Great... !

It seems like the media has been able to destroy the whole Republican field. Although he is a terrible candidate, I think Mitt Romney will win the nomination. If he does, I hope Obama wins.

Not because I think Obama is a great President. But because Mitt Romney is going to get unpopular really fast. He will help Democrats win the 2014 Congress, then he will be forced to take many unpopular choices, and lose the election to 2016. That is probably great news for Democrats, but for anyone who is conservative, think again.

Herman Cain:
He was doing quite well, but got a lot of baggage on the way. The accusations (probably false, some evidence here and here) will probably destroy him I think. In media, you are guilty before proven innocent and Herman Cain has no possibility to prove he is innocent and he wasn't prepared, but even if he was prepared it would still destroy him.

I know there is a lot of sources fighting against Herman Cain. I know liberals are fighting against him, because they want to keep telling the Tea Party is racist, and they are also afraid of his economic policies. The right wing establishment are afraid of any far right candidate, because they think it will turn voters off the Republican Party. Read this article in the economist The Republicans: A dangerous game | The Economist

The media tried to destroy him first by negative campaigning, but they had problems because they have a hard time understanding the average republican voter, who do not trust Romney. In the end they made up some accusations that will probably destroy him.

Rick Perry
He is a total disaster. Even when he is not in the top of the polls, we find more about him. Not only his political opinions on immigration, his lack of public appeal, his lack of intelligence, and his lack of debate skills. The Worst is his corruption. He seems to accept anything for the lowest bidder. No chance!

Mitt Romney:
The Republican establishment wants him, but liberals also want him. Not because they think he will be a great President. I have already told why the establishment want him. They think he will hurt the Republican Party the least. The Liberals want him, because he will be a weak President that may secure them victory in Congress in 2014, and elections in 2016 if he ever wins.

However, his baggage is horrible and his opinions are not much better. He wants a trade war with China. That is stupider than most of Bachmanns opinions. Although, kept hidden in the media, his plan gives huge tax cuts for the rich. He wants to remove the estate tax and give reductions in capital gains. Although the capital gains tax reduction is good, it is still a tax cut for the rich, which have to be compensated with a tax increase on everyone else. The reason he is not destroyed is because both right wing and left wing media supports him.

He also got the problem with hiring illegal immigrants, which not only shows he is hypocritical on immigration, but that he is part of the rich elite. That will come up much more during the general election. His Ponzi scheme won't help him, and his flip flopping is disastrous.

Ron Paul
There are big tides against Ron Paul as well. If he is ever close to winning the nomination, then he will be destroyed, because the media doesn't want him. If you think a sexual allegation against Cain is bad. What about Ron Paul. He will become the creepy old man. Not good.

However, he can still be the Republican party savior. If he runs as an independent, then he can take a lot of voters away from Mitt Romney, and show that Republican party do not want the corrupt Republican establishment.

John Huntsman
If there is not sizable hidden baggage. He is clearly the best candidate. Moderate intelligent Republicans love him. Liberals tolerate him. He is no symbol of corporations like Mitt Romney is. He is also much more inteligent, he has an ideological fundement, and actually do believe most of what he is saying. Candidates like John Huntsman can make Republicans popular again, and he will crush Obama.

Problem is, he only get 1-2% at the polls. Maybe that can change if people think he is a viable candidate?

Agree, disagree? Please tell me your opinions.

I'm with you on Huntsman. I keep saying that he is the car in the back of the pack that has avoided the massive car crash pileup in the front and if he can somehow get his face out there more he can rocket to the front unscathed just as all the other part-time front runners have thus far. If he got there, I think he has the staying power and clean enough record to stay up front.

Did you leave Gingrich out on purpose?

LoLz at the whole media conspiracy crap.

Keridan said:

Did you leave Gingrich out on purpose?

Click to expand...

I kind of forgot about him.

I don't think he has a chance, he has lost his staff, he has no money, and he has a lot of baggage. He will probably keep rising in polls, especially now that Cain is on his way down.

Camlon said:

I kind of forgot about him.

I don't think he has a chance, he has lost his staff, he has no money, and he has a lot of baggage. He will probably keep rising in polls, especially now that Cain is on his way down.

Click to expand...

Fair points. All in all, I wouldn't mind seeing him do better, but his history would never see him through. I just wish there was one candidate on the right that I could see making an all-around solid president. This will be another round of lesser evil, I think

Redress said:

LoLz at the whole media conspiracy crap.

Click to expand...

I don't trust media to be neutral, fair or honest. I just have too much experience. I don't think it is conspiracy anymore either.

If Democrats were really afraid of Mitt Romney, they would be campaigning against Romney and certainly not bashing the other candidates. However, they know that Romney wins by default, if there isn't any stronger candidate. Their goal is to destroy all other possibilities and force Republicans to support Romney.

Camlon said:

I don't trust media to be neutral, fair or honest. I just have too much experience. I don't think it is conspiracy anymore either.

If Democrats were really afraid of Mitt Romney, they would be campaigning against Romney and certainly not bashing the other candidates. However, they know that Romney wins by default, if there isn't any stronger candidate. Their goal is to destroy all other possibilities and force Republicans to support Romney.

Click to expand...

Which would be stupid. Since democrats are so smart we control all the media, why would you then assume we are stupid?

poweRob said:

I'm with you on Huntsman. I keep saying that he is the car in the back of the pack that has avoided the massive car crash pileup in the front and if he can somehow get his face out there more he can rocket to the front unscathed just as all the other part-time front runners have thus far. If he got there, I think he has the staying power and clean enough record to stay up front.

Click to expand...

It might not be his year, but within the next one or presidential cycles he could possibly be at the top. Romney had to make a previous run to get where he is today.

Redress said:

Which would be stupid. Since democrats are so smart we control all the media, why would you then assume we are stupid?

Click to expand...

Democrats do not control all the media. That is why I always say, liberal media, when I talk about media Democrats control.

I think some Democrats are stupid, but not the ones higher up. They are incredible intelligent. The possible tactics are

1. Do nothing.
- Bad tactic, since then the most credible candidate among Republicans can win with the help of conservative media.

2. Attack Romney
- Bad tactic, because either it won't work or a credible candidate among Republicans will win and crush Obama.

3. Attack everyone else apart from Romney
- This will force Republicans to support Romney, even though Romney hasn't convinced them yet. Republican supporters will be discouraged, and when the general election comes, they can make them even more discouraged by opening up his can of worms. If Republicans won't support him, then independents probably won't either.

Camlon said:

I don't trust media to be neutral, fair or honest. I just have too much experience. I don't think it is conspiracy anymore either.

If Democrats were really afraid of Mitt Romney, they would be campaigning against Romney and certainly not bashing the other candidates. However, they know that Romney wins by default, if there isn't any stronger candidate. Their goal is to destroy all other possibilities and force Republicans to support Romney.

Click to expand...

How does one not bash a clown act of desperation beginning with Palin, Bachmann, Perry, Gingrich? Seriously. I'd bloody well vote for a good moderate Republican. No moderate Republican can make in a party infested with religionists. You have to be anti-abortion to win the ticket. That alone narrows the field from serious consideration and I never took the aforementioned seriously. The nation is hanging on by a thread and the GOP is passing "In God We Trust" laws as if it were some sort of talisman to wave off the evil spirits. Cain isn't going to make it. Huntsman not a snowball's chance in hell. It's be Romney. Republicans don't want him. But Romney will be all they have.

Risky Thicket said:

How does one not bash a clown act of desperation beginning with Palin, Bachmann, Perry, Gingrich? Seriously. I'd bloody well vote for a good moderate Republican. No moderate Republican can make in a party infested with religionists. You have to be anti-abortion to win the ticket. That alone narrows the field from serious consideration and I never took the aforementioned seriously. The nation is hanging on by a thread and the GOP is passing "In God We Trust" laws as if it were some sort of talisman to wave off the evil spirits. Cain isn't going to make it. Huntsman not a snowball's chance in hell. It's be Romney. Republicans don't want him. But Romney will be all they have.

Click to expand...

So you are saying that liberal media are unconcerned about the election, and just want the best candidate to emerge?

Camlon said:

Democrats do not control all the media. That is why I always say, liberal media, when I talk about media Democrats control.

I think some Democrats are stupid, but not the ones higher up. They are incredible intelligent. The possible tactics are

1. Do nothing.
- Bad tactic, since then the most credible candidate among Republicans can win with the help of conservative media.

2. Attack Romney
- Bad tactic, because either it won't work or a credible candidate among Republicans will win and crush Obama.

3. Attack everyone else apart from Romney
- This will force Republicans to support Romney, even though Romney hasn't convinced them yet. Republican supporters will be discouraged, and when the general election comes, they can make them even more discouraged by opening up his can of worms. If Republicans won't support him, then independents probably won't either.

Click to expand...

No. If democrats control the media(we do not), the best thing we could do is destroy front runners. That is, was and will be for awhile Romney. Trying to force republicans to pick the person they are most likely to pick is silly. Trying to force republicans to pick the candidate who is running the best campaign so far is silly. The paranoid ramblings about the liberal media are just stupid. You are not going to get any sympathy playing the victim card.

Camlon said:

It seems like the media has been able to destroy the whole Republican field. Although he is a terrible candidate, I think Mitt Romney will win the nomination. If he does, I hope Obama wins.

Not because I think Obama is a great President. But because Mitt Romney is going to get unpopular really fast. He will help Democrats win the 2014 Congress, then he will be forced to take many unpopular choices, and lose the election to 2016. That is probably great news for Democrats, but for anyone who is conservative, think again.

Click to expand...

First of all, before we even begin we ought to dispel the myth that the media is the reason why all of these candidates are doing so poorly and instead spend more time looking at the actions of each candidate to better understand why they are doing poorly.

Herman Cain
Regardless of whether or not the sexual harassment allegations are true, the only person Cain will have to blame if it sinks his campaign is himself. This is not the first time that he has run for a major political office, and he should have known just how much scrutiny he would face. The first thing that his campaign should have done was to hire an investigator to find every possible damaging story that was in his past so that his campaign could develop plan to go on the offensive and mitigate the potential damage from those stories. Instead he is bumbling his way through this, changing his story with each passing day.

On foreign policy issues his own ignorance of the outside world is his own fault. Again, instead of making statements during interviews where he is seemingly proud of his own lack of knowledge, such was the case as when he said he could not name the President of Uzbekistan, he should hire more foreign policy experts to help teach him more about the outside world so that he could talk about issues without looking like a fool. But that would be too much work.

Finally, on domestic policy he should have been better prepared to defend something as ambitious as his 9-9-9 plan. But, again, the only defense Cain has is that he says the math to back up facts about his tax plan are on his website, although nothing of the sort exists.

Rick Perry
He is indeed a train wreck as a candidate. His biggest problem is his ability to effectively articulate his views during debates. Rather than put in the extra time to perform better during debates, he is willing to avoid them altogether. I view it as rather pathetic that he would rather run in the other direction than face his own problems and conquer them. He has no one to blame but himself for such a display of weakness.

Ron Paul
As there are no allegations of sexual misconduct that are known of, the media has nothing to paint a picture of him as a creepy old man that would work effectively. Although, I am sure that his fringe Austrian economic views and some racist statements in past newsletters written under his name is more than enough red meat to damage any chance he has at the presidency.

Mitt Romney
Romney is by far the most competent and disciplined campaigner of the bunch. As such his campaign has been able to fend off attacks over his flip-flopping and health care reform in Massachusetts with relative ease. Although it will be bloody, I expect that he will be able to outlast everyone and be the Republicans' nominee in 2012.

I have to clear up two falsehoods you made about Romney. The first is Romney does not want to start a trade war with China. All he wants to do is call out China for their manipulation of their currency that currently ensures the yuan remains undervalue in comparison to the dollar so that their export industry will not be harmed. All Romney wants to do is make sure that all countries work under the some set of rules, something that is not happening at this moment. It makes for a great talking point, though I have doubts on whether or not he has the spine to go through with it.

The other thing is Romney got rid of the contractor that hired illegal immigrants to do work on his property. I thought he was well prepared to dismiss that lie, but apparently some people still believe that.

Jon Huntsman
The best overall candidate in this crowd, and the one I would prefer to win. Though what makes him so attractive as a candidate is the same thing that also makes nonviable. There is no way that he will win the Republican primary so long as the Tea Party has as much clout as they do now.

I guess, in the end, the best tip I can offer you and other conservatives is to stop acting like victims. Every single candidate that is not Mitt Romney has done something that managed to hurt their campaigns, and no matter how much you wish it to be true, none of those did the media cause. Maybe if the party that preaches personal responsibility followed their advice and put in the time and effort to run better campaigns, they all would be running better campaigns and the Republican primary would not be looking like such a sideshow.

Redress said:

No. If democrats control the media(we do not), the best thing we could do is destroy front runners. That is, was and will be for awhile Romney. Trying to force republicans to pick the person they are most likely to pick is silly. Trying to force republicans to pick the candidate who is running the best campaign so far is silly. The paranoid ramblings about the liberal media are just stupid. You are not going to get any sympathy playing the victim card.

Click to expand...

Haha, victim card. When did I display myself as a victim. :lol:

I understand that you have a hard time understanding the complexity of politics. Trying to force republicans to pick the seemingly best candidate is not silly. Why?

Because Romney hasn't been able to convince anyone he is a good candidate. Democrats want him to win by default. They don't want him to win by convincing voters he is a good candidate, and they don't want any candidate to have a chance against Romney, because if another candidate beats Romney, then he is strong.

That's also why they prop up different candidates, and when they start rising, they crush them.

Spaceman_Spiff said:

First of all, before we even begin we ought to dispel the myth that the media is the reason why all of these candidates are doing so poorly and instead spend more time looking at the actions of each candidate to better understand why they are doing poorly.

Click to expand...

It is a combined effort, but the media has been one of the main reason other sane candidates haven't joined the race, because the liberal media would try to destroy them with any statements they made in the past, or any statements they make.

Why do you think so many decent candidates stay away from the race?

B]Herman Cain[/B]
Regardless of whether or not the sexual harassment allegations are true, the only person Cain will have to blame if it sinks his campaign is himself. This is not the first time that he has run for a major political office, and he should have known just how much scrutiny he would face. The first thing that his campaign should have done was to hire an investigator to find every possible damaging story that was in his past so that his campaign could develop plan to go on the offensive and mitigate the potential damage from those stories. Instead he is bumbling his way through this, changing his story with each passing day.

On foreign policy issues his own ignorance of the outside world is his own fault. Again, instead of making statements during interviews where he is seemingly proud of his own lack of knowledge, such was the case as when he said he could not name the President of Uzbekistan, he should hire more foreign policy experts to help teach him more about the outside world so that he could talk about issues without looking like a fool. But that would be too much work.

Finally, on domestic policy he should have been better prepared to defend something as ambitious as his 9-9-9 plan. But, again, the only defense Cain has is that he says the math to back up facts about his tax plan are on his website, although nothing of the sort exists.

Click to expand...

I agree completely. In fact it seems like he is not taking the presidency seriously, but even if he were, and he actually knew something about foreign policy, the liberal media would try to destroy him. And I don't think they did it because of their love towards Republicans. They didn't know his potential, and if he started growing, he would be very dangerous indeed. Also, what I said above.

I mean take a look at some of their attacks. He got his ideas from Sim City, which has a variable 0 to 20% property tax on 3 different sectors. His statement that he is not aware of the neo-conservative movement (there isn't any neo-conservative movement) get turned to him not knowing what neo-conservative is. Their failure to calculate tax rates, where they thought the effective tax rates pluss hidden taxes is 15%. A lot of media also predicted his collapse in a few days. He is still up there, a month later.

I loved when they criticized him of racism against blacks. It was just driving his poll numbers up, but I presume it was directed towards Democrats and not Republicans.

Rick Perry
He is indeed a train wreck as a candidate. His biggest problem is his ability to effectively articulate his views during debates. Rather than put in the extra time to perform better during debates, he is willing to avoid them altogether. I view it as rather pathetic that he would rather run in the other direction than face his own problems and conquer them. He has no one to blame but himself for such a display of weakness.

Click to expand...

You can't improve that much over a short time span. Improving debating skills takes time. He should have prepared two years ago, because he has been thinking about this for a long time.

Ron Paul
As there are no allegations of sexual misconduct that are known of, the media has nothing to paint a picture of him as a creepy old man that would work effectively. Although, I am sure that his fringe Austrian economic views and some racist statements in past newsletters written under his name is more than enough red meat to damage any chance he has at the presidency.

Click to expand...

You don't need anything. Make something up. Find someone who has worked with him and accuse him.

Also, Ron Paul has never been close to being nominated. He never experienced the media pressure. Normally they just ignore him, like they did with Herman Cain in the early stage.

Mitt Romney
Romney is by far the most competent and disciplined campaigner of the bunch. As such his campaign has been able to fend off attacks over his flip-flopping and health care reform in Massachusetts with relative ease. Although it will be bloody, I expect that he will be able to outlast everyone and be the Republicans' nominee in 2012.

I have to clear up two falsehoods you made about Romney. The first is Romney does not want to start a trade war with China. All he wants to do is call out China for their manipulation of their currency that currently ensures the yuan remains undervalue in comparison to the dollar so that their export industry will not be harmed. All Romney wants to do is make sure that all countries work under the some set of rules, something that is not happening at this moment. It makes for a great talking point, though I have doubts on whether or not he has the spine to go through with it.

The other thing is Romney got rid of the contractor that hired illegal immigrants to do work on his property. I thought he was well prepared to dismiss that lie, but apparently some people still believe that.

Click to expand...

I also expect him to win, but only because everyone else is worse. However, he did in fact say he wanted to start a trade war. Not directy, but indirectly. What consequences do you think labeling China as a "currency manipulator", and placing tariffs on China? Just look at Norway who gave the peace price to a person who wanted to overthrow the Chinese government. What will happen is a trade war.

It will have really bad consequences for US. Mitt Romney excuse that China exports more to the US is laughable. What China will do is to impose high tariffs on key exports for the US. Mitt Romney's policy on China is just as bad as most of Bachmanns opinions.

He hired the same contractor next year, and did not check if that contractor hired illegals or not. His defense was that "I'm running for office, for Pete's sake"

And we haven't even talked about his history in Wall Street. His picture of him holdning notes, his flip flopping on every issue. He hasn't been able to fend off anything, or else he would get more than 25% of the votes.

I guess, in the end, the best tip I can offer you and other conservatives is to stop acting like victims. Every single candidate that is not Mitt Romney has done something that managed to hurt their campaigns, and no matter how much you wish it to be true, none of those did the media cause. Maybe if the party that preaches personal responsibility followed their advice and put in the time and effort to run better campaigns, they all would be running better campaigns and the Republican primary would not be looking like such a sideshow.

Click to expand...

I was just pointing out that many liberal media outlets, like Washington Post were campaigning against Cain. I also know some conservative media who was completely outraged over Cain.

I can also see they are giving Mitt Romney an easy time. I'm not trying to be the victim, I'm just stating facts. If there is a really good candidate running, then that candidate will win regardless of the media. For instance take a look at Sweden Democrats in Sweden. But a decent candidate may be put off running, because he knows the media will be against him.

Redress said:

LoLz at the whole media conspiracy crap.

Click to expand...

Yeah. Because That Kind Of Stuff Would Never Happen

...JournoList e-mails obtained by the Daily Caller reveal what anybody with two neurons to rub together already knew: Professional liberals don't like Republicans and do like Democrats. They can be awfully smug and condescending in their sense of intellectual and moral superiority. They tend to ascribe evil motives to their political opponents - sometimes even when they know it's unfair. One obscure blogger insisted that liberals should arbitrarily demonize a conservative journalist as a racist to scare conservatives away from covering stories that might hurt Obama.

Oh, and - surprise! - it turns out that the "O" in JournoList stands for "Obama."

In 2008, participants shared talking points about how to shape coverage to help Obama. They tried to paint any negative coverage of Obama's racist and hateful pastor, Jeremiah Wright, as out of bounds. Journalists at such "objective" news organizations as Newsweek, Bloomberg, Time, and The Economist joined conversations with open partisans about the best way to criticize Sarah Palin....

In the 1930s, the New York Times deliberately whitewashed Stalin's murders. In 1964, CBS reported that Barry Goldwater was tied up with German Nazis. In 1985, the Los Angeles Times polled 2,700 journalists at 621 newspapers and found that journalists identified themselves as liberal by a factor of 3 to 1. Their actual views on issues were far more liberal than even that would suggest..

Click to expand...

cpwill said:

Yeah. Because That Kind Of Stuff Would Never Happen

Click to expand...

Message boards do happen in fact. Conservatives do spin little stuff into great big hairy conspiracy theories in fact. It's easier than being responsible for your own actions.

Redress said:

Message boards do happen in fact. Conservatives do spin little stuff into great big hairy conspiracy theories in fact. It's easier than being responsible for your own actions.

Click to expand...

Are you really denying that media is not helping the candidate they prefer?

Camlon said:

Are you really denying that media is not helping the candidate they prefer?

Click to expand...

To a certain extent they do.

But that's what happens when Media outlets are owned by mega corporations and have intrenched ties with powerful political parties.

The GOP establishment wants Romney.

The Tea Party and disgruntled Republicans want Cain.

There is a battle within the Republican party that could get extremely ugly and could ultimately lead to defeat. When the Conservative right in Canada split, Liberals held Canada at the federal level for over a decade. And on a sidenote produced 7 straight consecutive budget surpluses in a row.

Redress said:

Message boards do happen in fact. Conservatives do spin little stuff into great big hairy conspiracy theories in fact. It's easier than being responsible for your own actions.

Click to expand...

wtf. look, what cain did or did not do will out; but the notion that there is no liberal presence in the MSM, and that it's members didn't actively collaborate on twisting the news to fit their preferred message and effect an election is ridiculous. it deserves to rest on the same shelf with the notion that FOX isn't conservative. You didn't "lolz" at the notion that Cain may or may not be guilty, you decided to "lolz" at the notion of a liberal media collusion. it's not my fault examples are so easy to locate - it's theirs for engaing in this kind of crap in the first place and pretending to some kind of standard of objectivity after they do.

Camlon said:

It seems like the media has been able to destroy the whole Republican field. Although he is a terrible candidate, I think Mitt Romney will win the nomination. If he does, I hope Obama wins.

Not because I think Obama is a great President. But because Mitt Romney is going to get unpopular really fast. He will help Democrats win the 2014 Congress, then he will be forced to take many unpopular choices, and lose the election to 2016. That is probably great news for Democrats, but for anyone who is conservative, think again.

Herman Cain:
He was doing quite well, but got a lot of baggage on the way. The accusations (probably false, some evidence here and here) will probably destroy him I think. In media, you are guilty before proven innocent and Herman Cain has no possibility to prove he is innocent and he wasn't prepared, but even if he was prepared it would still destroy him.

I know there is a lot of sources fighting against Herman Cain. I know liberals are fighting against him, because they want to keep telling the Tea Party is racist, and they are also afraid of his economic policies. The right wing establishment are afraid of any far right candidate, because they think it will turn voters off the Republican Party. Read this article in the economist The Republicans: A dangerous game | The Economist

The media tried to destroy him first by negative campaigning, but they had problems because they have a hard time understanding the average republican voter, who do not trust Romney. In the end they made up some accusations that will probably destroy him.

Rick Perry
He is a total disaster. Even when he is not in the top of the polls, we find more about him. Not only his political opinions on immigration, his lack of public appeal, his lack of intelligence, and his lack of debate skills. The Worst is his corruption. He seems to accept anything for the lowest bidder. No chance!

Mitt Romney:
The Republican establishment wants him, but liberals also want him. Not because they think he will be a great President. I have already told why the establishment want him. They think he will hurt the Republican Party the least. The Liberals want him, because he will be a weak President that may secure them victory in Congress in 2014, and elections in 2016 if he ever wins.

However, his baggage is horrible and his opinions are not much better. He wants a trade war with China. That is stupider than most of Bachmanns opinions. Although, kept hidden in the media, his plan gives huge tax cuts for the rich. He wants to remove the estate tax and give reductions in capital gains. Although the capital gains tax reduction is good, it is still a tax cut for the rich, which have to be compensated with a tax increase on everyone else. The reason he is not destroyed is because both right wing and left wing media supports him.

He also got the problem with hiring illegal immigrants, which not only shows he is hypocritical on immigration, but that he is part of the rich elite. That will come up much more during the general election. His Ponzi scheme won't help him, and his flip flopping is disastrous.

Ron Paul
There are big tides against Ron Paul as well. If he is ever close to winning the nomination, then he will be destroyed, because the media doesn't want him. If you think a sexual allegation against Cain is bad. What about Ron Paul. He will become the creepy old man. Not good.

However, he can still be the Republican party savior. If he runs as an independent, then he can take a lot of voters away from Mitt Romney, and show that Republican party do not want the corrupt Republican establishment.

John Huntsman
If there is not sizable hidden baggage. He is clearly the best candidate. Moderate intelligent Republicans love him. Liberals tolerate him. He is no symbol of corporations like Mitt Romney is. He is also much more inteligent, he has an ideological fundement, and actually do believe most of what he is saying. Candidates like John Huntsman can make Republicans popular again, and he will crush Obama.

Problem is, he only get 1-2% at the polls. Maybe that can change if people think he is a viable candidate?

Agree, disagree? Please tell me your opinions.

Click to expand...

lol Get real...the entire republican field destroyed themselves..

lpast said:

lol Get real...the entire republican field destroyed themselves..

Click to expand...

I agree partly.

It was a combined effort. I misspoke.

Redress said:

Message boards do happen in fact. Conservatives do spin little stuff into great big hairy conspiracy theories in fact. It's easier than being responsible for your own actions.

Click to expand...

no spin required. you scoffed at the notion that liberals in the media would collude to damage a conservative politician. it was demonstrated that they had already done this in attempts to skew the 2008 presidential election. JournOListers represented all the major mainstream outlets, referred to themselves as the "Unofficial Obama Campaign", and actively sought to smear Republican candidates and spokespersons.

cpwill said:

no spin required. you scoffed at the notion that liberals in the media would collude to damage a conservative politician. it was demonstrated that they had already done this in attempts to skew the 2008 presidential election. JournOListers represented all the major mainstream outlets, referred to themselves as the "Unofficial Obama Campaign", and actively sought to smear Republican candidates and spokespersons.

Click to expand...

You're trying to build a mountain out of a molehill.

I thought the mantra was "If you fail it's your own fault".

I guess for you whenever a conservative politician gets hammed in the press for doing something dumb it's "THE LIBERAL MEDIA'S FAULT".