Huck's a "No" so who's a go for the GOP in 2012?

[Sandy]

Most credible polls showed Mike Huckabee as the only potential Republican candidate with a real shot at winning against President Obama in 2012. But Huck decided not to run, and bowed out on his show. He's not the first Republican to bow out this time around, though the others are minor players.

I'm not sure where that leaves the rest of the field, or who will pick up his supporters, since he had a rather unique economic view which many Republicans didn't particularly care for, including some prominent evangelical conservatives. I consider Richard Land's lack of support for his fellow Southern Baptist hypocritical.

So who's gonna get the nomination?

I think the White House would be predictably jubilant, and could be extremely confident of a second Obama term if Trump or Palin move to the head of the pack. I don't think either one has a snowball's chance on a hot stove, but Trump's hat is in the ring. Palin needs to disappear from sight and re-invent herself, but she can't seem to resist grabbing headlines, making bizzare comments and accepting low ball, tabloid type speaking engagements. You might see some electoral records broken by the President if she's his opponent.

Romney is old news, and with the economy turning around (which is bad news for Republicans all around), his position on economics will be made to look like more Bush policy that led to the recession in the first place. Evangelical conservatives will have a hard time with his Mormon faith. Gingrich, too, would have major difficulty gathering what will be the critical support of Christian conservatives.

Looks pretty wide open. Any guesses? Pawlenty? Or is there a new GOP rock star on the horizon.

[Jim]

Gloomy time for republicans! The most attractive and probably smartest candidates haven’t the sheer narcissism of Obama that’s glitzy, smarmy and so Hollywoodish these days…but attractive to the beginning and ending generations of the hippy-dippy love-in era, complete with hallucination as god. A woman could claim discrimination except that Hillary didn’t incite that, though she has the charisma of roughly a bear in hibernation, and that didn’t help. I watched part of the non-debate in South Carolina and was impressed by the scope of knowledge of those non-debaters, but then my scope of knowledge is sorta suspect and that has to be factored in.

Bad break for the repubs in that Obama is roughly as effective as St. Jimmy and would be vulnerable – still is actually, but he’s in the pocket of Wall Street and the unions, meaning mucho millions or billions of bucks and plenty of sweat equity. Why would anyone want to fight that, especially since the black and ethnic vote (especially Latino) is overwhelmingly assured, as well as the usual women’s vote, of course? After all, he’s a hunk and might even be able to slam-dunk. Besides, like he said in Berlin – he’s not the typical American, and ordinary is just so yuck.

Someone may emerge, though, probably someone who’s not in awe of either the man or the office and not all that ambitious, just an actual concerned citizen with apparent gravitas (lacking so plainly in Obama who…okay…does not have a Cheney, just Biden and his three-letter word, “jobs”). I’d like to see someone with valid military experience, but those guys have a hard time with bowing and scraping to corruption, not that they’re saints, by any means. Petraeus would be an example, but Hillary put the quietus on him when she glared at him in a hearing and pontificated solemnly that she would suspend belief in anything he said. Imagine that and envision her tale about running from the snipers, who, strangely, were all on vacation.

[Tim Bonney]

[Jim]

[Sandy]

On the user control panel, there's a feature called "Friends and Foes." You can put someone in the "foes" column, and, presto! Their posts disappear. Then you can enjoy the discussion again.

[ET]

This far out, polls are useless and most of the talk about it isalso....I still remember a TIME magazine cover from early 2008 that pronounced that it would be Hillary vs Guilianni for the 2008 election.

[Mrs Haruo]

Here's a "Hippy-Dippy" who's grabbing her hard hat and gas mask and digging in for another year of poo-flinging disguised as a U.S. Presidential election. Too bad Trump bowed out so soon. I could use another good belly laugh. I wonder who they will be supporting at the political rally at Hard Shell Three Sheets to the Wind Baptist Church?

[Tim Bonney]

[KeithE]

[Tim Bonney]

[KeithE]

[Tim Bonney]

[KeithE]

[Sandy]

I'm really surprised that Huck backed out. But then, he's more or less taken his oratorical, Baptist pulpit skills, applied them to politics, got name recognition in a nice run for the GOP nomination last time around, and now can influence partisan politics with a talk show that has made him a multi-millionaire. If not for a quirk in the Arkansas constitution, he might never even have become governor. I'm a little disappointed. He's neither the typical candidate nor the typical Republican.

Trump's bombast was short lived, predictably. No substance there to speak of. Palin appears to have fallen to the point where she only polls single digits among the party faithful and with the kind of low ball, tabloid speaking events she grabs at, a run at the GOP nomination by her would embarass the party. There are some others, rising stars who are neither loonie toons tea partiers or right wing extremists, who might make a good run at it, though the question is whether any of them want to risk losing and not being able to run again after that.

[Tim Bonney]

[Big Daddy Weaver]

Jon Stewart had a about Mike Huckabee and Fox News.

Just to add: Ted Nugent lives in Waco. He used to write a weekly column for the newspaper. It was a hateful column. Always over-the-top and outrageous. Then, when the newspaper was bought by a wealthy local Republican family - the first thing they did was kick Nugent to the curb.

[Jim]

The important thing about 2012 is the Congress. The repubs need to hang onto the House and turn the Senate (hopefully filibuster-proof), effectively handcuffing Obama, who, when the subject of flip-flopping comes up, takes the prize. Gitmo remains, as does the Patriot Act, as does his foreign policy as, for instance, in further tarnishing U.S. image by telling the various longtime heads of state that they MUST get out of office as early as yesterday – the ugly American exponentially. He flip-flopped on Qaddafi, first insisting that he didn’t actually have to go, then proclaimed that he had to go but that regime change was not the U.S. objective (stupidity squared), then just decided (because Hillary said Qaddafi was mean and fellow Amazons Rice and Power concurred?) to simply rain the bombs and missiles on the Libyans, his superior compassion determining which Libyans should live or die, though the warheads are not picky in heavily populated areas. Libya was never a threat to this or any other country, with its troop level at a mere 76,000. Currently running the show through NATO, Obama has his gang destroying Libya’s oil facilities, the better to help their economy, what’s left of it.

With absolutely no understanding of foreign affairs, except that he must apologize all around for the U.S. even existing, he’s made everybody mad at this country, notwithstanding his history-making, landmark decision to grab Osama. One wonders, even at that, what with all those Pakistani troops and its officer-corps institute maybe two minutes away, exactly what happened, perhaps behind the scene, that would allow more than 40 minutes of mayhem to take place without even a sentry engaged. The Pakistanis are Taliban folks and could deliver Mullah Omar at any time, but Osama was not a favorite, by any means. This is to take nothing from the SEALs since the truth may have been told (whichever version is finally accepted) and they were taking a great risk, no matter what the actual situation was. Prediction: About a year from now, if not sooner, the leaks will begin that have to do with this affair, maybe even a book like Unfit to Command that nailed the coffin shut on Kerry in 2004. There won’t be hearings or commissions, such as in the wake of 9/11 (Truthers firmly put to rest) or Katrina (FEMA unfairly maligned)…since secrecy might be harmed? There should be and then folks like me would be satisfied. The public needs to see the timeline and understand who made the decisions about what, when, and where.

The repubs DO have a shot at the presidency, however – maybe a long-shot like Clinton in 1992 or an even longer shot like Carter in 1976. For that matter, Reagan was thought of as just a lightweight actor in 1980, and no longer a shot could have existed than Lincoln in both 1860 and 1864 or Truman in1948. But Obama is no Truman so a second shot may be harder than anyone thinks, no matter the megabucks from the Wall Street gang, Obama’s platoon. A lot can and will happen in the next 18 months. Obama is rapidly flip-flopping (or trying to make it seem so) concerning drilling, for instance – translated, running scared enough to abandon his principled GREEN stance, but maybe too late. The public is not as gullible as he thinks. Still, gaining the Congress is what matters.

[Sandy]

[KeithE]

[Tim Bonney]

I'm not big on predicting things Keith. But I will predict that Ron Paul will not receive the Republican nomination for President. And I'd say the odds are getting better every day that Obama will get a second term.

[KeithE]

[Tim Bonney]

We'll just have to disagree Keith. I think some of his ideas are very fringe. And that's saying it as nicely as I can. Having integrity doesn't mean you are right or that you'd make a good President.

[Ed Pettibone]

[Sandy]

If you look at the growing number of "swing voters, a.k.a. "independents," there is one key issue in congressional and presidential elections, and it directly relates to the perception of economic well being. The new factor that got thrown in the mix after 9-11 is terrorism. The other party also has a pretty good idea of their chances and it seems that in years when they know they're not good, their "superstars" don't run.

Sometimes, there are "dealbreakers" that make a likely winner stumble, like Gerald Ford's pardoning of Nixon. I think Ford would have enjoyed at least one full elected term if he hadn't done that. Carter's dealbreaker was Iran. The Democrats ran Mondale in '84 because they knew they wouldn't beat Reagan. GHW Bush lost because of the economy. Clinton won in '96 because of the economy, and the Republicans ran poor old Bob Dole. The 2000 race was close because the economy was good and the side issues were polarizing. Bush won in 2004 because people were still fearful from 9-11 and the Democrats ran a Northeastern liberal. The economy swept Obama into office. It's slow recovery swept the GOP back into the house in 2010.
Whether or not he is re-elected will depend on where it goes between now and election day in 2012. The radio disc jockey pundits are really trying to convince people that its not about the economy, but it is about philosophy and the "constitutionality" of entitlement programs, etc. That should tell you that even they see the economic recovery, know where it is headed, and are worried that it will lead to Obama's re-election. It may also lead to another shift in who controls Congress.

[Tim Bonney]