Even as a Democrat, I could vote Republican as Alabama has an open primary system. I thought about voting for Ron Paul to mess with them. But then I realized a lot of Alabamians are voting for Ron too.

/Don't need another Republican moran as President.

This Markos dude is supposed to be a respected political commentator- featured on MSNBC, Newsweek, etc. This is sort-of an immature, bush-league move for someone like that.

I have no problem with a commentator (Will, Olberman, Hannity, whoever) supporing a party or a specific candidate. This just goes to show that the "blogisphere" (or whatever its called) isn't ready for prime-time. This seems like something a high schooler would think up.

*sigh*

Wouldn't be entertaining if we could just vote for the folks we thought would do a good job?

I've stayed with the Republican party for a while, often in hopes of trying to help stem the reactionary and radical elements. That's been a damn hard road, given the rise of the Religious Right and their cash machine, as well as the Chickenhawk factor and the Rah Rah Boyz who just want to be on the "winning" side.

Finding decent Conservatives is a harder thing than it used to be. And Mitt, despite his claims, is just another corrupt asshat who's handed out contracts and jobs to friends for as long as I've been aware of him, and that was back in Maine when I was in college--before he left for Utah. That was almost twenty years ago, and to see him in the race just gives me the shivers, because he screwed up the UMaine system in his short time with them, and I have no doubts that the rampant cronyism that follows him will just set up shop in a new setting.

He is just another opportunist who smells gravy train for him and friends--and we're already into a second term with that, so maybe we might want something different...

downstairs: his seems like something a high schooler would think up.

Except this has been done many times before. It's pretty much an old trick in open primaries.

I can't vote for Mitt... there's a chance he might actually win. And we can't have that.

Mitt is the master of the quick-and-easy non-solution. His answer to the Mass. healthcare problem? Tax uninsured people more. Because the people who can't afford healthcare will suddenly be able to after he takes their money away. And let's not forget his solution to the family dog shiatting all over the car: hose down the car. Never mind that there is a TERRIFIED dog strapped to the roof as the family station wagon rockets along the highway.

Is this the man you want anywhere NEAR the White House?

Saborlas: I can't vote for Mitt... there's a chance he might actually win. And we can't have that.

Mitt is the master of the quick-and-easy non-solution. His answer to the Mass. healthcare problem? Tax uninsured people more. Because the people who can't afford healthcare will suddenly be able to after he takes their money away. And let's not forget his solution to the family dog shiatting all over the car: hose down the car. Never mind that there is a TERRIFIED dog strapped to the roof as the family station wagon rockets along the highway.

Is this the man you want anywhere NEAR the White House?

Pretty much. He's a nightmare, and you think that GW staged a raid on the Fed? Mitt will make that look like the work of a schoolboy...

Does it really matter?

/ Diebold will have the final say anyhow

I didn't know Romney's dad was the Governor of Michigan and his mom was a Senate candidate in the '70s. As much as he tries to hide it, he was born into and has lived a life in the establishment 'club'.

Nah, most Republicans can support any of the following: Romney, Thompson, McCain, and Guiliani.

If you want to really mess things up, let Huckabee win. I've never seen a Republican take such a beating from members in his own party.

I don't particularly care what the Republicans do, none of them will be president.

You wanna really mess up the Democrats this primary season? Let them keep on doing what they've been doing to each other...

Shaggy_C: I didn't know Romney's dad was the Governor of Michigan and his mom was a Senate candidate in the '70s. As much as he tries to hide it, he was born into and has lived a life in the establishment 'club'.

Neither does anyone else in Michigan under the age of 60 - yet he thinks his surname is a household name in the state.

When George Romney was governor or Michigan, Chub Peabody was governor of Massachusetts. 99% of people in my state wouldn't recognize the name other than it's a town on the North Shore.

Saborlas [TotalFark] Quote 2008-01-12 11:44:43 AM
I can't vote for Mitt... there's a chance he might actually win. And we can't have that.


No he won't. But you know who will? McCain, and if Romney drops out of the race McCain has a pretty simple path.

Ron Paul is a joke. Thompson isn't going anywhere. Giuliani's stategy is retarded and if Romney has dropped out before Florida, Giuliani is toast (with Romney in chaos will still remain and Giuliani could maybe do some damage)

The only real threat would be Huckabee, and that dude won't win either.

cirby Quote 2008-01-12 01:46:41 PM
You wanna really mess up the Democrats this primary season? Let them keep on doing what they've been doing to each other...

I watched one of the republican NH debates on youtube the other night.
HOLY shiat! It was like an insane catfight. The democrats have been carebears to each other compared to the republicans.

Seriously.

Why is it that there is a debate on who is the best republican for Dems to vote for? Let both parties put up their candidates and may the best ideas win.

Alphax Quote 2008-01-12 01:45:53 PM
I don't particularly care what the Republicans do, none of them will be president.

I honestly believe that McCain will beat Hillary, if that ends up being the match-up.

I'm not sure anyone other than McCain could win though.

may the best ideas win.

Can I borrow your rose colored glasses you brought from the mushroom store in fairyland?

downstairs: This Markos dude is supposed to be a respected political commentator- featured on MSNBC, Newsweek, etc. This is sort-of an immature, bush-league move for someone like that.

I have no problem with a commentator (Will, Olberman, Hannity, whoever) supporing a party or a specific candidate. This just goes to show that the "blogisphere" (or whatever its called) isn't ready for prime-time. This seems like something a high schooler would think up.

I totally agree. This is the kind of liberal trick that gives US politics a bad name. The republicans would never do this sort of thing.

\Is that Karl Rove tsking?

Bill Frist: The only real threat would be Huckabee, and that dude won't win either.

Okay, no snark... how do you figure that?

Ace Frehley's Ghost Quote 2008-01-12 01:57:49 PM
Bill Frist: The only real threat would be Huckabee, and that dude won't win either.

Okay, no snark... how do you figure that?


Which part, that he would be the only threat to McCain if Romney dropped out or that he won't win the primary?

a) As I said, Thompson and Paul are non-factors. That leaves McCain, Huckabee, Romney and 9/11. If Romney drops out, you just have Huckabee and 9/11. If Romney drops out that means Huckabee or McCain wins Michigan and one or the other will win South Carolina.

9/11 will be all but forgotten by the time Floriday rolls around if Huckabee and McCain have split all the primaries up till then. His startegy sucks.

So there you go.

as for b), half the republican base distrusts Huckabee. He is the the reaping they hoped wouldn't happen from their sowing. The party will rebel against him and wrap themselves around McCain if it comes down to those two.

Honestly, when has the republican party ever not gone to some obvious choice like McCain? Bush Jr., Bush Sr., Dole, Reagan... these were all obvious, party established candidates. No one like Huckabee ever wins on the republican side.

Subby, you do realize that for the most part, the only ones voting in republican primaries are republicans, right?

This is the perhaps the dumbest thing I have ever read on FARK. A boatload of FAIL for you, Subby.

GoldSpider Quote 2008-01-12 02:03:09 PM
Subby, you do realize that for the most part, the only ones voting in republican primaries are republicans, right?

This is the perhaps the dumbest thing I have ever read on FARK. A boatload of FAIL for you, Subby.

Try actually reading the farking article, goonball

/not subby

Bill Frist: may the best ideas win.

Can I borrow your rose colored glasses you brought from the mushroom store in fairyland?

Don't expect it to happen but I can wish.

helix400: Nah, most Republicans can support any of the following: Romney, Thompson, McCain, and Guiliani.

If you want to really mess things up, let Huckabee win. I've never seen a Republican take such a beating from members in his own party.

Agreed. Also, Huck pisses off Fox News for some reason. Maybe they just hate people from Arkansas. Anything that torques off Fox News is a good idea, so vote Huckabee.

He would be obliterated in the general election too.

Way back when I first started to vote, I naïvely thought that one selected the best candidate for the job and voted for that person.

Not long after that, I took what I thought was a cynical turn, and started voting for the candidate I believed was the least worst.

Now I see we can vote for the candidate who will best fark up the race.

I can't wait to see what's next.

Yeah, moreso this part:

Bill Frist: as for b), half the republican base distrusts Huckabee. He is the the reaping they hoped wouldn't happen from their sowing. The party will rebel against him and wrap themselves around McCain if it comes down to those two.

I'm not certain that "half the republican base" won't vote for Huckabee. It seems to me that the evangelical wing is more than half the base at this point.

It seems to me that the evangelical wing is more than half the base at this point.

Well, we will see I suppose. Thompson staying in the race at least thorugh South Carolina siphons a lot of those votes away.



I still think Kos is correct, the best thing for the democrats would be to continue the chaos with all of the candidates staying in to fight with each other and attack each other (likewise the best thing for republicans is for the three front running Dems to stay in. If Obama or Clinton could rap this up quickly it would be bad news for republicans)

Man, Huckabee does have a legitimate shot if he is the GOP nominee. He isn't bullshiatting about his faith like the establishment wants. Even I can agree with him on this:

- The First Amendment requires that expressions of faith be neither prohibited nor preferred.

- My faith is my life - it defines me. I don't separate my faith from my personal and professional lives.

- Real faith makes us more humble and mindful, not of the faults of others, but of our own. It makes us less judgmental, as we see others with the same frailties we have.

- Faith gives us strength in the face of injustice and motivates us to do our best for "the least of us."

- Our nation was birthed in a spirit of faith - not a prescriptive faith telling us how or whether to believe, but acknowledging a providence that pervades our world.

Huckabee on Faith and Politics (new window)

Ace Frehley's Ghost: Bill Frist: as for b), half the republican base distrusts Huckabee. He is the the reaping they hoped wouldn't happen from their sowing. The party will rebel against him and wrap themselves around McCain if it comes down to those two.

I'm not certain that "half the republican base" won't vote for Huckabee. It seems to me that the evangelical wing is more than half the base at this point.

Karl Rove was right - the Republican party is no longer the single monolith it once was; it's becoming a fractured coalition of interests (much like the dems have been since the civil rights movement). You've got 1. social conservatives (evangelicals), 2. fiscal conservatives (small government), and 3. foreign policy conservatives (neocons). The problem this year is that none of the candidates embody all three of these attributes.

Rudy: 2,3
McCain: 2,3
Thompson: 2,3
Romney: 1,2
Huckabee: 1
Paul: 1,2

This is why the party is struggling.

hubiestubert: I've stayed with the Republican party for a while, often in hopes of trying to help stem the reactionary and radical elements. That's been a damn hard road, given the rise of the Religious Right and their cash machine, as well as the Chickenhawk factor and the Rah Rah Boyz who just want to be on the "winning" side.

Finding decent Conservatives is a harder thing than it used to be.
There really is only one GOP conservative running. And it's got nothing to do with gays or bibles.

- Our nation was birthed in a spirit of faith - not a prescriptive faith telling us how or whether to believe, but acknowledging a providence that pervades our world.

YOu agree with this?

Almost all of our founding fathers were deists or atheists and they purposefully left any mention of god out of the constitution and indeed claimed that the country was founded on secularism and had no basis in any religious beliefs.

Shaggy_C

Good post, though I think you are a little off. Ron Paul isn't a social conservative and doesn't appeal to that crowd. He is simply a 2. Also, Thompson is a 1

Finding decent Conservatives is a harder thing than it used to be.

They don't exist in politics. Okay, maybe they exist in scattered numbers in minor positions of hte republican party, but all of the main people and all of the real power is held, as you note, by people who are hardly conservative in the traditional sense.

Ballooning the size of the government, being fiscally irresponsible, trying to run the world with foreign policy... the real leaders in the consverative party are about as anti-conservative as you can get.

That's one thing you can at least give to the Democrats. Many of hte leaders of the party truly are liberals, whether you think that is a good thing or not. Republicans just wear the mask of conservatism.

They're casting Mitt Romney as the "very worst" of the GOP? EPIC FAIL. Huckabee is by far the looniest and the worst possible choice. It takes a hick state like Arkansas for this mental midget to hold elected office. He wouldn't have a shot in the states with better educated people, and won't ever have a shot at being president unless this country slips even further into fairy tale jesus land.

Huckabee is at least likeable though.

Romney is like the slimiest used car salesmen you've ever met. Only Mr. 911 is less likable.

I'l be sure to get on that, along with the other 5 or so conservatives that exist on fark.

You don't need to mess up the other party's selection process. Each party will somehow manage to pick the worst candidate for the country like they always do.

Bill Frist: Good post, though I think you are a little off. Ron Paul isn't a social conservative and doesn't appeal to that crowd. He is simply a 2. Also, Thompson is a 1

I disagree; Paul is quite the religious nut (combatting war on Christmas, abortion rights, the idea that a separation of church and state does not exist, etc.). Thompson (as far as we know) is essentially non-religious; he refuses to talk about faith with reporters.

groovyjman21: What differentiates Romney from the rest of the clowns somewhat is that he has managed billions successfully.

As I stated yesterday, only Romney is somewhat palatable on the Republican side. It would behoove their party to nominate him; unfortunately, the fact that he's Mormon is unacceptable to most conservatives. Funny how that works - the dems fear putting up a black man because of what the cons might do, and the cons won't put up a good centrist candidate because he doesn't share their religion. Something is wrong when you can consistently count on one side of the aisle acting like intolerant simpletons.

Aren't you a tad weary of anyone who can flip flop as much as Romney? He makes John Kerry look like an Anvil.

I would think Romney would be four more years for Bush.

Bill Frist: Aren't you a tad weary of anyone who can flip flop as much as Romney?

I would much rather have an executive willing to accept the fact that he can be wrong rather than one who stubbornly refuses to admit fault. See: our current president.

I guess I don't find moving from every centrist position to the positions that most idiotic yet important portion of your base supports during a campaign is prove that one is accepting you are wrong and changing your mind.

Seems like obivous pandering.

They're casting Mitt Romney as the "very worst" of the GOP? EPIC FAIL.

You guys really need to learn to read before you start up with your ZOMGEPICFAIL!!1. They don't see him as weak, they are encouraging democrats to vote for him in Michigan (and ONLY Michigan) because the democratic primary there means nothing, and they are afraid he will drop out of the race if he loses. They want him in to keep republicans fighting each other instead of preparing to go against the democrats.

Be careful what you wish for. Since the 1976 election every winner save one (a sitting VP) has been a state governor at some point in their life. At this point, Romney vs Clinton is the Republican's dream match up.

Shaggy_C: Funny how that works - the dems fear putting up a black man because of what the cons might do, and the cons won't put up a good centrist candidate because he doesn't share their religion.

Romney? A CENTRIST??? Just how far to the right has the "center" drifted in the last decade??

Bill Frist: Seems like obivous pandering.

tragically, pandering is essential to running a successful presidential campaign these days.

groovyjman21: What differentiates Romney from the rest of the clowns somewhat is that he has managed billions successfully.

I agree. I disagree with Romney on many issues, but I'd rather have a successful business executive, someone who is obviously competent, than someone with a record of constant failure. Someone like, let's say... oh, I dunno... George Bush

Shaggy_C: Ace Frehley's Ghost: Bill Frist: as for b), half the republican base distrusts Huckabee. He is the the reaping they hoped wouldn't happen from their sowing. The party will rebel against him and wrap themselves around McCain if it comes down to those two.

I'm not certain that "half the republican base" won't vote for Huckabee. It seems to me that the evangelical wing is more than half the base at this point.

Karl Rove was right - the Republican party is no longer the single monolith it once was; it's becoming a fractured coalition of interests (much like the dems have been since the civil rights movement). You've got 1. social conservatives (evangelicals), 2. fiscal conservatives (small government), and 3. foreign policy conservatives (neocons). The problem this year is that none of the candidates embody all three of these attributes.

Rudy: 2,3
McCain: 2,3
Thompson: 2,3
Romney: 1,2
Huckabee: 1
Paul: 1,2

This is why the party is struggling.

The only one I see on your list there who is small government is Paul.

(Military interventionism is BIG GOVERNMENT whether you like it or not.)

The only one I see on your list there who is small government is Paul.

Agreed.

however, the others he marks with 2s wear the mask of fiscal conservatisim, meaning they want to cut taxes and some programs (though not spending overall) and so on.

stiletto_the_wise: Romney? A CENTRIST??? Just how far to the right has the "center" drifted in the last decade??

The number of people who consider Bill Clinton a Liberal should be a pretty good indicator.

groovyjman21: What differentiates Romney from the rest of the clowns somewhat is that he has managed billions successfully.

Sort of like Dick Cheney?