Reagan lost the nomination in 76 then won the Presidency in 80.
American Politics
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss Amad saving our blushes in a win against Southampton as well as our now annual loss at home to Brighton. They discuss Amorim's post-match comments, revisit how mid-table we may or may not be, and discuss some transfer news.
- Status
Nixon...sort of.
There's no way Romney has any chance. His best hope was as a businessman to steady the ship during an economic crisis. That crisis is long gone and now he's just another rich asshole.
Romney....
that's how desperate the GOP is now.
really funny.
that's how desperate the GOP is now.
really funny.
He's actually their best qualified candidate.
Depends how you decide what qualified means. What's happened to Huntsman?
he is damaged goods. they have all the recordings of his saying 'anything and everything' to get votes. people don't know what he stands for. him being pushed to be the nominee merely shows how desperate the GOP are.
Is there any candidate who could win the next election against Clinton anyway?
As long as the Tea-Party and the rest of the GOP are fighting each other, they wont win elections.
As long as the Tea-Party and the rest of the GOP are fighting each other, they wont win elections.
Clinton isn't the inevitable winner yet. There will be challengers and she isn't a good campaigner. She also has lots of baggage and will be attacked by the right as viciously as they went for Obama.
My argument is less about Clinton and more about the GOP. When they run with a moderate candidate with a traditional conservative center-right agenda, they wont mobilize the tea-party support. On the other side, when they run with a tea-party candidate, they´ll get slaughtered in the center. I see little middle ground and most of their possible candidates are also already damaged goods.
If there is any kind of scandal or the economy starts tanking 2-3 month before the election, they have a (small) chance, else I dont see how they´ll win any presidential election until they sort things out.
They might run Jeb who would make it interesting.
He's not damaged at all among non-partisans, in fact he is seen as distinctly centrist among Republicans, which if you're a Dem, wouldn't be the ideal person to run against. Dems should want to run against the likes of Christie (who is legitimately damaged) or a Tea Party hero like Cruz or Paul. The likes of Romney, Jeb Bush, or Marco Rubio are the most likely candidates to do well against Hillary or whoever.
Another Bush or another Clinton......third party candidate here I come!
By qualified I mean able to get the nomination and actually win. Huntsman is a decent choice but he comes across as a bit of a lightweight - someone who a Republican President may appoint as Secretary of State, but not Presidential (but possibly vice presidential) material.
Conversely the Tea Party types don't have much of an option. If a centrist like Bush or Romney were to get the nomination, they would be given a choice between those two or Hillary Clinton. They may not turn out in numbers as much as if Ted Cruz were the nominee, but there is enough of a conservative talk radio and tv apparatus to get them to turn up for whoever the nominee is. Trouble for the Republicans is American voting demographics and social norms have drifted significantly to the left in recent years. More minorities, recently naturalized immigrants, and young people are voting - which is how the Dems are squeaking out many of their elections. Ultimately, the only way Republicans can gain the White House is with a moderate like Romney or Bush.
all true, but even moderate candidates are heavily influenced by the tea-party. Romney made many concessions to appease them, which ultimately helped the democrats. I doubt that the tea-party would rally behind a candidate with a moderate-conservative message. They rather self-destruct.
Anyway. Elections are always about the economy. If the economy is doing okay in the year before the election, they republican party will lose.
Anyway. Elections are always about the economy. If the economy is doing okay in the year before the election, they republican party will lose.
The worst thing about the 2018 election is that the GOP primaries will in all probability not have the absolutely amazing array of candidates that it did last time. At least half of those appeared to be outright morons. I am not exaggerating when I say that watching the Republican primary debates was by far the most entertaining part of the election. Surely we won't get such a magnificent field again? Come on, Michelle. Come on, Rick. Come on 999-uzbeki-beki-stan-stan-guy.
Dare I say it? Come on Sarah.
Dare I say it? Come on Sarah.
Meanwhile back at the ranch.....
The amount of fear-mongering, lying, and propagandistic bullshit peddled by the American right these days is just obscene. Here's two people (who really need to shut the feck up and go away for the rest of their lives) standing in front of a green screen in costumes, lazily (and blatantly) reading off a teleprompter all the absurd talking points and clichés the GOP have dreamt up this past decade, and people actually fall for this shit?
God I hate people.
God I hate people.
Doubt he'd run again. Guy is sitting on piles of dough and probably would want to save himself the embarrassment. Huntsman is an odd one. Back in 2012 when it seemed like every week a new Republican got their turn in the spotlight, Huntsman never got that opportunity. I mean you had Herman Cain--the pizza guy and Michele Bachmann--the nut job getting serious looks. He's not conservative enough to win the Republican ticket, but would probably do well in a general election with moderate voters. Basically, conservatives don't trust him cuz he was appointed ambassador to China by Obama, and he also supports gay marriage.
2016 Republican contenders will probably include Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Rand Paul. Electability should be the hot button for Republicans. This is where the religious right has really screwed them up. America needs a centrist third party.
Last edited:
A centrist third party? 
To most Europeans, the Dems would be considered pretty right wing
To most Europeans, the Dems would be considered pretty right wing
The Republican nominee must appeal to the tea party nuts.
Besides the GOP does not have the numbers to win a National election.
They actually don't. We know this because the last two nominees haven't.
Yeah, I shudder to think what Europeans must make of the Tea Party. We've got more than our fair share of backwards-ass nut jobs in America for sure.A centrist third party?
To most Europeans, the Dems would be considered pretty right wing
Last edited:
"We know that America's armed forces are the greatest fighting force, and the greatest force for good, the world has ever known"
Ooookay.
If you think about it who else would you nominate?
It's hard to disagree that they've got the most military power. But greatest force for good is debatable given the number of invasions, the number of innocent people they've killed and how rarely that's a good thing for the countries they're in. I'd put the likes of UNICEF, the ECHR and even the generally useless UN far higher as forces for good.
There's a whole lot of them in EU parliament actually
Republicans will always struggle with their "traditional values" agenda. And with economy being quite solid it's hard to see what sort of leverage they'll have. Basically foreign policy is the only real point of criticism they can use.
I think he's waiting until the Republican base can get behind a moderate. Even Romney had to move right to garner support. As much as I would like to see him have a serious go of it, he'd get eaten alive in the primaries.
The Tea Party will have to fade and everyone calm down before he has a chance.
Well it certainly isn't The Avengers. Don't discount the fact that the US Army has done a lot of good too. Claiming armies are good is daft but you get my point.
Romney-Huntsman ticket would probably carry Utah.
There's a whole lot of them in EU parliament actually
Republicans will always struggle with their "traditional values" agenda. And with economy being quite solid it's hard to see what sort of leverage they'll have. Basically foreign policy is the only real point of criticism they can use.
Nationalist, anti Euro parties will always have an advantage in European elections since their voters all care so strongly about EU membership compared with the more moderate parties. You'd need to look at national parliaments to get a better judge of electorate preference.
Cayman Islands too.
That's true, but still i mean there are a lot of wackos who would not look out of place in Tea Party.
It's actually ironic, cause tax stuff aside modern Tea Party pretty much sums up what original Boston Tea Party was against.
A Jeb Bush - Marco Rubio ticket would be quite formidable imo. Jeb comes across as very centrist and Rubio has pretty good Tea Party credentials. They could collectively unite the three pillars (Fiscal, Social, and Defense) of the Republican Party and give Hillary or whoever a proper run for their money. And as a bonus would definitely carry Florida.
Well, the Romans. Or the Mongols.
Neither of them was the "greatest force for good", though, and nor has any military ever been.
Depends really, the level of technological and societal advancement the Romans brought to most of their conquered lands actually puts them in with a pretty good shout...
You just know a Life of Brian YT is coming.
Technological sure, but I think historians have generally moved away from the idea that the Romans brought in some way "societal advancement". Just like how the Dark Ages after the fall of the Western Roman Empire weren't all that dark.
I'd say the greatest force for good was probably the enlightenment philosophers.
No it wont,the latino and black and women vote are not going to go for GOP until they change their ways and no Bush/Rubio nightmare team will change their minds.
Well since Rubio is Latino and Bush's wife and son are Latino, I'm fairly sure they would cut into any advantage the Dems have with Latino voters, especially since both of them seem to have departed from the Republican position on immigration. Women voters would obviously go for Hillary, but again, it would be split along party lines. Republican women aren't going to switch allegiances just because Hillary is female.
- Status