• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who do you think will win the Republican nomination?

Who do you think will win the Republican nomination?

  • Total voters
    70
Barbbtx said:
Palin hasn't decided yet. Cain will get the social conservative tea party vote if she doesn't run. I hope she doesn't run. She said a long time ago,she wouldn't if there was someone she thought would do as good or better of a job. I'm hoping she thinks Cain is that person.
Whoops, forgot Bachmann, she is for sure a tea party favorite too.
Click to expand...

Palin can't run now since she missed the date when she would have had to drop out of her Fox News gig under our election laws, and Cain/Bachmann both have a snowballs chance in hell of winning.
 
Catawba said:
Palin can't run now since she missed the date when she would have had to drop out of her Fox News gig under our election laws, and Cain/Bachmann both have a snowballs chance in hell of winning.
Click to expand...

Really? I just saw her on Fox recently. She said it was still way early and she hadn't decided yet.
I think I'll go look for your avatar. :)
 
haymarket said:
Socks stretch also when making a perfect fit.

You really need to read Eric Hoffer. Every time you try to discuss this issue you make it clear you do not have a clue about the term or its application. I have tried to provide selections from the writing of Hoffer, the analysis you asked for and summaries for you but it is obvious that you are only pretending to discuss this as a ruse to attack me. Surprise surprise as Gomer Pyle used to say.

The real question for you is why you are so hyper sensitive every time this perfectly acceptable term in political science and sociology comes up here? It has been used for over half a century now and even inspired universities to offer courses in Political Sociology using the work of Hoffer and his TRUE BELIEVER concept as part of the syllabus along with the work of Mills, Domhoff and others. But for some reason, for you, its like waving a red flag when you hear it.
Click to expand...



Dude, even left wingers make fun of you. How can you not see it? This "true believer" nonsense is so ironic it's a joke.


I asked you this before and i'll do it again, name 5 right wingers on this forum you do not think are "true believers".

Hell name 5 right wingers you respect.

You can include right-libertarian if you want.


This vapid ranting of your is so so played.... :pimpdaddy:
 
Barbbtx said:
Really? I just saw her on Fox recently. She said it was still way early and she hadn't decided yet.
I think I'll go look for your avatar. :)
Click to expand...

Then you can add election law to the long list of things the imbecile Palin knows nothing about:

"Effective today, March 2nd, Fox News has suspended its contributor arrangements with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, both of whom have signaled possible runs for the president. The suspension is effective for 60 days, then on May 1st their contracts will be terminated unless they notify Fox that they are not running for president."
Fox News Suspends Newt Gingrich | Rick Santurom | Presidential Candidacy | Mediaite
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
So explain to me how "common dreams" is not as biased as newsmax. :lamo
Click to expand...

Explain it to you?

Check out every fact that have in the story and show where they are wrong. If you do not like that source because it upsets you ideologically, just google "Michigan emergency manager law - and you will have a legion of sources which give you the same factual information. Are you actually disputing this Republican power grab?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Dude, even left wingers make fun of you. How can you not see it? This "true believer" nonsense is so ironic it's a joke.


I asked you this before and i'll do it again, name 5 right wingers on this forum you do not think are "true believers".

Hell name 5 right wingers you respect.

You can include right-libertarian if you want.


This vapid ranting of your is so so played.... :pimpdaddy:
Click to expand...

Making childish insults hardly advances your 'case' - if indeed you had one.

I explained to you before, with plenty of verifiable proof, that the term TRUE BELIEVER has been around for over a half a century now. It is an accepted and well used term in the field of political science, sociology and political sociology. I gave you references, citations and quotes.

The real question here is why you seem to see red every time I use the term? For some reason known only to the inner workings of your thought processes, you see it as something other than what it is and have a purely emotional reaction to it as evidenced by this childish need to insult me.

Then you engage in these theatrics which have nothing to do with the use of the term. Name five right wingers I respect?!?!?!? Name five right wingers on this forum who are not True Believers?!?!?!?

You really must believe I have made some deep study of people here and can get out my charts and graphs and present the character analysis studies of the membership. Your request is a blatant attempt to bait me into making personal attacks on others. And it is not going to work.

Now I believe the next step is for you to issue another one of of your last, final, no more second chances, this is it, I'm not kidding this time, you had better watch out, warnings to me.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I asked you this before and i'll do it again, name 5 right wingers on this forum you do not think are "true believers".

Hell name 5 right wingers you respect.

You can include right-libertarian if you want.


This vapid ranting of your is so so played.... :pimpdaddy:
Click to expand...


i ask again...


Also haymarket, which of the listed potential candidates above would not fall into this silly "true believer" shtick of yours?


Why do you avoid this answer? Ironic, no?
 
haymarket said:
Making childish insults hardly advances your 'case' - if indeed you had one.

I explained to you before, with plenty of verifiable proof, that the term TRUE BELIEVER has been around for over a half a century now. It is an accepted and well used term in the field of political science, sociology and political sociology. I gave you references, citations and quotes.

The real question here is why you seem to see red every time I use the term? For some reason known only to the inner workings of your thought processes, you see it as something other than what it is and have a purely emotional reaction to it as evidenced by this childish need to insult me.

Then you engage in these theatrics which have nothing to do with the use of the term. Name five right wingers I respect?!?!?!? Name five right wingers on this forum who are not True Believers?!?!?!?

You really must believe I have made some deep study of people here and can get out my charts and graphs and present the character analysis studies of the membership. Your request is a blatant attempt to bait me into making personal attacks on others. And it is not going to work.

Now I believe the next step is for you to issue another one of of your last, final, no more second chances, this is it, I'm not kidding this time, you had better watch out, warnings to me.
Click to expand...



How about you answer the questions I posted in my last post?


Especially the topical one, which one of the listed potential candidates above would not fall into a "true believer" candidate. What makes that candidate so?




Simple really.
 
I voted for Pawlenty, because the poll is who do I think will win the nomination. If it was who do I want to win the nomination it would be Romney, but I don't think the populist/bigot base the Republicans have been courting lately would allow a Mormon to win the nomination.

Pawlenty is so perfectly bland that he's got a good shot at winning by default. All the other big candidates are too problematic, the others are too obscure. Pawlenty strikes the right balance of fame and WASP-hood to be able to take the nomination. He will lose to Obama.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
How about you answer the questions I posted in my last post?


Especially the topical one, which one of the listed potential candidates above would not fall into a "true believer" candidate. What makes that candidate so?




Simple really.
Click to expand...

I will be happy to answer the questions about the topic but will not jump at your bait to rip into fellow posters or make this about you.

Which candidates on the list are not true belivers?

Trump believes only in himself or whatever he feels at that point in time he needs to profess belief in to get over.

Romney is probably less of the right wing True Believer than the others on the list and probably fails the criteria test.

Pawlenty would not have been placed in that category a couple of years ago but now I have no idea if he is or is not. Time will tell.

Now its your turn - why do you see red and get upset every time a perfectly acceptable term of politics and sociology is used here?
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
Then you can add election law to the long list of things the imbecile Palin knows nothing about:

"Effective today, March 2nd, Fox News has suspended its contributor arrangements with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, both of whom have signaled possible runs for the president. The suspension is effective for 60 days, then on May 1st their contracts will be terminated unless they notify Fox that they are not running for president."
Fox News Suspends Newt Gingrich | Rick Santurom | Presidential Candidacy | Mediaite
Click to expand...

Fox, in an e-mail to POLITICO, indicated that once any of the candidates declares for the presidency he or she will have to sever the deal with the network.
Click to expand...
Palin never declared herself a candidate or formed an exploratory committee When/if she does, she's out as a paid contributor.
 
Barbbtx said:
Palin never declared herself a candidate or formed an exploratory committee When/if she does, she's out as a paid contributor.
Click to expand...

A few weeks ago I would have bet that Palin would NOT run figuring she could not win. But now with Huckabee out and Trump out as well, I wonder if the allure of the race will make her run that risk of losing to Obama calculating that she can still win the nomination and anything is possible with a drastic change in national or world events that changes the playing field in her favor?
 
In your poll you forgot about...

GEORGE SR. & BABS PLAN
Apparently they wanted Jeb to be POTUS even more than george jr. Unfortunately for them Jeb wants no part of running for POTUS. Sooo mommy & daddy's plan for 2012? Make all the other gop candidates look weak. Ya know that comment that babs made about Palin staying in Alaska? Not just a flip answer. (part of the plan) This way if they can talk Jeb into it even a last min. He has a great chance.

I guess Jeb would fall into to "other" cattagory even tho I officially voted that Romney would be the pick.
 
Last edited:
BentWingedAngel said:
In your poll you forgot about...

GEORGE SR. & BABS PLAN
Apparently they wanted Jeb to be POTUS even more than george jr. Unfortunately for them Jeb wants no part of running for POTUS. Sooo mommy & daddy's plan for 2012? Make all the other gop candidates look weak. Ya know that comment that babs made about Palin staying in Alaska? Not just a flip answer. (part of the plan) This way if they can talk Jeb into it even a last min. He has a great chance.
Click to expand...

What makes you say he has a great chance?
 
BentWingedAngel said:
In your poll you forgot about...

GEORGE SR. & BABS PLAN
Apparently they wanted Jeb to be POTUS even more than george jr. Unfortunately for them Jeb wants no part of running for POTUS. Sooo mommy & daddy's plan for 2012? Make all the other gop candidates look weak. Ya know that comment that babs made about Palin staying in Alaska? Not just a flip answer. (part of the plan) This way if they can talk Jeb into it even a last min. He has a great chance.

I guess Jeb would fall into to "other" cattagory even tho I officially voted that Romney would be the pick.
Click to expand...

Laura Bush has called Mitch Daniels wife. Apparently to give her advice/encouragement about what it's like to be first lady. I think the Bush's must want Mitch to run. Mitch has left the decision up to his wife.
 
Barbbtx said:
Laura Bush has called Mitch Daniels wife. Apparently to give her advice/encouragement about what it's like to be first lady. I think the Bush's must want Mitch to run. Mitch has left the decision up to his wife.
Click to expand...

That should make conservatives happy. :lamo
 
That's just sad. Nothing about his platform to back that thought?
 
Kandahar said:
I disagree. Candidates can overcome flaws, but they can't overcome "not very exciting." At least not in a primary. People are voting for the one candidate who they like the best...not any number of candidates who they deem acceptable. That's why I think Pawlenty is really overrated by most of the political elite.
Click to expand...

Really? Jon Kerry is the go-to guy for boring candidates, and he won the nomination over a guy who famously got a little too excited. I can't imagine that a great many people were excited by Jon McCain, either, another primary-winner. Nor do I think Pawlenty is any less exciting than either George Bush. When/if people realize that voting for Pawlenty could be the best chance they have at putting a conservative in the White House, they'll start getting excited, regardless of the candidate himself. I actually think Mitch Danliels has a lot more to lose in terms of having absolutely no charisma; from what I can tell he has even less than Pawlenty.
 
Dav said:
Really? Jon Kerry is the go-to guy for boring candidates, and he won the nomination over a guy who famously got a little too excited.
Click to expand...

Edwards?

And I wonder if Kerry didn't win because of his seniority and war record -though the war record seemed to be most of what was on display at the 2004 convention.

I actually think Mitch Danliels has a lot more to lose in terms of having absolutely no charisma; from what I can tell he has even less than Pawlenty.
Click to expand...

the man ran two successful campaigns for Governor off the back of his harley. I think (hope?) he might surprise us.
 
This far out, its too early to tell.
 
Kandahar said:
Could be...Romney is up a couple percent today, but it's hard to tell how much of that is due to his fundraising and how much of it is due to other factors like Huckabee/Trump declining to run. I think InTrade is usually pretty good about ignoring the campaign minutiae if it won't ultimately make that much of a difference in the outcome.
Click to expand...

really? i assumed it worked like the stock market - with some long investors and some short jumpy ones. what is Intrade's record?
 
cpwill said:
Edwards?
Click to expand...

Not quite:


the man ran two successful campaigns for Governor off the back of his harley. I think (hope?) he might surprise us.
Click to expand...

Ok, I just looked that up... yeah, the Harley will definitely earn him some points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom