2012 Republican Nomination

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Running and losing in 2012 is not the end of the world, though, and it can be nice in that it gets your dirty laundry out four years early - people get bored by the same scandals, after all, and you have time to prepare to counter them four years later.

And, you could throw a bone to someone who feels it should be his chance, like they did with Dole in 1996. Maybe you can get Romney out of the way that way.

[Naked Gents Rut]

The American public is a lot less accepting of big government in this day and age. The first New Deal took place during the global high-water mark of public support for statist government.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I think GePap completely underestimate the appeal Jindal has to the rank and file of the Republican Party. But yes, there is the chance he waits until 2016.

The rank and file that thought Macaca was legit?

[Ramo]

Originally posted by GePap
Well, it took Republicans 20 years to get back in the WH after the first New Deal started, and they have never actually undone most of it.

And the Republican that followed was primarily consolidating the New Deal.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
The American public is a lot less accepting of big government in this day and age.

Yeah, when movements against Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and a permanent standing global military make any significant movement with a large portion of the voting public, I will buy this.

[GePap]

and lets not forget the Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, and the new drug benefits program.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Running and losing in 2012 is not the end of the world, though, and it can be nice in that it gets your dirty laundry out four years early - people get bored by the same scandals, after all, and you have time to prepare to counter them four years later.

Losing the nomination, sure. But if Jindal runs in 2012 I would give him a decent shot to win the nomination. And if he loses the general, his chance to get a redo in 2016 would be pretty small. Neither party has run their losing candidate from a previous general election since 1968. And there hasn't been a renomination of the losing candidate from the immediately preceding election since 1956.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by GePap
and lets not forget the Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, and the new drug benefits program.

None of which are actually popular with the American people overall, IIRC. Just goes to show that Americans like the Democrats statist programs but hate the ones the Republicans devise.

[Naked Gents Rut]

Public attitudes today are greatly different than they were during the massive wave of fascist, communist and socialist governments that swept the globe in the wake of WWI. Anyone with a solid grasp of history would understand this.

Just goes to show that Americans like the Democrats statist programs

If the American public liked Democratic statist programs so much, Obama wouldn't have to pretend he's going to cut taxes when he's elected.

[OzzyKP]

I Huckabee. it may be him and Romney fighting over it next time. I think Romney has an edge and am surprized I'm the first to pick him.

I don't think any of the folks on the list above are particularly strong and unless Obama screws up royally in the next 4 years probably won't be able to stand up to him.

[GePap]

Because Americans want big government benefits without having to pay for them, which is why we are now a country deeply in debt.

Public attitudes today are greatly different than they were during the massive wave of fascist, communist and socialist governments that swept the globe in the wake of WWI. Anyone with a solid grasp of history would understand this.

So what are you doing pretending that you can talk about those times?

[Naked Gents Rut]

New York > Chicago, ergo NYU > UChicago.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
New York > Chicago, ergo NYU > UChicago.

Ah, being better versed on this issue than you:

NYC >Chicago, but U of Chicago > NYU

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
I think Romney has an edge and am surprized I'm the first to pick him.

You weren't.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap
Ah, being better versed on this issue than you:

NYC >Chicago, but U of Chicago > NYU

/me blinks

Was this supposed to be witty or a serious argument? It doesn't make sense as either...