the matter further.

  Gee, couldn't they just have said....no?  I didn't hear a "no" in that response.  More like indignation and, we don't wanna talk about it. Methinks they doth indignate too much  .

I certainly wouldn't put it pass the U.S., it sure doesn't have a problem with kidnapping, illegal imprisonment , torture and assassination, not to mention committing war crimes. Horrific and reprehensible as these might be.

[kathy]

**Yup.  And the CIA has been doing disgusting and dastardly things since day one.  It's awful.**

kathy     

[killersmom]

Just a thought.............

[brokebacktom]

Is there a Republican, ANY live Republican, that would be acceptable as a presidential candidate in 2012 and possibly, dare I say it here, President of the USA?

Jon Huntsman. He's running but only getting about 5 to 8% of the vote. He is considered to liberal.

[fritzkep]

A sobering thought.

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/Santorum-surges-from-behind-in-Iowa.html?cmpid=124488469&fb_source=message

Hope the mess created is not too bad.

[Marge_Innavera]

Unfortunately, any Republican candidate would be a Republican president.  So far, these are the folks who are saying it would be to cruel to take back the tax break the wealthiest Americans got under Bush II, but not so bad if they raise the tax rate for the rest of us back to pre-Bush days.  

For several months now the GOP has been trumpeting the Alarming News that a high percentage of non-rich Americans "don't pay any taxes."  That would be the people who do pay sales taxes but have been exempt from Federal taxes for good reason -- they live on the financial ledge where a reduction in take-home pay would mean not enough money for necessities. Combine that with the GOP's hostility to "handouts" like food stamp programs, and you have a recipe for a truly desperate portion of the population with literally nothing to lose.

John Huntsman has previously expressed agreement with that, so no way would I support him, "single issue" taboo or no.  And there's always the question of why he would ally himself with the GOP in the first place.  If you're a hit man and you dress and speak nicely and have pretty, well-behaved little children, I still don't want to work for you and I'm not sure I'd want to live next door to you.

[doodler]

So the Republican you COULD support is...?

[fofol]

So the Republican you COULD support is...?

...NOT YET BORN.

[Ellen (tellyouwhat)]

So the Republican you COULD support is...?

Not sure why there needs to be a Republican I could support.

But if for some reason I had to vote for one of them in a straw poll, I would vote for Romney only because I hope and believe he isn't really as extreme as he pretends to be for the tea party.

But I don't respect his posturing.  I believe if he came out and said he believes in his version of health care, here's why -- more people would respect him.

As it is the candidate I respect the most is Ron Paul.  I also would never vote for him under any circumstances, but I respect him because he knows where he stands, he doesn't sway in the wind, he's not even kooky like Gingrich.  I guess I respect him because I know where he stands, too. 

I might vote for him as head of an ethics committee .  But not for president of the United States.

****************

Ultimately, as much as we dislike it, we are somewhat stuck with our two-party platforms, and whoever becomes prez as a Republican is going to continue the policies we saw while W was president.  That would be disastrous.  So at present there is no Republican I could support.