since the crazies are killing each other before they even face Obama, why aren't conservatives looking closer at Huntsman? Seems like he would have the ability to get some votes fom indies, undecideds, and even the growing crowd of disappointed Dems. Romney wishes he was this guy.

Just asking, but seems like a plausible choice to win.

Who?

[quote=ZRX1200]Who?[/quote]

exactly why I'm asking. Why can't he get noticed in light of these pathetic choices?

You made me laff Z.

I went deer hunting last week but Le HockeyDad don't want your votes!

I hope you laughed at my sarcasm.....

I listened to him interviewed on NPR a longtime before the circus started and he makes some good points (for my views) but I think he's too liberal for a majority of the base offsetting middle gains. He's closest to Barry Soetoro of the R candidates and of Barry wasn't so bad I think he would have a better shot.

All the R candidates have redeeming qualities, just the little problem of most belonging to one party rule with different flavored syrup.

But I'm just a Ron Paul kinda guy so what do I know. It worth what it cost ya!

[quote=ZRX1200]I hope you laughed at my sarcasm.....

I listened to him interviewed on NPR a longtime before the circus started and he makes some good points (for my views) but I think he's too liberal for a majority of the base offsetting middle gains. He's closest to Barry Soetoro of the R candidates and of Barry wasn't so bad I think he would have a better shot.

All the R candidates have redeeming qualities, just the little problem of most belonging to one party rule with different flavored syrup.

But I'm just a Ron Paul kinda guy so what do I know. It worth what it cost ya! [/quote]

loved it as sarcasm, and so quick I was caught off guard. shoulda known you'd be out there.

I don't mean to suggest he'd garner much support from the small sampling here as THE answer, but he seems like the logical choice if Reps want to take the office away from Obama. Looking at the bigger picture, he may be the only one running from either party who could actually work cross party, the idea being that stalemate and dogma are the things really hindering positive direction.

Yeah, he has a couple things that match up with Paul, couple that match others too. Face it, no one can ever get every issue they want unless they simply want dictatorship. What are people willing to let go of to have what's most important to them?

Still think it will be Newt, though he always has that self destruct button within reach.

[quote=HockeyDad]I went deer hunting last week but Le HockeyDad don't want your votes![/quote]

I don't get it, unless it's a Romney reference.

I'm with ZRX on his general characterization of the Republican party as a different flavored cough syrup.. . Huntsman seems bright enough but the fact that he is heavily backed (and seemingly anointed) by the Bush family is major turnoff for me, Frank.

To me, Huntsman comes across as a smarmy, rich, one world bootlick who has substantial holdings in China and the rest of the world and to which he gives the SAME level of priority as he does this country. IMHO, people like that are responsible for converting our country into a Walmart distribution center of Chinese goods. They have no real love of country nor sense of loyalty.

The irony is that this man with anemic poll numbers can still be President despite his lack of financial support from supporters or committing any millions from his own personal piggybank. Daddykins has set-up a substantial and very rich political action committee ready to come to his aid shortly if he has the testicular fortitude to continue his rather embarrassing, self-serving run.

[quote=bloody spaniard]I'm with ZRX on his general characterization of the Republican party as a different flavored cough syrup.. . Huntsman seems bright enough but the fact that he is heavily backed (and seemingly anointed) by the Bush family is major turnoff for me, Frank.

To me, Huntsman comes across as a smarmy, rich, one world bootlick who has substantial holdings in China and the rest of the world and to which he gives the SAME level of priority as he does this country. IMHO, people like that are responsible for converting our country into a Walmart distribution center of Chinese goods. They have no real love of country nor sense of loyalty.

The irony is that this man with anemic poll numbers can still be President despite his lack of financial support from supporters or committing any millions from his own personal piggybank. Daddykins has set-up a substantial and very rich political action committee ready to come to his aid shortly if he has the testicular fortitude to continue his rather embarrassing, self-serving run.[/quote]

Understood, and not surprised. probably accurate. I suppose the answer to my question is the unwillingness to spend...yet.

But I'm not pushing his agenda, just asking why he hasn't emerged as a favorite to the vast blander middle than this forum tends to attract. He seems more marketable than the typical hair-do that rises early and fades on lack of substance. Not an issues issue, I mean more of in a tactical way toward winning the office.

Might he be playing it the opposite way, letting others slug it out and then making his move? It is getting late.

So far, Walmart is acting like they don't miss my business at all.

[quote=frankj1]I don't get it, unless it's a Romney reference.[/quote]

Yes, it was a Mormon joke. Mormon jokes suck....they always have to be explained.

Obama will win re-election. Accept the reality.

[quote=HockeyDad]Yes, it was a Mormon joke. Mormon jokes suck....they always have to be explained.[/quote]

correct

[quote=HockeyDad]Obama will win re-election. Accept the reality.[/quote]

correct.

[quote=bloody spaniard]I'm with ZRX on his general characterization of the Republican party as a different flavored cough syrup.. . Huntsman seems bright enough but the fact that he is heavily backed (and seemingly anointed) by the Bush family is major turnoff for me, Frank.

To me, Huntsman comes across as a smarmy, rich, one world bootlick who has substantial holdings in China and the rest of the world and to which he gives the SAME level of priority as he does this country. IMHO, people like that are responsible for converting our country into a Walmart distribution center of Chinese goods. They have no real love of country nor sense of loyalty.

The irony is that this man with anemic poll numbers can still be President despite his lack of financial support from supporters or committing any millions from his own personal piggybank. Daddykins has set-up a substantial and very rich political action committee ready to come to his aid shortly if he has the testicular fortitude to continue his rather embarrassing, self-serving run.[/quote]

Funny, I substituted the names of Romney, Newt, Cain, Bachman, and it pretty much summed them up too.

Can we get another crop...please?

[quote=DrMaddVibe]Funny, I substituted the names of Romney, Newt, Cain, Bachman, and it pretty much summed them up too.

Can we get another crop...please?

[/quote]

no one satisfies everything, that's long been known. except a benevolent dictator. And other than Alan Iverson, no one is "The Answer" either.

Sure he's a cream of wheat candidate, I don't care. But people may want a break from spicey food already cuz it's been poison to the country. My interest is more like a marketing question. Obviously Bachmann et all have no shot.

I just don't understand why a party that has spent 4 years determined to make sure Dems fail (hey, that's the game plan, I didn't make it up) so as to push them out of ofice wouldn't back the most likely candidate to have the broadest, blandest appeal. I can't understand the inability to identify and support the person most likely after successfully regaining so much of Congress...

[quote=DrMaddVibe]Funny, I substituted the names of Romney, Newt, Cain, Bachman, and it pretty much summed them up too.

Can we get another crop...please?

[/quote]=d> =d> =d>

[quote=frankj1]no one satisfies everything, that's long been known. except a benevolent dictator. And other than Alan Iverson, no one is "The Answer" either.

Sure he's a cream of wheat candidate, I don't care. But people may want a break from spicey food already cuz it's been poison to the country. My interest is more like a marketing question. Obviously Bachmann et all have no shot.

I just don't understand why a party that has spent 4 years determined to make sure Dems fail (hey, that's the game plan, I didn't make it up) so as to push them out of ofice wouldn't back the most likely candidate to have the broadest, blandest appeal. I can't understand the inability to identify and support the person most likely after successfully regaining so much of Congress...[/quote]

I have the 1/4 theory.

1/4 of the Republican base is for Romney, 1/4 for the other candidates, 1/4 is "independent" (very undecided), & 1/4 is hard core Tea Party...

My guess is that after the South Carolina primary, Romney will be in the running along with one of the top three vote getters (Gingrich, Cain, or Perry, couple that with someone who garners enough independents AND Tea Partiers & VOILA, you have the trifecta of oatmeal surprise for the electorate to savor.

[quote=HockeyDad]Obama will win re-election. Accept the reality.[/quote]

Doubt it and Allez les Habitants!

=d>

[quote=HockeyDad]Obama will win re-election. Accept the reality.[/quote]

It's true.

The real question is, how many more election cycles will it take before people start to WAKE THE F**K UP and realize they are being conned?

I used to think we needed a strong, viable 3rd party. I now realize we need a strong, viable 2nd party.

[quote=borndead1]It's true.

The real question is, how many more election cycles will it take before people start to WAKE THE F**K UP and realize they are being conned?

I used to think we needed a strong, viable 3rd party. I now realize we need a strong, viable 2nd party.[/quote]

IMHO, You never know for sure but it'll probably be too late when the folks finally start to wake up... Heck, I think it'll already be too late after this next election.

The people's "individualism" streak will be trumped by dependency on Government for survival.

[quote=borndead1]It's true.

The real question is, how many more election cycles will it take before people start to WAKE THE F**K UP and realize they are being conned?

I used to think we needed a strong, viable 3rd party. I now realize we need a strong, viable 2nd party.[/quote]

Can I hear a 1st party?🇨🇮