The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I'm interested in your opinions.

From an outside perspective, it appears as if your party is in shambles.  It looks like your base is dwindling to only include Christian white men over 40.  There are a lot of them out there, but in a general election, where you depend on women, Hispanics, and secularists, you're going to have a tough go.  ...and not just in this election cycle, but forever.

I look at your candidates and I just don't see a viable one in the group:

Romney - a total fraud and both sides know it.  He has no convictions and stands for nothing.  He's a blank slate and his own party can't even stomach him.  ...and I don't blame them.  He's outspending his opposition (who, in my opinion, are unelectable lunatics) by a greater than 5 to 1 margin, and still only barely squeaking by.  In an election where the banks and the 1% is extremely unpopular, as well the Healthcare bill, the GOP frontrunner is a 1% money manager, against the auto-bailout, who basically authored the Healthcare bill.  What are you thinking?

Santorum - I'd like to see Santorum do well, only because I really believe that he's the real thing.  He is un-apologetically on board with GOP policies and doesn't use "dog whistles".  I think it'd actually be good for the country to have an up/down vote on a really religious candidate that preaches his religious beliefs from the stump.  I think he'd get destroyed in the general election, but at least we'd be able to see where a true social conservative stacks up.

Gingrich - Extremely unpopular with his own peers and lost his job from multiple ethics violations.  Really?  How can you expect him to win anything?

Paul - Not in it to win it.  Only in it to change the conversation, where I think he's been pretty successful.

------

So, my question to the Republicans on here, leaving how much you dislike Obama out of it, what do you see for your party?  What do you want out of it, and what do you think of the dog and pony show that's happening right now?

For me, as a liberal, I do want a strong, logical GOP.  I think that a sensible dissenting voice is integral to our politics...it keeps us from making rash choices.  But what we have now, from where I'm sitting, is a total joke that is only getting worse.

Romney is thee nominee. Period. The other 3 need to hang it up so that Romney can begin campaigning against Obama. He can win if he burns the McCain playbook of being nice to Obama, and focuses on issues like the economy, etc. Make his campaign about issues, and force Obama to defend his record, Romney wins. If he spends his whole campaign talking about how nice a guy Obama is, and catering to Democrats, Romney loses.

This makes me scratch my bean a bit, as it seems like every time I see him in a debate, all he's talking about is Obama...

I'm by no means into politics but from highlights that I see from the debates, I can't stand any of the republican nominees except Paul. He's the only one that makes sense when debating and when being interviewed. I don't know about his overall platform, but I'd wish he'd be the nominee.

Everyone else is just so ridiculously stupid I can't see how they even made it this far.

McCain's problem wasn't that he was nice to Obama.  There was plenty of negitive campaigning against Obama.  Granted most of it wasn't followed by "My name is John McCain and I approve this message."  The way McCain/Fiengold had intended things to happen.  But in case you missed it the most common pro-McCain ad on TV was one featuring Obama's church's minister.  

McCain's problem was he didn't stand for anything other than "I am not Obama."   Mitt Romney is running on that exact same play book.  I have not heard any sort of vision or direction Romney wants to take this country.  Everything I have heard is why Obama is bad.  That is not a direction.  Simply stating Obamacare (which is almost exactly what Romneycare is) is bad is not a direction.  If he wants to lay out his plan to improve the healthcare system and it is better than Obama care he can win on that.  If he has a better plan for improving the economy he can win on that.  If all he is going to do is say where the current adminstratation went wrong -- he will lose.  

In a town hall meeting, a woman asked McCain about Obama being a muslim. McCain interrupted her, and something along the lines of "Obama is a nice man, and we won't have any talk like that here." You can't run a dirty campaign, and all of a sudden, play nice. It won't work. I think the majority of the Republicans except for the Rubios, DeMints, and Jindals etc are simply afraid of being called a racist if they attack Obama.

So you are saying you would have rather had McCain lie about Obama's religion? The man isn't a Muslim, he is a US citizen, or are you one of conspiracy people?

Ahem..Just a thought......When we ask a question about what someone thinks,and ask them like...Without just posting an Anti Obama rant...Someone posts,it would help to get more responses if we don't pounce on every word....I thank Frimp for posting....

I kind of feel the Republicans are going through what the Democrats went through earlier this century...Nominataing old rich white guys,that in a personality contest,just barely beat out roadkill... :D

I don't care what his religion is. But shooting yourself in the foot to avoid offending your opponent is stupid. Everything about McCain being the nominee was stupid, and from what I've seen from Romney, he is using the same playbook.

But, as a Republican, are you satisfied with Romney?

The way I see it is this: There are some people who will always vote the most liberal choice.  I'm one of them.  There are people who will take the most conservative choice (Frimp).  When Obama ran last time, not only did I vote for him, but I called my friends to make sure that they voted.  I made sure that they had a ride to the polls.  Republicans do the same, when they have someone they are passionate about.  So, I don't doubt that GOPers that vote will choose Romney over Obama.  ...but they're not going to be preaching about Romney at church.  They're not going to be knocking on doors to help him.

And that's why he'll lose.

Romney is a total fraud.  He can't possibly badmouth Obamacare with any shred of respectability.  He can't talk about abortion.  He can't talk about helping the middle class.  Yet that is what his constituency will demand of him.  There's just no way that you can realistically think any of those things are important to him.  He's just saying what he thinks he needs to in order to get elected.  But clearly, the GOP base isn't on board, and I don't blame them.

And I sincerely hope that if Obama is in a town meeting and someone ask Obama about Romney being a member of a cult that promotes bigomy, Obama responds in similiar manner as McCain's response. 


You can attack Obama on the issues without being a racist.  Attack him on the issues.  On the lack of improvement in the economy during his term, on gas prices (even though the president has very little to do with the cost of gas).  What the republicans should have pounded Obama on last time was lack of experience.  (Won't work this time).  But most of the attack ads on Obama were in fact racist, such as the Wright ads. 

If the DNC or an Obama superpac runs ads attacking Romney on bigomy, it would be the equivlant of much of the ads run against Obama last election cycle.   

Frimp, I think your response is indicative of Dave's original point.

Look at the example you gave of McCain "playing nice": a McCain supporter at a town hall made an unsubstantive, false claim that Obama was an Arab.  His verbatim response: "No, ma'am: no ma'am. He's a decent family man, citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues, and that's what this campaign's all about. He's not."

To today's GOP base, this is heresy.  They don't want to hear about disagreements with the other side on the issues of substance; they want to hear about how Marxist Kenyan secret Muslims are secretly plotting to undo the Constitution and start up FEMA concentration camps after they confiscate all of your guns.

This is the problem, and you can see it in action as we speak.  GOP presidential candidates that speak out in favor of offering an education to the children of illegal immigrants, or providing a path to legal residency for people who have lived here for multiple decades, are immediately eviscerated for proposing "amnesty."  Any Republican that offers even the slightest bit of support for an individual healthcare mandate (which was a common conservative position prior to 2009) is branded an Obamacare apologist.  The current iteration of the GOP base wants someone who will actively hurl insults (true or not) at the left, who will vigorously dismantle the safety net, and who will crusade on social issues that have already been lost (contraception?  really?).

Lest I be accused of team bias, I invite anyone to look at the hotly-contested 2008 Democratic primary, and see how many hard-left statements Obama made during that primary season that had to be actively walked back for the general.  There was the well-publicized "bitter and clinging to guns and religion" quote, but other than that, what other crazy-left-wing statements did Obama (and Hillary) make in the primary that they weren't ready to stand behind in November?

I think all of the nominees are a joke and you are right the GOP is in shambles. I want Obama gone but I do not see anyone from the GOP side currently that can win on their own.

My brother in law, a lifelong Republican, admitted to me that he has left his own party.  That really resonated with me.  He has become more secularist as he's aged, and probably a little more moderate, but still believes in the basic "small government principles" that the GOP claims to be.  But he's done with them for now.

My brother, who I consider a liberal, is a registered Republican.  I don't think he's ever voted for them (or at least not recently).  He says that when he reads what they're supposed to be about, from a fiscal conservatism standpoint, he agrees with them.  However, in practice, they aren't that.

I never thought I'd miss the days of William F. Buckley, but in today's GOP atmosphere, he would be branded an elitist, snob, RINO, or worse.

I think it's fair to say that the Republican base wants little to do with Romney, but because there are no legitimate candidates running against him, he will be the nominee.  This is similar to 2004 when Kerry ran for the Democrats.

The GOP needs issues to run on, and so far, they haven't been able to produce much other than anti-Obama rhetoric.  They need something that will draw in folks who are middle of the road on issues.  Each side will pull in their hard core voting bases, but whoever wins the middle, wins the election.  Right now, I don't see a single issue Mitt Romney and the Republican Party can use to pull those voters.

As an aside, every time I see Mitt, I can't help but think he's actually the puppet, Guy Smiley, from Sesame Street.

Actually they had one legitmate candiate ---Newt.  I don't agree with him on most issues, but he is a legitmate statesman. 

You haven't been watching Survivor have you? They have the gayest of young gay guys on there and last week he said he was a Republican and he didn't believe in handouts. I can't stand the guy but it doesn't have anything to do wiht him being gay ... or a Republican!

And the election comes down to guys like him. 

I am going to vote for Obama.  Frimp is going to vote for the republician nominee.  It really doesn't matter what either of the canditates do between now and November as it concerns either mine or Frimps vote.

The question comes down to who wins the votes of homosexuals who want legalized gay marriages but oppose universal health care.  Or pro-life Catholics who  oppose gay marriage but support universal health care.  Or NRA members who oppose gun control and the "Patriot Act".  Etc.

Very few people agree with any canidate or parties platform 100%.  But as of late the democrats message has been one of inclusion, while the republicans are doing every thing they can to alinate people who agree with some but not all of their platform. 

 

 

I applaud McCain for doing that!  Remember, McCain had a strong record of working with the opposition before being painted as "another George Bush lackey" by the Democrats.  McCain had integrity, I thought, which is why they needed a pitbull who would say anything on the ticket (Palin).  I think that was the error.  They didn't choose a strategy, they mixed it up, with McCain as (largely) good cop and Palin as bad cop.

Let's get real: McCain was an honorable politician, but his party was so badly damaged when it was his turn, that it didn't matter what he did.  The US wasn't electing another Republican after 2 terms of Bush.  He was just way too unpopular.

McCain, in order to drum up any enthusiasm at all, appealed to his base, but it just didn't fit him.  It ended up souring his image, both with the opposition and with his own party.

I thought McCain would have won if he didn't choose Palin.

The democrats weren't entirely to blame for that.  While the dems did do there best to attribute the failing of GWB to McCain, McCain didn't have a very consistant message on whether he supported or opposed Bush on many issues.  McCain might have won if he had stuck with a message of his willingness to compromise with the democrats and his centerist history instead of graviting to the right. 

I was using that as one of many examples of how McCain torpedoed himself. He could have said something along the lines of Obama isnt a muslim, or he didn't believe one's religion should have anything to do with anything. But instead, he scolded the woman, and defended Obama's honor.

It will be interesting to see if the media and Obama gives Romney a pass on being a mormon like they did with Obama. Not holding my breath though.

^ No chance.

You don't have a 2 term president that has very, very low approval ratings, a crashed economy, and then elect another guy from the same party with more-or-less the same policy platform.  It just doesn't happen. McCain could not win.

I expect that Romney's religion and his association with those who support bigomny, will be considersablely less of an issue this election than any one of the following:  (1) Obama's associations with black leaders that had made "unamerican" statements while condemning this countries history of slavery, segration and continued racism, (2) whether Obama was/is a Muslim, (3) statements made by leaders of Obama's church, (4) Obama's birth certificate, (5) Obama's middle name. (6) The similarity in the sounding of Obama and Osama's names.   

Will it come up...probably.  So don't hold your breath for a complete pass.  But Obama hardly got a pass in the media. 

I don't think that Romney's religion will play a factor in the general election at all.

The right is the more religious driven of the parties.  They are more likely to have "religious tests" on their candidates.  The left doesn't really do that.  They elect a wider variety of religious views to office.

I know more than a few Republicans who really have a problem voting for Romney because he is a Mormon.  These people are all hardcore Christians, and see Mormonism a cult and not a legitimate religion.  The less Romney plays the religion card would be to his advantage.

That is what he said; I just posted the direct quote.  The woman said that Obama couldn't be trusted because he is an Arab.  McCain said that Obama is not an Arab (this is fact) and that Obama (a sitting Senator, mind you) is a decent citizen who he (McCain) has serious fundamental policy differences with, and that's what the campaign should be about.

If Republicans honestly believe that that kind of response is unacceptable, it confirms the point being made.

Are you saying that the media gave Obama a pass on being a Muslim, or what exactly?  Obama is a plain-jane Christian.  That doesn't require a "pass" in America.

Romney's religion is going to be a bigger issue with his own base than with independents. 

I don't see either side bringing it up.  Romney isn't the most skilled canidate to ever run but he is smart enough to know, "vote for me I a Mormon" isn't a winning campaign plan.

The dems aren't going to harp on it because it undercuts their own message that Obama should be judged on his leadership not his skin color.  Plus there is no reason to bother stirring up the Roy Moore wing of the republican party., that neither will vote for a Morman or a black and are going to stay home or vote third party anyway.   Anyone who considers Romney's religion an issue already knows his religion, the dems don't need to stir that pot. 

A huge issue with the GOP is the absorption of the Tea Party crowd. They are very radically opposed to anything other than their vision, and they have caused a rupture within the party. The GOP screwed up when the brought them in top help with gains in the 2010 mid-terms, and now they are paying the price. The GOP has a serious identity crisis.

I think, though the party has catered to the far right, that this talk of identity crises and lack of vision is overblown.  I remember the same being said of the Democrats before a young, charismatic senator named Barack Obama stepped into the light.  The Republicans lack a candidate.

Aren't I lucky, I get a double dose of the Republicans today.Ron Paul and Rick Santoram are both speaking,visiting here in town today...

I'm with you on this one Dave. A Romney / Obama election would be a missed opportunity. There's not enough contrast. Romney is like a vanilla wafer.

An Obama / Santorum election would spark many conversations this country needs to continue to have. It's cleary in a post Christian era and those two running against each other would be very cathartic.

Unfortunately, Santorum doesn't have the money or organization to win against Romney.

^^^ Unfortunately? Santorum is a wacko. I honestly have no idea how people can vote for Gingrich, Romney, or Santorum.

Is this a joke? Santorum is a hate-filled, bigoted douche bag that thinks the Hand Maid's Tale is a how-to on running a nation. He doesn't want to be president. He wants to be the Pope of America and make sure we're all nice and moral according to his imaginary friend in the sky.

(http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lkhw456Y8s1qjcwuzo1_400.jpg)

The last two posts are exactly why I think it would be a good election. It would bring out the intensity of both constituents. Because there are many people who agree with his conservative values.

But, I think it is less about religion, specifically Catholic. The majorities of Catholics have voted for Romney in this primary.

Romney is also not without an interesting backstory. Joseph Smith, who had a vision of Jesus and started the Chuch of Latter Day Saints, ran for president. Which he was later murdered because of while in custody. Now, after having our first black president, I think it is no small deal that we could possibly have a our first mormon president. It really is a shift in mindset.

I don't want to vote for any of these guys. I may end up not voting again just because these guys are all bad. The only one that I would even think about supporting is Ron Paul but he's not going to be the nominee.

I don't really care what religion the president is. I think religion has NO business in politics. Period.

I totally agree with you and will go one further. I will not vote for any of these fools. The only one that will get my support is Paul. The other three are shithead jack-offs and Obama is a stinky turd that's in way over his head. My buddy told me in the last election to vote for the lesser of 2 evils. To hell with that, if they don't deserve my vote and they won't get it. Like George Carlin said, "If you vote you have no right to complain !!!"