A few years ago, they said that Kerry was a "flip-flopper" with no real stance who wasn't a strong candidate, and to an extent, I'll give them that (he didn't really "look" like a great leader).
Yet, there isn't one viable candidate here in the primary race for the entire republican party. I mean, say what you will about Clinton, Obama, & Edwards (which, all you can really say is that they're very well educated & have alot of political experience), but the republicans are banking their 2008 pool on:
a creepy, robot-like, uber-conservative mormon
A fictional TV judge from law & order
A guy who was pretty much dead-last in the runnings until he made the gayest Chuck Norris reference I've ever seen (and I've seen alot of em', those jokes got old 3 years ago)
And the guy who was mayor of NYC when it was attacked, which I'm not sure I'd be proud of (although that's certainly what he's resting his whole campaign on)
So, are the republicans pretty much expecting to loose?
2007-12-11 03:06:55 · 20 answers · asked by C'est Pas Vrai! 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I'll concede that McCain's alright. It's too bad no one likes him anymore, he's probably the only republican with a soul/any understading of what's actually going on in Iraq
2007-12-11 03:17:32 · update #1
Ron Paul is worthless
2007-12-11 03:37:40 · update #2
I say Ron Paul is worthless because he's going to be a non-factor. It's sad but true. Third parties don't win in this country. Moreover, I get the feeling he's a full-o-poopy liar, and would just go staunch right-wing upon winning the election (which he won't).
2007-12-11 05:10:34 · update #3
I don't think it's any worse than 2000. In 2000 they also had McCain and a buch of losers.
Although I liked McCain in 2000 better than McCain in 2008. I think when he lost that election to Rove (sorry, I mean Bush), it shook up his political confidence and turned him into more of a typical Republican politician.
Considering that, this could indeed be the GOP's worst ever pool of candidates. Not a single one is electable, which is why the one with the Chuck Norris commercial is doing the best right now. How sad is that?
2007-12-11 04:59:22 · answer #1 · answered by Dana1981 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is pretty bad. A poll that came out this morning said that 76% of Republicans are undecided whom to vote for and/or could change their mind at election time. Whereas only about 50% of Democrats were the same.
If you look at it, there are 3 socialist liberals running, 2 men so old that they have a hard time staying up beyond 8 pm, 2 men who have absolutely no chance, and 1 true Republican who cannot get any air time because his views are too old for most Republicans to remember what their party originally stood for.
2007-12-11 03:11:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Ron Paul who use to be a Republican and now's a Liberterian(i think of??) may be the only one that could stand a raffle. yet...because maximum persons do not totally inderstand that he abides with the help of the U.S. shape(and for despite reason they do in comparison to that), that on my own could save him from triumphing. he's the single i might vote for. we could desire to get the form decrease back contained in the government!!! through fact all lawmakers take an oath to uphold it...yet so very few who certainly DO.
2016-10-01 08:56:58 · answer #3 · answered by melesa 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was about to agree... but then I'm looking back to the past Republican candidates... I can't think of any year where there wasn't a group of sorry Republican losers. And what makes it worse is that there's morons in this country that actually like them. And what makes it even more worse is that there's enough people in the country with enough money to rig an entire election and try to convince the nation that the majority of our country wanted the Republicans.
2007-12-11 03:14:03 · answer #4 · answered by Doubledown 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Giuliani and Thompson are liberals in republican disguise. Liberals should be happy for them. Romney is just pathetic. McCain is better than any of the presidential candidates and has more experience than just about all of them put together, plus he is the only one who really understands war and most of the other issues. But unfortunately he does not have enough support to be electable, but he is making a small come back. Huckabee is the only real choice for the republicans and he can beat hillary and obama because they both are just the most pathetic excuse for candidates ever.
2007-12-11 03:13:52 · answer #5 · answered by flyguy03 3 · 3⤊ 4⤋
What a collection of candidates all want the to please the religious right they want to bring back the days of Ronnie and Nancy they all speak with fork tongue. My question is why do they not pay honor to man in the white house GWB?
2007-12-11 06:26:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. We have a revolutionary running for President. A Thomas Jefferson. An honest man that cares about the people. A man that wants to return America to it's Constitution principles.
Ron Paul is America's only Hope for President
2007-12-11 03:23:09 · answer #7 · answered by Eric T 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Hillary and Barrack will never leave Iraq, because of that many Dems will vote Ron Paul.
"Peace is Patriotic"
2007-12-11 03:40:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Let's see...you have Hillary, who has so much illegal baggage that it will take an army to carry it..Obama, who doesn't have enough experience, and John, Man of the little people, Edwards,( who is prettier than Hillary and spents more on his hair for one haircut than some of his constituents make per month)...who do you suggest is the best?
2007-12-11 03:22:48 · answer #9 · answered by elaine 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
They're expecting Bush to declare a state of emergency and cancel the elections! At that point ,the whole bunch of them will be Bush's new cabinet! They will do anything to remain in power! I wouldn't vote for any of them to even be a dog catcher!
2007-12-11 03:17:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋