Republican Primaries

Post Reply New Topic

Trump, Huckabee, and Daniels decline to run, shrinking the playing field. Which is good as, the less candidates there are, the more time can be spent exploring them. Best to explore 8 candidates fully rather than 15 at surface value

I wouldn't support any of the people you listed, but let's go through the list and examine their chances:

Newt Gingrich
0 chance. He already was deeply unpopular, but after his recent skirmish with Paul Ryan and subsequent humiliation Gingrich's political career is over. He will probably announce his exit from the race in the next few months.

Sarah Palin
Again, no chance. She probably wouldn't even be able to win her home state. A very large portion of Republican do not believe Palin is qualified to be President, and she will get very few Independent votes and absolutely no Democratic votes. And she has been too thoroughly discredited by this point to have much chance even in the GOP primaries. Also, she is better off financially just sticking around Fox news, giving speeches, etc. Elected office would mean she had actual responsibilities, and she doesn't seem to want that.

Herman Cain
No one knows who this guy is. He may experience a brief surge in popularity, but as people get to know his stances better that will crash hard. The "fair" tax, the gold standard, extreme "business-friendly" policies, an extreme stance on abortion, and his support for the bank bailouts will all come back to haunt him. Further, Cain has never held elected office, so he will be attacked for inexperience.

Mitt Romney
The most credible candidate at this point. He is seen as a moderate and will be the choice of the sane wing of the Republican Party. Whether that will really be enough to win the nomination is an open question. He will not win the general election, because he is too liberal to really garner the support of the Republican base. If Romney is nominated, there is a strong chance that the evangelical vote and Tea Party vote will defect to a third party or independent candidate, splitting the vote and guaranteeing Obama's re-election.

Tim Pawlenty
Irrelevant. A poll came out suggesting that Pawlenty would probably lose his home state in a race against Obama- now that's just sad.

Michelle Bachman
She's insane and stupid, but she might capture the Tea Party vote, since Palin is unlikely to run. I do not think the Tea Party vote alone will be enough to win the nomination, and I know for certain that it is not enough to win the general election.

Rick Santorum
The man was annihilated as an incumbent in the race for his own Senate seat. Also, feel free to Google his name and click the first result.

Ron Paul
Not gonna happen. The GOP establishment won't support him, and neither will the general public.

I picked Bachmann, because I love a good comedy.

+1

The upcoming primary is just going to be a big joke, anyway.

I support Ron Paul, because even though he's not going to win. His views out of all the candidates out there is the closest to my views. I'm not a supporter of the modern republican party though. The modern republican party has been taken hostage by the Evangelical religious right. They support smaller government when it comes to services, but when it comes to moral issues they want the government to control them.

Michelle Bachman is closest to my views, but her open homophobia is a little much.

I hope Mitt Romney get's the nomination, because he's the only one who has the slightest chance of defeating Obama. But most likely scenario is that all the other Tea Partier's won't vote for him because he's "not right wing enough".

I don't know yet. I wish Ted Nugent would run.

Michelle Bachmann or Ron Paul.

No, or at least modern as far as 3 years ago it was taken over by RINOs.

Besides abortion and marriage, what moral issues do you see the republicans trying to control?

What is taught in the elementary schools. The religious right has been trying to insert Intelligent Design (so-called) into the biology-science curriculum.

The religious coo coo birds want to destroy and discredit science.

ruveyn

They want to establish a Right to Discriminate, on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.
Access to health care is a moral issue.
The plight of the poor is a moral issue.
The labor rights is a moral issue.
Animal rights is a moral issue.
Reproductive education is a moral issue.
Stewardship of the environment is a moral issue.
Just foreign policy is a moral issue.
Exploitation of developing countries is a moral issue.
I mean, the list goes on and on. Not that the Democrats are a whole lot better on all these... But, most of them, they are.

With regards to public policy, that has been, and should always be a state issue.

If those states would like to include that alongside Darwinian theory, that is fine.

If it destroys weak science, that is also fine. Darwinian theory does not lend anything to physics and chemistry, and its views on micro-evolution can still be preserved in full. So the sciences are still preserved. It's mostly in the realm of philosophy anyways, so I don't think biology has to shoulder so much of that content anyways... sadly, though philosophy is required for a well-rounded education, it is not taught in public schools.

On a national level, which is what we're talking about, other then Abortion and Marriage, what social/moral issues do the Republicans seek to control?

I said "control" as in Controlling what you do.

Are you evading this because it is an uncomfortable issue to confront that... the farther right you go, the less government control you have, and the more anarchy prevails?

Most - if not all - those things you listed require a more activist and controlling government. So I'll ask again... other then Abortion and Marriage, what do you see them trying to control? (On a national level).

By the way...

It is fine if you guys think that we should have a more activist controlling government to make up for the stupid populace it rules over...

Im just curious because I would like a long list of the controlling public policies of the right. I know they exist, but looking through Cal Berkeley's list of social issues, I am not finding too many.


The Death Penalty is a huge moral issue, and the Right is its most visible supporter. It is state-sponsored killing.

Child welfare and child healthcare is perhaps another.

Drugs seems to bring together both sides of the isle.

I am looking for issues that are mostly pushed exclusively by the right that are "Controlling"

The government is a necessary counterbalance to corporate power. The scales are already tipped in favor of commercial interests over the interests of society. The government needs to step in to prevent corporations, religious institutions, and other gangs of thugs from continuing to run roughshod over this country and her citizens.