Are there no conservatives here?
Thompson, of course! I think he's the closest thing we have to a statesman at that level of politics.
2007-10-10 03:00:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by gatefan 3
·
1⤊
4⤋
Fred T or Rudy have the best shots.
Rudy probably has the best odds of beating Obama, Fred the best odds of beating Hillary.
Fred is the most tradional small government conservative of the true Republicans up there (Ron Paul is a Libertarian running as a Republican and won't win the primary), and people elect Republicans to cut taxes, encourage freedom, stop freeloaders, and he's a big states rights guy which does those things. He's essentially the opposite type of Republican to what Bush is, and his record backs him on that, which is good for him.
Rudy simply polls well to undecided middle of the road voters. The truth is he's probably the best executive leader of ALL the candidates for either party. Gun to our heads, US sinks or swims scenario, he's the man to handle things. However Rudy isn't a social conservative so he could have a rough time winning enough of the religious right to pull the primary. He also comes off as pretty fierce (which he can be) and that might concern people. He's closer to Bush then Fred.
Some of the others in the field could do well... Romney isn't out of it in particular.
The Democrats are very beatable. Ever since they threw off their blue collar, Union friendly, working man agenda to favor special interest groups and college/hollywood affluent liberals with no common sense... and basically embraced Socialism and Communist theory... they've made themselves beatable when they could have swept this.
Their greatest mistake was Edwards over Gephard in 04. They made it clear their party didn't have room for anyone who deviated even a little from their absolute stances. You have diversity in the Republican party... look at Ron Paul on well, everything, or Rudy on social issues. The party tolerates it. You don't have that in the Democrats anymore, and that's come at the expense of the base they should never have ignored, working class Americans.
2007-10-10 03:50:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by Carlos S 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
You're going to get about 100 answers from people thumping their chests for the Dems, or the GOP. Don't listen to them, because you are getting simple minded, bias opinions.
The true answer to your question is that it's unlikely that a GOP candidate can claim the White House.
You can wax intellectual on ANY of the many issues, but here is the bottom line: Bush's overall approval rating is the lowest in the history of the Presidency. Natural human reaction is to fix with the opposite. The majority of people want a change, and you will see a change with the Demcoratic representative claiming the White House over the Republican, irrespective of who it is.
I know that all the Yahoo Answers right-wingers will pound this answer into the ground with negatives, so be it, but face facts guys: It's a liberal senate, and will be a liberal White House in January 2009.
2007-10-10 04:55:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by The Peav 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, maybe Ron Paul if he can get the nom., there is a huge anti-war sentiment in this country, a pro war candidate is unelectable... the only republican who is against the war is Ron Paul, unless they nominate him.. they have no shot.. Let's look at the frontrunners.. Mitt Romney is a major flip flopper as well as Giuliani.. In fact I believe Giuliani has the worst chances out of all of them, due to his poor track record
The fact that he bases his whole platform as hero on 9/11 is simply a myth...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17869046/
Then even with this information public, he lied and said that he spent just as much time as the workers, when found that he only spend 29 hours there!!
Not to mention that he left the city in double the debt.. regardless of his claims..
His co-chair has already made racist comment calling African Americans "retarded"
He has no foreign policy experience... And how will he fight terrorism when he can't even keep our borders secure.. Don't forget he said "illegal immigration is not a crime"
2007-10-10 03:04:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
I'm a Democrat and the only Republican I'd even consider voting for is John McCain who doesn't have a snowball's chance in heck of getting the nomination. I can't stand Guiliani. He's still playing the 9/11 card and I just think he's an obnoxious @sshole.
2007-10-10 03:01:20
·
answer #5
·
answered by luckythirteen 6
·
4⤊
1⤋
Yes. Any Republican who is capable of drawing a clear distinction between the Democratic philosophy and the Republican philosophy will win and win big. Failure to do that will be to forfeit any chance of winning. At this stage of the game they are only competing with each other to gain the Republican nomination. It remains to be seen if the successful candidate can offer this distinction when opposing the Democrat.
.
2007-10-10 02:59:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jacob W 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Tom Tancredo is excellent, but obscure.
Ron Paul is tempting, but too libertarian for most.
I am registered as repub, and I can't stand any of the four front runners, if that gives you any idea.
So, I would have to say...no.
I'm sure my candidates will be gone after the early primaries. Would I vote for Rudy????? Rudy versus Hillary? OMG.
I might sleep in.
2007-10-10 02:59:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by greengo 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Not unless one of them separates himself from the pack and stands for something. Right now all I'm seeing is a group of automatons who don't have anything to say.
The issues I care about are:
1.Sovereignty
2.Taxes, reform of the tax code, and reduce taxes.
3.Health care reform, care by doctors, not insurance companies or the government.
4.Reduction of government interference in my life.
5.Unnecessary laws, as in smoking laws, drug laws, building codes and licenses, because all of these require more taxes.
6.Preservation of the family and its autonomy. And parental right to raise their kids the way they want to.
7.Upholding the Constitution
8.Freedom of religion, all religion not just those which are politically correct.
9.Reduction of all the government agencies that were designed to help, but in fact, make life much harder.
Perhaps if some candidate were to address these issues and have real solutions for them, and could get some support from his colleagues, then he would have a chance.
2007-10-10 03:17:08
·
answer #8
·
answered by maryjellerson 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
Will be interesting to see how the rest of the country embraces the winner of the Iowa caucus. Most believe it will be Hillary but I think she will motivate almost as many people to vote against her as for her. Like many voted for Kerry because they didn't like Bush, you will get the same with Hillary. The only difference may be that the Republicans put out a better candidate than Kerry (better speaker, better record).
2007-10-10 02:59:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Who ever wins the primary will win the election. Think about this for a moment. Bill never even came close to garnering 50% of the vote. How will Hillary?? No one in their right mind would vote for that witch....
2007-10-10 02:58:36
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋
I sure HOPE NOT!!!!
I think that Guilliani will play the 9/11 card and may sucker some people in with sympathy for that. The others just scare me!
2007-10-10 02:57:16
·
answer #11
·
answered by kaytee3212 6
·
4⤊
1⤋