Who do you think will win the Republican nomination?

xpiher said:

I misquoted. I meant to say that 20-30% of the population is TEA and 20-30% of the population is Big gov repub. The information came from a USA-Today/Gallup poll.



Social conservatives who want to legislate from the bible and who support taking away liberties for security purposes. You know, PATACT, anti-gay marriage, anti-choice, smoking bans, etc

If you don't see how most repubs support big gov you need to pay more attention.

Click to expand...

Sorry, except for smoking bans (That's a liberal thing) I don't see those things as big government.

Spaceman_Spiff said:

After watching that video my first thought is that Cain needs to spend money on a better speech writer or hire a trainer to teach him how to speak extemporaneously. Right now he has a couple of bad habits that need to be fixed so he can clearly present his ideas.

The other I noticed is he is extremely weak in terms of foreign policy. Between watching this and his gaffes during the Republican debate he stands a real risk of ceding foreign policy, a traditionally conservative plank, to President Obama if he is not careful.

Click to expand...

LOL, Speech writer. Yea, I'm sure Cain has speech writers.:roll:
For, his couple of bad habits (I don't know what you mean) and I don't believe they would need "fixed"
One reason people like Cain is that he speaks to them. He is not an elitist, with trainers, speech writers and teleprompters.
He made no gaffes in the debate. He told the truth.
He needs work on foreign policy but he's a fast learner. I agree with him on Israel and his strong support of them.
The economy is our number one priorty and it is a national security issue as our energy policy and our immigration policy is. He's good on those.

Kandahar said:

Looks like Mitch Daniels is out. Although I did think he was somewhat overrated as a presidential candidate, there is no question that he is a great governor. Despite the fact that he is a conservative Republican and I'm a liberal Democrat, I don't think it's an exaggeration for me to say that Mitch Daniels is one of the two or three best governors in America right now.

As I see it, the number of viable Republican candidates is now down to just three: Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, and Jon Huntsman. Other potentially viable candidates (e.g. Chris Christie, Rick Perry) have not declared any intention to enter the race yet, although it's not too late. The rest of the field mostly consists of vanity candidates at this point.

I think the nominee will probably be either Romney, Pawlenty, or Huntsman...with Romney still the most likely choice.

Click to expand...

Romney=RomneyCare Huntsman-Cap and trade/Obama those are pretty big hurdles.

Barbbtx said:

Sorry, except for smoking bans (That's a liberal thing) I don't see those things as big government.

Click to expand...

Smoking bans is a repub thing as well. Also, all those things are BIG GOV.

Repubs have no chance in hell now though.

i voted "other". i think herman cain will take the nomination. why? because he's a federal reserve internationalist stooge and
fox news is already backing him.
the sheep will fall in line from there.

With Mitch Daniels out, the betting odds on each of the top Republican contenders have improved a bit. Here are the most likely Republican nominees now, with their probability of winning the nomination according to InTrade:

Mitt Romney 28.0%
Tim Pawlenty 25.0%
Jon Huntsman 16.5%
Sarah Palin 6.4%
Herman Cain 6.2%
Michele Bachmann 5.3%
Chris Christie 3.0%
Newt Gingrich 2.9%
Rick Perry 2.7%
Ron Paul 2.6%
Paul Ryan 1.1%
Rudy Giuliani 1.1%

Kandahar said:

With Mitch Daniels out, the betting odds on each of the top Republican contenders have improved a bit. Here are the most likely Republican nominees now, with their probability of winning the nomination according to InTrade:

Mitt Romney 28.0%
Tim Pawlenty 25.0%
Jon Huntsman 16.5%
Sarah Palin 6.4%
Herman Cain 6.2%
Michele Bachmann 5.3%
Chris Christie 3.0%
Newt Gingrich 2.9%
Rick Perry 2.7%
Ron Paul 2.6%
Paul Ryan 1.1%
Rudy Giuliani 1.1%

Click to expand...

yeah. i remember when barack obama was at the bottom of the nomination list before the primaries of 2008.

lewstherin said:

i voted "other". i think herman cain will take the nomination. why? because he's a federal reserve internationalist stooge and
fox news is already backing him.
the sheep will fall in line from there.

Click to expand...

Just curious. Are you mentally capable of making a point without taking a shot?

lewstherin said:

yeah. i remember when barack obama was at the bottom of the nomination list before the primaries of 2008.

Click to expand...

Only when people thought he wasn't going to run at all (i.e. before the 2006 midterms). After he started to make noise about a possible presidential bid in November 2006, he was never anything less than the 2nd most likely Democratic nominee on InTrade.

Kandahar said:

Only when people thought he wasn't going to run at all (i.e. before the 2006 midterms). After he started to make noise about a possible presidential bid in November 2006, he was never anything less than the 2nd most likely Democratic nominee on InTrade.

Click to expand...

bull. he was an underdog even after he won the iowa caucus. what world do you live in?

lewstherin said:

bull. he was an underdog even after he won the iowa caucus.

Click to expand...

Ahem. What I said was: After he started to make noise about a possible presidential bid in November 2006, he was never anything less than the 2nd most likely Democratic nominee on InTrade.

Do you understand what "2nd most likely" means? Do you understand that it's not mutually exclusive with being an underdog in a field of two?

lewstherin said:

what world do you live in?

Click to expand...

What's your point anyway? That InTrade isn't a good predictor of eventual success? If that's the case, I suggest you bet your life savings on every underdog contract. You'll make a fortune.

I think it depends on how far right the rest of the republican primary voters have gotten. If you are to believe polls Romney and pawlenty are the two likely with palin even closing in. If the real right truly thinks like fox and limbaugh make it out then Herman Cain and yes even palin.

Barbbtx said:

LOL, Speech writer. Yea, I'm sure Cain has speech writers.:roll:

Click to expand...

It would not surprise me that he does not have someone writing his speeches given the way he spoke. What I am saying is he probably ought to look into hiring someone who can help him better express his views for public events such as these.

Barbbtx said:

For, his couple of bad habits (I don't know what you mean) and I don't believe they would need "fixed"

Click to expand...

One of the bad habits I noticed is he repeats himself. For example, he will say something like, "Right now, we have start to drilling for oil right now." It is a minor inconvenience but it is a mistake best left for amateurs.

The other is parts of his speech were just wrong. During his speech he claims that we need to reread the Constitution. While still stalking about the Constitution he then goes on to cite a passage from the Declaration of Independence. It makes him look stupid to claim that his opponents need to read the Constitution when even he does not know it. This again is something a better staff could help with.

Barbbtx said:

One reason people like Cain is that he speaks to them. He is not an elitist, with trainers, speech writers and teleprompters.

Click to expand...

Since when is hiring someone to help you reach your potential elitist? Cain spent a lot of time talking about how he wants to be #1. Well, if he does, he better look into someone who can even out some of his rougher edges because he has the potential to actually win the presidency.

It is refreshing that he tells it like it is. My only suggestion is that he ought to be careful because that could easily bite him in the ass if he is not careful about what he says.

Barbbtx said:

He made no gaffes in the debate. He told the truth.

Click to expand...

I may be picky, but by my count he made two.

The first is claiming to not know what the plan is for Afghanistan. First I find it a mistake to ever claim that I do not understand something were I running for an elected office, much less the presidency. Most people who follow politics can articulate what the plan is in Afghanistan, so Cain claiming he does not know make him look ignorant. In politics, ignorance is weakness.

The other gaffe he made was during the Libya/Syria response. He claimed that President Obama waffled with first supporting Muammar Gaddafi, and then not supporting him. The problem is President Obama never supported Gaddafi in the least bit. My guess is that Cain confused Obama's response to the situation in Libya with the situation in Egypt, in which President Obama was waffling on whether or not to support Hosni Mubarak continuing to rule Egypt.

Mistakes like this make him look either stupid or ignorant. Again, in politics neither is desirable.

Barbbtx said:

He needs work on foreign policy but he's a fast learner. I agree with him on Israel and his strong support of them.

Click to expand...

He better be, since he has a lot to learn. There is a lot more to American foreign policy than just supporting Israel. For someone who claims we need a comprehensive policy his is lacking right now, though that is understandable since it is early in the campaign.

Barbbtx said:

The economy is our number one priority and it is a national security issue as our energy policy and our immigration policy is. He's good on those.

Click to expand...

Yes, the economy is the number one priority right now and he appears to share the same ideas of every Republican.

When it comes to energy policy I question some of the things he says. First, he criticizes the United States for loans sent to Brazil to drill for oil. One of the reasons China is excelling is because they are making similar loans to help develop natural resources throughout Africa and other developing countries. The United States should take similar actions in order to ensure that our nation's energy resources are plentiful. The fact that Cain criticizes that is pitiful.

The other thing is his claim that if the United States started drilling that any oil discovered will mean that the United States will be its own best customer. The only thing that would make that true is if he nationalizes our nation's oil industry, but I do not see him doing that. So instead newly drilled oil will be sold on the international market to the highest bidder.

Keep in mind that both of those should not attempt to expand production of natural resources while mitigating potential environmental damage that may arise.

Zyphlin said:

I respectfully disagree. If it was provable bush knowingly and purposefully lied, then perhaps. But thats nothing but speculation, not fact. It's un questionable fact that Clinton messed around with a subordinate.

Ultimately, based on facts not opinion/speculation, Iraq was a policy decision, Monica wasn't. I have am more forgiving of policy mistakes in terms of how much of an issue I have with a president on a personal level rather than ethical issues. Just. My take, I can understand others feeling differently

Click to expand...

I respect your right to your opinion but I see it much differently. There is plenty of evidence the Bush administration lied to us about the threat of Iraq, there is just none that was acted on. I would be happy to discuss it in a more appropriate thread.

Catawba said:

I respect your right to your opinion but I see it much differently. There is plenty of evidence the Bush administration lied to us about the threat of Iraq, there is just none that was acted on. I would be happy to discuss it in a more appropriate thread.

Click to expand...

Well, furthermore, Clinton's dalliance with an intern did not result in the deaths of thousands of American service personnel. Bush's dalliance with the truth around WMDs certainly did.

cpwill said:

conservatives will hold their nose and vote for Mitt if that is the option. but we don't like him, we don't want him, and we won't come out for him in the numbers that we would come out for someone who had at least a dimes worth of difference between himself and Obama on such critical matters as healthcare.

Click to expand...

That is indeed comforting to know, as Romney is the most likely candidate by far to win the GOP nomination! :sun

lewstherin said:

i voted "other". i think herman cain will take the nomination. why? because he's a federal reserve internationalist stooge and
fox news is already backing him.
the sheep will fall in line from there.

Click to expand...

I wish fox news was backing him. Even when they mention him, (when they even bother) they call him a long shot, Ceo of GF pizza, even though his resume is much more than that. Nope, Fox wants to help get an establishment republican nominated, just like the rest of the media. Pawlenty, or Romney will be their choice. Even Neil Cavuto who I think supports Cain, can't keep his mouth shut about the odds. Well dang, maybe his odds wouldn't be so bad if they'd all quit saying how hopeless his chances are.

Barbbtx said:

I wish fox news was backing him. Even when they mention him, (when they even bother) they call him a long shot, Ceo of GF pizza, even though his resume is much more than that. Nope, Fox wants to help get an establishment republican nominated, just like the rest of the media. Pawlenty, or Romney will be their choice. Even Neil Cavuto who I think supports Cain, can't keep his mouth shut about the odds. Well dang, maybe his odds wouldn't be so bad if they'd all quit saying how hopeless his chances are.

Click to expand...

what else would you call him? he IS a longshot.

Spaceman_Spiff said:

It would not surprise me that he does not have someone writing his speeches given the way he spoke. What I am saying is he probably ought to look into hiring someone who can help him better express his views for public events such as these.

One of the bad habits I noticed is he repeats himself. For example, he will say something like, "Right now, we have start to drilling for oil right now." It is a minor inconvenience but it is a mistake best left for amateurs.

The other is parts of his speech were just wrong. During his speech he claims that we need to reread the Constitution. While still stalking about the Constitution he then goes on to cite a passage from the Declaration of Independence. It makes him look stupid to claim that his opponents need to read the Constitution when even he does not know it. This again is something a better staff could help with.


Since when is hiring someone to help you reach your potential elitist? Cain spent a lot of time talking about how he wants to be #1. Well, if he does, he better look into someone who can even out some of his rougher edges because he has the potential to actually win the presidency.

It is refreshing that he tells it like it is. My only suggestion is that he ought to be careful because that could easily bite him in the ass if he is not careful about what he says.

I may be picky, but by my count he made two.

The first is claiming to not know what the plan is for Afghanistan. First I find it a mistake to ever claim that I do not understand something were I running for an elected office, much less the presidency. Most people who follow politics can articulate what the plan is in Afghanistan, so Cain claiming he does not know make him look ignorant. In politics, ignorance is weakness.

The other gaffe he made was during the Libya/Syria response. He claimed that President Obama waffled with first supporting Muammar Gaddafi, and then not supporting him. The problem is President Obama never supported Gaddafi in the least bit. My guess is that Cain confused Obama's response to the situation in Libya with the situation in Egypt, in which President Obama was waffling on whether or not to support Hosni Mubarak continuing to rule Egypt.

Mistakes like this make him look either stupid or ignorant. Again, in politics neither is desirable.


He better be, since he has a lot to learn. There is a lot more to American foreign policy than just supporting Israel. For someone who claims we need a comprehensive policy his is lacking right now, though that is understandable since it is early in the campaign.

Yes, the economy is the number one priority right now and he appears to share the same ideas of every Republican.

When it comes to energy policy I question some of the things he says. First, he criticizes the United States for loans sent to Brazil to drill for oil. One of the reasons China is excelling is because they are making similar loans to help develop natural resources throughout Africa and other developing countries. The United States should take similar actions in order to ensure that our nation's energy resources are plentiful. The fact that Cain criticizes that is pitiful.

The other thing is his claim that if the United States started drilling that any oil discovered will mean that the United States will be its own best customer. The only thing that would make that true is if he nationalizes our nation's oil industry, but I do not see him doing that. So instead newly drilled oil will be sold on the international market to the highest bidder.

Keep in mind that both of those should not attempt to expand production of natural resources while mitigating potential environmental damage that may arise.

Click to expand...

I was going to try to address your intire post, but I don't have the energy.
I'll just say, in my opinion the LAST thing Cain needs to do is hire experts to help him with his speechs.
His answer on Afghanistan was perfect. I guess he could have said "When I am elected, I'll bring all our troops home by July! I'll close Gitmo within a year. Everyone will be able to afford college and healthcare! There will be no more torture on my watch!
That is not who Cain is. He said he would have to have all the inside information that he is not privy to, before he could answer the question about what he would do about Afghanistan.
Seems Obama had all kinds of answers during his campaign until he became privy to the secret stuff. Then he had to back track.
His energy plan sounds great to me too. Maybe it won't be easy to execute exactly as he wants, by I promise you, it will get more than lip service.

liblady said:

what else would you call him? he IS a longshot.

Click to expand...

No, I don't think he is a long shot at all. He may not have as much chance as Romney, but he no long shot.

Barbbtx said:

No, I don't think he is a long shot at all. He may not have as much chance as Romney, but he no long shot.

Click to expand...

i think he may have gained some status very lately, but is still a long shot to actually get the nod. even the wsj hardly mentions him in this latest article.

Mitch Daniels Won't Run for President; Tim Pawlenty Announces Candidacy - WSJ.com

Barbbtx said:

I wish fox news was backing him. Even when they mention him, (when they even bother) they call him a long shot, Ceo of GF pizza, even though his resume is much more than that. Nope, Fox wants to help get an establishment republican nominated, just like the rest of the media. Pawlenty, or Romney will be their choice. Even Neil Cavuto who I think supports Cain, can't keep his mouth shut about the odds. Well dang, maybe his odds wouldn't be so bad if they'd all quit saying how hopeless his chances are.

Click to expand...

This could be a good time to check out what the rest of the media has to say. Maybe Fox is dropping the ball, but they're not the be-all and end-all.

Kandahar said:

Looks like Mitch Daniels is out. Although I did think he was somewhat overrated as a presidential candidate, there is no question that he is a great governor. Despite the fact that he is a conservative Republican and I'm a liberal Democrat, I don't think it's an exaggeration for me to say that Mitch Daniels is one of the two or three best governors in America right now.

As I see it, the number of viable Republican candidates is now down to just three: Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, and Jon Huntsman. Other potentially viable candidates (e.g. Chris Christie, Rick Perry) have not declared any intention to enter the race yet, although it's not too late. The rest of the field mostly consists of vanity candidates at this point.

I think the nominee will probably be either Romney, Pawlenty, or Huntsman...with Romney still the most likely choice.

Click to expand...

Sadly I think at this point you are correct. I guess I'll have to be a T-Paw fellow unless Perry throws his hat in.

With the exception of Huntsman - that man is more Romney-lite than Bachmann is Palin-lite. I don't see him gaining much traction - traditionally a Republican Primary goes as thus: one leading candidate wins Iowa. another wins New Hampshire. They battle between them for South Carolina, who picks the winner.

Huntsman is (as I recall) skipping Iowa all-together, and with good reason; he has little chance there. Romney has New Hampshire pretty solid in his corner assuming no amazing break-away candidate; and Huntsman would have to be competing with Romney for the same folks.

He may be a good candidate (I know little of him personally), but he doesn't have the support.

JohnWOlin said:

I think it depends on how far right the rest of the republican primary voters have gotten. If you are to believe polls Romney and pawlenty are the two likely with palin even closing in. If the real right truly thinks like fox and limbaugh make it out then Herman Cain and yes even palin.

Click to expand...

an interesting analogy might be drawn now between the Republican base of 2012 and the Democrat base of 2008. Any Candidate who has to defend a healthcare mandate, big spending, or an otherwise fiscally liberal record will find themself in the same awkward position as Hillary explaining her vote for the war in Iraq.

cpwill said:

Sadly I think at this point you are correct. I guess I'll have to be a T-Paw fellow unless Perry throws his hat in.

With the exception of Huntsman - that man is more Romney-lite than Bachmann is Palin-lite. I don't see him gaining much traction - traditionally a Republican Primary goes as thus: one leading candidate wins Iowa. another wins New Hampshire. They battle between them for South Carolina, who picks the winner.

Huntsman is (as I recall) skipping Iowa all-together, and with good reason; he has little chance there. Romney has New Hampshire pretty solid in his corner assuming no amazing break-away candidate; and Huntsman would have to be competing with Romney for the same folks.

He may be a good candidate (I know little of him personally), but he doesn't have the support.

Click to expand...

What makes you support Pawlenty? I need to know who to vote for in the repub primary so I need more info from your lot.