GOP Primaries/Candidates thread

[NorthSideSox72]

Rasmussen with a new national poll out. Again, national polls are really only interesting for big changes, trends, movements... but that's where this one seems significant...

 

Giuliani 24%

Romney 14%

Thompson 14%

Huckabee 12%

McCain 10%

Paul 5%

 

Here is what is really interesting in this one, looking at the trends. For one thing, Giuliani's 24% ties for the lowest he has shown in a national poll in months. Huckabee's 12% ties for the highest he has ever shown. McCain's 10% is the lowest he has shown in months (aside from a Zogby poll, which we'll ignore because its Zogby). And Thompson's 14% and his next-most-recent 12% in a Fox poll are indicating a downturn for him even on the national stage.

 

[Balta1701]

For some more fun, CNN has a New Hampshire poll out.

 

Giuliani 16 (24)

Romney 33 (25)

McCain 18 (18)

Thompson 4 (13)

Huckabee 5

Paul 8 (4)

 

Trend lines in brackets. None given for Huck.

 

Thompson and Rudy are literally in free fall.

[Texsox]

Looking at the list, McCain is the only one with national campaigning experience. I still see him as the consensus.

[NorthSideSox72]

For some more fun, CNN has a New Hampshire poll out.

 

Giuliani 16 (24)

Romney 33 (25)

McCain 18 (18)

Thompson 4 (13)

Huckabee 5

Paul 8 (4)

 

Trend lines in brackets. None given for Huck.

 

Thompson and Rudy are literally in free fall.

Look 2 posts up from yours. You seem to keep posting stuff that I already posted lately. You have me on ignore, don't you?

[southsider2k5]

Too bad for Thompson it is the 21st century now. Like Richardson on the left, he is a guy that is getting killed by the media era, but is probably the best candidate out there on the right, but their message and their styles just don't play well in this media and money age. Its too bad really.

[Rex Kickass]

Fred Thompson is more of an empty suit than anyone else out there right now IMO. Media age or not, I think he's pretty disconnected from a lot.

 

It's not that he acts like its still 1980, I sometimes think he thinks its still 1980.

[YASNY]

Fred Thompson is more of an empty suit than anyone else out there right now IMO. Media age or not, I think he's pretty disconnected from a lot.

 

It's not that he acts like its still 1980, I sometimes think he thinks its still 1980.

 

We could use some 1960 right now. But that just gets you a bullet in head.

[southsider2k5]

Fred Thompson is more of an empty suit than anyone else out there right now IMO. Media age or not, I think he's pretty disconnected from a lot.

 

It's not that he acts like its still 1980, I sometimes think he thinks its still 1980.

 

I'm not sure what the labels you are using exactly mean, but when I have sat down and listen to his specifics on his policies, he is one of very few candidates who is saying things that I can actually agree with. He isn't just parroting party and money positions. He has been willing to take unpopular stances, and take positions that are against his own personal beliefs. I haven't seen that from any other candidate so far. If that is an "empty suit" and "1980", well then I guess I love the 80's. Give me that anyday over the same old recycled crap leading both parties thus far.

[EvilMonkey]

I'm not sure what the labels you are using exactly mean, but when I have sat down and listen to his specifics on his policies, he is one of very few candidates who is saying things that I can actually agree with. He isn't just parroting party and money positions. He has been willing to take unpopular stances, and take positions that are against his own personal beliefs. I haven't seen that from any other candidate so far. If that is an "empty suit" and "1980", well then I guess I love the 80's. Give me that anyday over the same old recycled crap leading both parties thus far.

I have to agree with you. I LIKE what I hear. It just isn't presented like a Baptist preacher at a revival, so it doesn't sound right. He actually answers questions!

[southsider2k5]

I have to agree with you. I LIKE what I hear. It just isn't presented like a Baptist preacher at a revival, so it doesn't sound right. He actually answers questions!

 

Actually I really respect the guy for actually admitting that all of the answers to all of the issues. I like the fact that he is willing to leave certian things to states rights, dispite the possibility of them going against his personal beliefs. I respect that a lot. I have yet to hear anyone else take positions like that.

[kapkomet]

Actually I really respect the guy for actually admitting that all of the answers to all of the issues. I like the fact that he is willing to leave certian things to states rights, dispite the possibility of them going against his personal beliefs. I respect that a lot. I have yet to hear anyone else take positions like that.

Which is why, unfortunately, he will not win. Damn near everyone in this country wants a handout from the FEDERAL government, and it all sounds soooooooooooooooo ooooooooh sooooooooo ohhhhhhhh good, doesn't it?

 

That sound you just heard was your federal government screwing you over again.

[Rex Kickass]

Actually I really respect the guy for actually admitting that all of the answers to all of the issues. I like the fact that he is willing to leave certian things to states rights, dispite the possibility of them going against his personal beliefs. I respect that a lot. I have yet to hear anyone else take positions like that.

 

Maybe it's just because I read on his website the same platitudes I see on any Joe Conservative positions. He's willing to leave certain things to state's rights, unless he doesn't.

 

He did vote for DOMA for example. And he wants to pressure for the end of Sanctuary Cities. Although a lot of you here might applaud that, that's not a states rights issue by any means.

[EvilMonkey]

Maybe it's just because I read on his website the same platitudes I see on any Joe Conservative positions. He's willing to leave certain things to state's rights, unless he doesn't.

 

He did vote for DOMA for example. And he wants to pressure for the end of Sanctuary Cities. Although a lot of you here might applaud that, that's not a states rights issue by any means.

States rights doesn't mean the states get free reign to do whatever the hell they want. protection of this country and border enforcement are responsibilities of the federal government, and sancuary cities subvert that process. I do not see how that takes away from his general states rights positions. If that's the worst you got, give it up.

[southsider2k5]

States rights doesn't mean the states get free reign to do whatever the hell they want. protection of this country and border enforcement are responsibilities of the federal government, and sancuary cities subvert that process. I do not see how that takes away from his general states rights positions. If that's the worst you got, give it up.

 

The biggest reasons for the federal government was to ensure free trade across state lines and for the safety and protection of the countries borders. Santuary cities fall directly under the guidelines of securing the country.

[Balta1701]

Since we don't have a "General election topics" thread, I'll put this here since McCain had his name on the original bill.

Unions and businesses may pay for TV and radio "issue ads" that name candidates in the days before elections, federal regulators said Tuesday, easing previous restrictions and opening the way for interest groups to influence next year's elections with big-money advertising campaigns.

 

Following the lead of the Supreme Court, the Federal Election Commission voted unanimously to soften its advertising rules in a decision that could lead to fresh ads as soon as next month in Iowa.

 

Under the change, an organization that supports a presidential candidate, for example, may use corporate or union money to run independent ads that cast the candidate in a good light or that criticize his or her rivals, provided the overall message is a call to action on a public policy issue.

 

The FEC had little choice. The Supreme Court ruled last June that restrictions on such ads were unconstitutional, but offered no clear guidelines for what types of ads would be affected.

 

A 2002 campaign finance law, whose co-author was Republican presidential candidate John McCain, banned corporations and unions from paying for issue ads within two months of a general election and 30 days of a primary election.

 

Under the rules adopted Tuesday, issue ads that mention a political candidate will be permissible in the weeks before an election as long as they focus on a matter of public policy and don't mention an election, political party or an opposing candidate, or take a stand on a candidate's character, qualifications or fitness for office.

 

Commissioners voted 4-1 to require that financing for any advertising paid for by unions or corporations be publicly disclosed — a provision supported by several campaign finance watchdog groups.

AP News

[southsider2k5]

Wonderful. More chances for a person to get "Rather'd" in an election cycle.

[Balta1701]

Mitt Romney:

I asked Mr. Romney whether he would consider including qualified Americans of the Islamic faith in his cabinet as advisers on national security matters, given his position that "jihadism" is the principal foreign policy threat facing America today. He answered, "…based on the numbers of American Muslims [as a percentage] in our population, I cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified. But of course, I would imagine that Muslims could serve at lower levels of my administration."

[NorthSideSox72]

Mitt Romney:

I realize this quote is supposed to make me think Romney is anti-Muslim, but... I don't think that's the most interesting aspect of that quote.

 

Anyone want to guess what it is? Hint: He's a Republican?

 

[Balta1701]

I realize this quote is supposed to make me think Romney is anti-Muslim, but... I don't think that's the most interesting aspect of that quote.

 

Anyone want to guess what it is? Hint: He's a Republican?

Actually, I interpreted it as saying Mitt Romney is pro affirmative action, given that he's just endorsed a quota system, and that's why I posted it.

[NorthSideSox72]

Actually, I interpreted it as saying Mitt Romney is pro affirmative action, given that he's just endorsed a quota system, and that's why I posted it.

OK good, you caught that too. Sort of funny, yeah?

 

[southsider2k5]

Mitt Romney is an idiot. According to his own system, he shouldn't be President because he wouldn't be representative of the entire country. I hate to say it, but I would rather see Guiliani nominated than Mitt. Even as a Clintonesque scumbag, he at least holds some moderate social positions. I guess anymore we just assume our Presidents have no morals or ethics, or none of the leaders of the races would even be mentioned as Presidential material.

[NorthSideSox72]

Mitt Romney is an idiot. According to his own system, he shouldn't be President because he wouldn't be representative of the entire country. I hate to say it, but I would rather see Guiliani nominated than Mitt. Even as a Clintonesque scumbag, he at least holds some moderate social positions. I guess anymore we just assume our Presidents have no morals or ethics, or none of the leaders of the races would even be mentioned as Presidential material.

Romney has two positives - executive experience in a counter-party-heavy state, and a record of some degree of fiscal discipline. Giuliani's supposed positive of some social moderation appears to have vanished in any case. In the fight between those two losers, I'd have to go with Romney.

 

[southsider2k5]

The latest national polls...

 

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con...l_tracking_poll

 

Republican Presidential Nomination with Mitt Romney now in second place nationally. Giuliani attracts 23% support from Likely Republican Primary voters nationwide while Romney attracts 15%. Mike Huckabee is the top choice for 13% while Fred Thompson and John McCain each earn 12% support. Ron Paul's is at 5% and no other Republican candidate reaches 2%

[southsider2k5]

Mitt Romney:

 

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/pos...jhkMThmMGY2MzQ=

 

It is starting to sound like these were taken out of context...

 

Governor Romney: "… But I also think that suggesting that we have to fill spots based on checking off boxes of various ethnic groups is really a very inappropriate way to think about how we staff positions. I'm very pleased that, among my Cabinet members, for instance, I had several African-American individuals. I had people of different backgrounds. But I don't go in every circumstance I'm in and say, OK, how many African-Americans, how many Hispanic-Americans, how many Asian-Americans, and fill boxes that way. I fill responsibilities based upon people's merit and their skill. And, sometimes, it includes many ethnic minorities. And, other times, it includes different minorities. But I'm very pleased with my record." (CNN's "Situation Room," 11/27/07)

 

That sounds more like an arch-conservative.

[Balta1701]

It is starting to sound like these were taken out of context...

In other words, he went off message in an interview, and the next time the issue came up his campaign made sure to get the soundbite right, because he can't sound like he's endorsing quotas. Don't see how that's surprising at all, as far as I can tell every campaign takes that pattern with most things that you could classify as slip-ups.

Edited November 27, 2007 by Balta1701