Poll: Huckabee, Gingrich, Palin or Pawlenty?

[Aaronius]

There is any interesting discussion going on over at Mitt Romney Central; the poll posted there proposes the following hypothetical:

Romney does not run in 2012. There are four candidates who have composed formal campaigns to win the GOP nomination – Huckabee, Palin, Gingrich, and Pawlenty. You are standing in the booth, ballot in hand. Who do you cast it for? Sorry no write-ins here. (Of course this poll is aimed at Romney supporters, but if you are not among them feel free to vote up your candidate

I wanted to see what y'all thought about this hypothetical... please reply with sound reasons why or why not a particular candidate would be good or bad for a run against Obama in 2012 (2011)

 

[kansaswhig]

Of these choices?

The only one that has a shot is Pawlenty.

The rest are far to polarizing and will scare away independents.

 

[Kandahar]

I like Huckabee the best of those four. But I'm not a Republican, and will probably vote for Obama over any of them.

 

[Ethereal]

I'd vote for Newt.

 

[apdst]

Newt! If Newt ran, everyone else might as well pack up and go home. PBO will be irrelevant by 2012. The only question in 2012 will be, "which Republican is going to win the primary".

 

[Joe1991]

Newt! If Newt ran, everyone else might as well pack up and go home. PBO will be irrelevant by 2012. The only question in 2012 will be, "which Republican is going to win the primary".

I'll take that bet. How much?

 

[Ikari]

I don't know a whole lot about Pawlenty, I'd be willing to hear him out. Gingrich I wouldn't discount right off the bat. The other two are absolute "no"'s. Huckabee is kinda crazy and I'm not sure he isn't looking to infuse religion into the government. And Palin is an idiot, the further she is away from any power, the better.

 

[apdst]

I'll take that bet. How much?

Thousand dollars, baby! We can put it on paper. I ain't skeered. Call your lawyer and get it drawn up.

 

[Ethereal]

I'll take that bet. How much?

If Newt and Obama debated it would be a bloody massacre. Barry wouldn't stand a chance...

 

[danarhea]

I don't know a whole lot about Pawlenty, I'd be willing to hear him out. Gingrich I wouldn't discount right off the bat. The other two are absolute "no"'s. Huckabee is kinda crazy and I'm not sure he isn't looking to infuse religion into the government. And Palin is an idiot, the further she is away from any power, the better.

I lean towards Pawlenty, although I think Newt is better qualified. However, with Newt's personal baggage, he would be torn to shreds during the campaign.

Huckabee - I liked him until he said he would change the Constitution for Jesus. That was it. I will never vote for him after that.

Palin - A complete idiot. No.Way.Ever.

My vote will once again be for Ron Paul.

 

[Strucky]

Theres a four way tie in that poll.... lol

 

[Ethereal]

I lean towards Pawlenty, although I think Newt is better qualified. However, with Newt's personal baggage, he would be torn to shreds during the campaign.

Huckabee - I liked him until he said he would change the Constitution for Jesus. That was it. I will never vote for him after that.

Palin - A complete idiot. No.Way.Ever.

My vote will once again be for Ron Paul.

What's Newt's personal baggage? The divorces?

 

[Cold Highway]

Pawlenty because he just seems saner of the bunch and I rather be lynched than vote for the other three clowns.

 

[bhkad]

Newt is brilliant and would get my vote.

 

[bhkad]

There is any interesting discussion going on over at Mitt Romney Central; the poll posted there proposes the following hypothetical:





I wanted to see what y'all thought about this hypothetical... please reply with sound reasons why or why not a particular candidate would be good or bad for a run against Obama in 2012 (2011)

Why not start a poll here? BTW, welcome to DP.

 

[First Thought]

Newt, by far. I think he would destroy the other three candidates.

 

[DrunkenAsparagus]

I'd vote for Newt, probababy Pawlenty

 

[kansaswhig]

I think it's pretty sweet that Newt makes movies about Jesus but he's cheated on three wives. I think it's not hypocritical at all that while he was leading the witch hunt against slick Willy for getting a BJ, Newt was doing more than getting his knob polished by someone other than his wife.

Another "family values" Conservative hypocrite that believes they are above everyone else and that their own behavior shouldn't matter.

"Do as I say, not as I do"

Newt's slogan for 2012.

 

[First Thought]

I think it's pretty sweet that Newt makes movies about Jesus but he's cheated on three wives. I think it's not hypocritical at all that while he was leading the witch hunt against slick Willy for getting a BJ, Newt was doing more than getting his knob polished by someone other than his wife.

Another "family values" Conservative hypocrite that believes they are above everyone else and that their own behavior shouldn't matter.

"Do as I say, not as I do"

Newt's slogan for 2012.

Unfortunately for you, that would hardly make him a bad president. How about you discuss what part of his platform you would disagree with? Less personal attacks and more substance this time.

 

[kansaswhig]

Unfortunately for you, that would hardly make him a bad president. How about you discuss what part of his platform you would disagree with? Less personal attacks and more substance this time.

Since every GOP candidate would essentially have the same platform (except Ron Paul, of course, who would get my vote), there is no sense in arguing it. I don't like Newt personally and I imagine many other Americans don't either, despite his home on Fox News. He is tarnished goods, politically and I'll be shocked if he runs.

If I debated him, I'd simply ask, "Why did you cheat on all three of your wives if you believe so fervently in family values"?

 

[First Thought]

Since every GOP candidate would essentially have the same platform (except Ron Paul, of course, who would get my vote), there is no sense in arguing it. I don't like Newt personally and I imagine many other Americans don't either, despite his home on Fox News. He is tarnished goods, politically and I'll be shocked if he runs.

Well, enlighten us all on his platform, then.

If I debated him, I'd simply ask, "Why did you cheat on all three of your wives if you believe so fervently in family values"?

Completely irrelevant to whether or not he would make a good President and leader of this country.

 

[kansaswhig]

Well, enlighten us all on his platform, then.

http://platform.gop.com/2008Platform.pdf

Completely irrelevant to whether or not he would make a good President and leader of this country.

No, it isn't. Maybe Libertarians believe that personal behavior doesn't matter, but most people do care. If Newt's willing to put his dick in women other than his wife, then what else is he willing to do? What other moral issues is he willing to compromise on? He broke his vows to his wife and God not once, but three times. Would he break vows to the American people? Looks like he would.

If you live in an amoral world, then good for you. Most folks don't and believe one's behavior says a lot about them, not only personally, but professionally.

 

[submarinepainter]

I lean towards Pawlenty, although I think Newt is better qualified. However, with Newt's personal baggage, he would be torn to shreds during the campaign.

Huckabee - I liked him until he said he would change the Constitution for Jesus. That was it. I will never vote for him after that.

Palin - A complete idiot. No.Way.Ever.

My vote will once again be for Ron Paul.

mine too.




I think all either party offers are big government libs / neocons , i am tired of the same old ****.

 

[First Thought]

http://platform.gop.com/2008Platform.pdf

So candidates always agree with exactly what their party stands for? There's never any deviation?

No, it isn't. Maybe Libertarians believe that personal behavior doesn't matter, but most people do care.

Cheating on your wife does not mean you will be a poor leader. Unless you can somehow show a correlation...

If Newt's willing to put his dick in women other than his wife, then what else is he willing to do?

I do not know. Unlike yourself, I choose not to speculate.

What other moral issues is he willing to compromise on?

Again, I do not know. You never established what you think his platform would be, so I do not know if he would be making promises he could not keep. Also, compromising on moral issues does not make one a poor leader.

He broke his vows to his wife and God not once, but three times. Would he break vows to the American people? Looks like he would.

We can agree to disagree that making promises to America is somehow the same as fidelity to one's spouse.

If you live in an amoral world, then good for you. Most folks don't and believe one's behavior says a lot about them, not only personally, but professionally.

I do not know what idealistic world you live in, but most people, especially politicians, have some skeletons in their closets. Cheating on your wife has no relation to decision making concerning the future of our nation.

 

[Coronado]

http://platform.gop.com/2008Platform.pdf




No, it isn't. Maybe Libertarians believe that personal behavior doesn't matter, but most people do care. If Newt's willing to put his dick in women other than his wife, then what else is he willing to do? What other moral issues is he willing to compromise on? He broke his vows to his wife and God not once, but three times. Would he break vows to the American people? Looks like he would.

If you live in an amoral world, then good for you. Most folks don't and believe one's behavior says a lot about them, not only personally, but professionally.

Bill Clinton was elected twice to the Presidency. Thus, your argument fails.