Online Now 1014

Off-Topic

On this Board 343
Record: 1683 (11/6/2012)

Online now 1011
Record: 11761 (2/27/2012)

Boards ▾

Inside Scoop

The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports

Terps Sports

Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports

General Sports Water Cooler

A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics

Off-Topic

Test/Feedback Forum

Feedback for IMS and 247Sports

The Ticket Exchange

Reply

Republican POTUS Candidate Thread

  • Our list sucks right now though I would nail Palin and Bachmann.

    I can only hope a decent candidate emerges because if it becomes Palin versus Obama, I am moving to the UK.

    dginzu

  • As a Dem, Christie scares me a lot more than Ryan. Ryan has the policy down, but Christie crushes in personality. The Pubs need someone with flair and can't do their standard "Well its his turn" nomination. Though I've been thinking maybe running the most plain, white male (in race and pizazz) candidate would also have its positives.

    http://www.ghitp.wordpress.com/

    JManslow ●

  • JManslow said...

    As a Dem, Christie scares me a lot more than Ryan. Ryan has the policy down, but Christie crushes in personality. The Pubs need someone with flair and can't do their standard "Well its his turn" nomination. Though I've been thinking maybe running the most plain, white male (in race and pizazz) candidate would also have its positives.

    All good points.

    I like them both but prefer Ryan and would take either over the current list. I'm a big Rayn fan so I'm somewhat biased. What he does exceptionally well, in addition to knowing the numbers inside and out, is tie the fiscal issues into a bigger theme of why they truly matter to America. He's able to take his fiscal responsibility arguments (which I personally believe in) and demonstrate why he believes they lead to the long term prosperity of America. Any Pub candidate that can't successfully make this connection will lose because the Dems and Obama will demagogue them on the cuts in spending, etc.

    This post was edited by Bradleyfan on 3/24/2011 at 4:03 PM

    Bradleyfan ●

  • :esquire said...

    Christie might want to think about running in 2012. Bill Clinton contemplated waiting until 96 to run because at the time Bush was pretty strong. But he said eff it, and ran, then recession, Ross Perot and bam he was president.

    Christie seems pretty popular now, what if he waits and Obama has a good 2nd term, some Dem outof the blue becomes a strong candidate, what if things go south in NJ over the next few years.

    OR what if some other Pub beats Obama in 2012, then he can't run until 2020.

    Obama can be beaten by a decent candidate in 2012, Christie shouldn't pass up this chance.

    Plus, from the response to the youtubes of the fat kid in Australia body slamming the bully, it's crystal clear that fat boys are in vogue. Strike while the iron's hot. lol.

    bbpgtr ●

  • He probably won't run but I'd love to see Lt Col. Alan West debate Obama. They'd have to invoke the mercy rule because a true leader of men like West is Obama's worst nightmare.

    bbpgtr ●

  • Terpsrule15 said...

    Obama will win by default. LOL. Did you see the last election. The next one will go largely the same. No one thought Reagan could win. He caught more crap than any of these candidates. Oh and by the way, no one thought Obama would even win the nomination much less the election. Which of course shows, having no experience whatsoever doing anything makes you qualifed to be President. The point being it is way too early to tell. I personally like Bob Mcdonald and think he could come in and blow Obama away. it won't be that hard if you have the right strong candidate. Even Scott Brown could beat Obama. Don't rule out Christie either. He has said he won't run but I'm not convinced. I would love Palin to run for the sheer enteratinment value. The woman has an extreme backbone and can take a shot. And let's face it she is the only candidate including our current President that has been fully and completely vetted. Lastly, don't be so sure Obama doesn't get challeneged in a primary. I don't care what Hilary says, I could easily see her blowing out of the state department. She has said she is staying but it is politics.

    Hilary has stated recently that she is only doing 4 years at State. Obama will have a new Sec. of State if he wins.

    This post was edited by reeceg1 on 3/24/2011 at 4:43 PM

    Layman ... Jake Layman!

    reeceg1

  • When did being a two bit bully equate with being "honest"?

    I've yet to see any changes in New Jersey, well, other than my propery taxes going up significantly this past year.

    NJTerpfan1 ●

  • Would HillDawg want the VP spot? I could see O using that as a Hail Mary if that race looks like its going to be tight.

    http://www.ghitp.wordpress.com/

    JManslow ●

  • Bradleyfan said...

    The fact that most people haven't focused on candidates yet is exactly why the poll on Obama's reelection is more important than the head-to-head polls. Most people have seen Obama in action for over two years now and know whether they like his policies or not. The head-to-head will become meaningful when the Pub field has become one, that candidate has been embraced by the Pubs and the public is able to compare and contrast his/her policies with Obama's.

    Regarding Ryan, he probably won't run, but stranger things have happened. There's no reason for him to put his name in now. He has more than enough personality to do fine against Obama. I can see a personality argument with Daniels but not Ryan. Plus, Obama doesn't always come off well when has to defend himself or his record, which he will have to do in 2012, unlike 2008.

    If I was a Dem, I would not want to see either Ryan on Christie in 2012. As a Pub, those are my first two choices. Just my opinion.

    Eh. It really doesn't mean anything unless you want it to. Pew has O cruising to reelection, but that doesn't really matter either.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/151461-pew-poll-obama-would-deliver-shellacking-to-generic-republican

    I know you're a Ryan fan, but I don't think he's presidential material, and there's a lot in his voting record to counter his deficit hawk persona. How long has it been since a a House member was a serious candidate? Think it's been a while. I'd be more worried about Christie, less of a paper trail and certainly more charismatic.

    PaulUMD

  • JManslow said...

    Would HillDawg want the VP spot? I could see O using that as a Hail Mary if that race looks like its going to be tight.

    What would it get him? She's brings nothing to the table since she's been part of the administration from the get go anyway. And O won't just dump Biden like that, they've gotten pretty close.

    PaulUMD

  • PaulUMD said...

    What would it get him? She's brings nothing to the table since she's been part of the administration from the get go anyway. And O won't just dump Biden like that, they've gotten pretty close.

    I think that would rake in a lot more Pub women than people think.

    http://www.ghitp.wordpress.com/

    JManslow ●

  • Obama getting destroyed will give me a bigger orgasm than any chick I have ever banged I think

    Viperrockgun

  • Yo jman, after Obama gets destroyed you can bang your girl on Fox News and Ill bang my girl Courtney Friel on there.

    That will cheer you up.

    Viperrockgun

  • PaulUMD said...

    Eh. It really doesn't mean anything unless you want it to. Pew has O cruising to reelection, but that doesn't really matter either.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/151461-pew-poll-obama-would-deliver-shellacking-to-generic-republican

    I know you're a Ryan fan, but I don't think he's presidential material, and there's a lot in his voting record to counter his deficit hawk persona. How long has it been since a a House member was a serious candidate? Think it's been a while. I'd be more worried about Christie, less of a paper trail and certainly more charismatic.

    You could very well be right about Ryan. Admittedly I'm a big fan and biased towards him. He does have some issues in his voting record that counter his deficit hawk persona (e.g., TARP, Auto Bailouts). Still, he polls number one with the Tea Party folks, which is surprising given his TARP vote, ect. That's where I would think these votes would hurt him the most, but apparently not. Again, maybe I'm biased, but I don't see lack of personality as a Ryan issue. I actually think he has a good personaility. The one minor flaw I've seen, and this is nit picking, is some times he makes faces when someone else attacks his position. He can't do that in a debate. I don't worry about him only being a House member. Trends/molds are meant to be broken. Obama demonstrated that.

    IMO, the biggest issue with Ryan is, as you stated earlier, he probably won't run. Although he always seems to leave just the slightest little bit of wiggle room when asked this question. Maybe it's wishful thinking on my part.

    Bradleyfan ●

  • reeceg1 said...

    Hilary has stated recently that she is only doing 4 years at State. Obama will have a new Sec. of State if he wins.

    I know but the Clinton's are shrewd and I'm not buying it. Here is the bottom line, no President has ever been reelected with unemployment above 8%. And it will probably be there come reelection with the real unemployment rate being even higher. Obama = Carter at least right now. Objectively speaking no candidate looks good right now. There so many of them. it's always that way. I still think Bob McDonnel/Rubio ticket would be formidable. But again who knows what will happen. Should be a fun time though.

    Terpsrule15

  • A few scattered thoughts:

    - Any wild speculation this far out is pretty worthless. Romney and Pawlenty are the two favorites until further notice. I'd be pretty shocked if Daniels/Huntsman/Ryan or anyone like that wins. They have a lot going for them and they'd probably make good Presidents, but people don't nominate/elect wonks, especially if they don't know who they are. Romney fits the wonk mold, but he's been around the block before and has basically been running for President for like 6 years at this point. Pawlenty's been building his org up for probably at least a few years now too. The charisma guys (Huckabee/Palin/Christie) can make some noise and win a primary or two (like Huckabee last time), but they probably don't have the appeal nationwide. I know Huckabee technically came in 2nd last year, but that was only because Romney dropped out and people were still pissed about McCain.

    - Can we please stop pretending that social issues are REALLY going to make a difference? We did end up with McCain last time.

    - I will say that Pawlenty's media team has impressed me, and good media tends to win elections these days.

    - Gingrich is probably the wild card, but he's got so many problems, I think he'll flame out. He's basically the St. John's of the field.

    - The two people that could come maybe see coming out of nowhere and winning are Rubio and Scott Brown, but those are still unlikely.

    - John Bolton is apparently thinking about running. I secretly want him to win.

    - Let's not pretend Bachmann running means anything. She's no different than Kucinich, Mosley-Braun, Gravel, etc.

    This post was edited by dexterstjacques on 3/24/2011 at 6:49 PM

    Well, I mean, that’s what it is. I doodoo and then listen to Katy Perry.

    dexterstjacques

  • dexterstjacques said...

    A few scattered thoughts:

    - Any wild speculation this far out is pretty worthless. Romney and Pawlenty are the two favorites until further notice. I'd be pretty shocked if Daniels/Huntsman/Ryan or anyone like that wins. They have a lot going for them and they'd probably make good Presidents, but people don't nominate/elect wonks, especially if they don't know who they are. Romney fits the wonk mold, but he's been around the block before and has basically been running for President for like 6 years at this point. Pawlenty's been building his org up for probably at least a few years now too. The charisma guys (Huckabee/Palin/Christie) can make some noise and win a primary or two (like Huckabee last time), but they probably don't have the appeal nationwide. I know Huckabee technically came in 2nd last year, but that was only because Romney dropped out and people were still pissed about McCain.

    - Can we please stop pretending that social issues are REALLY going to make a difference? We did end up with McCain last time.

    - I will say that Pawlenty's media team has impressed me, and good media tends to win elections these days.

    - Gingrich is probably the wild card, but he's got so many problems, I think he'll flame out. He's basically the St. John's of the field.

    - The two people that could come maybe see coming out of nowhere and winning are Rubio and Scott Brown, but those are still unlikely.

    - John Bolton is apparently thinking about running. I secretly want him to win.

    - Let's not pretend Bachmann running means anything. She's no different than Kucinich, Mosley-Braun, Gravel, etc.

    I agree about Romney. I think he's too flawed to win but he's got such money and organization he is still the frontrunner. I too have been impressed by Pawlenty's media and rollout...except still nobody cared. If he wins it's only because he's the least blemished of the bunch.

    I think social issues will be a factor this time exactly because they trotted out McCain last time. Lots of people were not happy with that, and only relented when he picked Palin.

    Bolton? badidea

    Here's a crazy prediction. No Palin and no Huckabee...Bachmann could win Iowa (not that that means anything anymore).

    Real talk.

    PaulUMD

  • Good article on Romney's strategy....

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51921.html

    PaulUMD

  • I am a pretty big Ryan fan (though I didn't like his yay on TARP), but I can't see him emerging from the aforementioned field. At 41 would he be the youngest president ever if he somehow won? (Sorry Dr. Smead if you read these forums). It would be interesting to watch if Demint threw his hat in the ring.

    It is hard for me to see a scenario where Obama does not win by 6-10 points. I think the real election is 2016 with Christie as a very legitamate republican candidate.

    irishbmad

  • NJTerpfan1 said...

    When did being a two bit bully equate with being "honest"?

    I've yet to see any changes in New Jersey, well, other than my propery taxes going up significantly this past year.

    Property taxes are local. You probably have dems in charge of that.

    sniper_terp

  • irishbmad said...

    It is hard for me to see a scenario where Obama does not win by 6-10 points. I think the real election is 2016 with Christie as a very legitamate republican candidate.

    Which world are you guys living in?
    Even DC area has tons of vacant stores, homes in foreclosure, evictions, joblessness, increased prices everywhere.
    Increased frustation over immigration policies, lack of energy policy, no leadership the list is endless.

    For such a time as this.

    bigturtle

  • irishbmad said...

    I am a pretty big Ryan fan (though I didn't like his yay on TARP), but I can't see him emerging from the aforementioned field. At 41 would he be the youngest president ever if he somehow won? (Sorry Dr. Smead if you read these forums). It would be interesting to watch if Demint threw his hat in the ring.

    It is hard for me to see a scenario where Obama does not win by 6-10 points. I think the real election is 2016 with Christie as a very legitamate republican candidate.

    You do realize that Obama "only" won by 7 points in 2008, even though he had basically every single advantage working for him, right?

    Well, I mean, that’s what it is. I doodoo and then listen to Katy Perry.

    dexterstjacques

  • bigturtle said...

    Which world are you guys living in? Even DC area has tons of vacant stores, homes in foreclosure, evictions, joblessness, increased prices everywhere. Increased frustation over immigration policies, lack of energy policy, no leadership the list is endless.

    Yes but you act like there is some new blood on the scene that could say he/she wasn't responsible for that mess. The repub front runners are going to keep doing "business as usual". There will be no talk of balancing the budget within 10 years. No talk of ending the wars, NAFTA or the WTO.

    sniper_terp

  • sniper_terp said...

    Yes but you act like there is some new blood on the scene that could say he/she wasn't responsible for that mess. The repub front runners are going to keep doing "business as usual". There will be no talk of balancing the budget within 10 years. No talk of ending the wars, NAFTA or the WTO.

    The new blood on the scene as you use that term is Obama. In 2008, he was able to campaign, for the most part, as a Washington outsider (even though he really wasn't) with a clean record. Obama was a clean slate. He could attack Bush and the Pubs, didn't have to defend his record and could rely on the whole "hope and change" meme, which meant different things to different people. This time he has a very clear record to defend. That's the big difference, IMO.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Bradleyfan on 3/25/2011 at 11:22 AM

    Bradleyfan ●

  • Serious Question: When was the last Republican candidate who was able to "cut in line" the way Obama did? Does Bush 43 count? It's Romney's turn, and unless something crazy happens it'll be Romney and Obama will cakewalk, IMO.

    NYCTerp05: i guarantee you my child won't turn out gay

    JemoTerp

Maryland
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports