So, who's likely to win and why.
I'd like to think that Jon Huntsman will win. Mainly because increasingly, the republicans want "anyone but Romney" and each of the other more zany people have surges and then fall down. Gingrich is in the midst of his at the moment. Eventually, when all that quiets down, Huntsman, with his legitimate republican credentials and potential bipartisan appeal, strikes me as the most likly candidate to give Obama a real run for his money. That said though, he doesn't have much in the way of natural charisma, which for the Republicans is something of a must.
I find it almost laughable that the base would even consider Newt, considering his 'moral' failures in the past. God knows, if Rick decided to highlight his lover past - Like Ron highlighted his career -, his campaign might as well close up shop and just disappear.
Agreed. Jon at the very least isn't batty as hell. Although, he has the same flaw as the Mit, he's Mormon. Not that this is a bad thing, I just can't see the Social Conservative voting for either. After all, lets face it. It's the Social movements that win the elections, not the economical ticket.
I think Jon Huntsman will win. While he is still polling in the lower single-digits nationally, he did win the New Hampshire mock-primary. Independents like him, he's consistently conservative, and the New York Times predicts he's the most likely republican candidate to beat Obama.
His only downfall is that he worked under Obama as ambassador to China, and many republicans assume he's similar to Obama because of this association. This is not the case, as his record as governor shows just how conservative he actually is. If anything, it speaks to his merit and shows that he is bipartisan.
As far as the Mormon issue is concerned, it's a non-issue for me. I don't care about my president's religion, as long as he or she has morals. I hope that when he wins the NH primary, voters will come around to it. When JFK ran people made a big deal about his Catholicism, but he won anyway.
Anyway, if you want to hear more about Jon Huntsman, you should check out the Nerdfighters for Huntsman Tumblr, which I am somewhat-affiliated with: http://jon2012dftba.tumblr.com (we also have a Facebook group).
Oh, agreed. His independence appeal and his ability to work his Conservationism is what's needed if folk actually want to be defeat Obama in the elections.
As it were although, I wouldn't say it's his Obama work that'll put Republicans off of him - Can anyone say Romneycare? -, but more so the fact that he clashes with the ideology that most voters in the primary share. I can still remember how most turned and mocked him when he had that spat with Rick in regards to evolution/creationism.
I've heard many republicans say that he and Obama are essentially the same just because he served under Obama, which is flat-out faulty logic. I know it's BS, but it's what I've heard the most as a Hunstman supporter.
As a science-minded conservative, I completely love how he's called out the GOP for denying climate change and evolution, but then I also a person who believes creationism and evolution can coexist. I understand that some conservatives may find it hard to come to terms with these stances as well as his support for civil unions, and it's really unfortunate that they probably won't see past this since their disagreement is based on religion.
Well, I suppose if you were looking to confound those nay sayers, I'd reach into when he was governor. Taxes remained low, showing that he's like the rest in that aspect. But of course, that may come back to bite him in ass, as his spending increased also. I can't help but ask -being from the Uk-, but where does this idea that you can lower taxes, and continue to spend? If there was ever a disaster plan, that thought process would certainly play a part.
The problem with the GOP, is that they're listening and being influenced by the Ultra-right, which in turn is being founded by big money. So, those who wish to keep costs down whilst mining, will support and give donations to those running for office, Democrat or Republican alike. Thus. the climate denialists are born. They can't place sanctions on us, if we dispute that there's any truth to climate change, let's get people to fight our side. Obviously, this isn't simply a Conservative problem, but when you listen to them, at least to the majority, this is the mantra they all seem to chant.
I like Jon over the fact that he's no blinded by faith. I'd much rather a believer with his eyes and ears open, than one who's bahing with the rest of the sheep - not meaning that with any disrespect to any religious folk reading this -. But again, it's the social movements within the Republican base that seems to be dictating, not the economical, nor the science friendly side. As much as I like Jon, and as much as I'd much rather him than any the rest, let's face it. He's got less chance of winning, than I do at becoming the next prime minister.
Corporations include taxes in their budgets, so when taxes decrease, they have room in their budget to hire people. This causes job creation, increasing income tax revenue and thus allowing you to increase spending. It's important to note that he cut wasteful spending in Utah. I don't think his spending record will hurt him when Utah was #1 for jobs creation and jobs creation is what this country so desperately needs.
It hurts that you think his odds are so low! Trust me, if that were the case, he would drop out. In fact, he's polling third* in New Hampshire, an early primary state that can give a candidate enough momentum to gain the nomination. Not to mention that Newt's popularity is declining, and Perry, Bachmann, and Cain have all had their 5 minutes of fame as well. Huntsman is already rising in the polls just in time to take the primary. Don't count him out just yet!
*Based on the poll taken on Thursday by 7NEWS/Suffolk University
I'm sorry, but in ALL of these stats, he's polling 4 percentage points at the most. I want him to win too, but the data isn't looking good for him.
Hmm. I understand your skepticism, and I understand that his road to the White House won't be an easy one. For fear of sounding like a broken record, here's an article that show how he can win:
I find myself liking Ron Paul more and more. He doesn't get coverage on any news outlets but in the last few debates he has pretty much destroyed all front runners when it comes to what matters most for America.
The only point Ron is right on, is the point about pulling out of Afgan and whatever other bases America has around the world. Other than that, he's an elitist when it comes to Education. He wants to deregulate Oil, banking and whatever other trade the government interferes in. Lets be serious, it wasn't over regulation that caused the oil spill the other year there, it was under regulation. It wasn't over regulation that caused the market crash, it was under regulation. And that's all without mentioning how he'd re-appeal the 1969 bill given the chance, because that's government interfering with peoples own businesses. Who's to say he can't discriminate against blacks/gays/Muslims/Christians/Atheists.
Yeah, Ron ain't looking like the best choice..
I find Ron Paul endearing, but I don't think he should be president. While I agree with him that the government is too large, I think his level of deregulation is too large as well. For instance, I can't imagine ignoring the threat of Iran gaining nuclear weapons. I don't know what you mean by your statement about discrimination. Does he have history of discriminating against any groups? I know he at least corrected Rick Santorum in a debate when he said that we should racially profile for Muslims in airports.