Happy New Year & Iowa
Sunday, January 1, 2012 at 12:50PM Happy New Year! I hope it's a great one for all you conservatives out their. I hope it's a miserable failure for the random liberal that trolls this site on occasion.
Now, on to the big election in Iowa and my thoughts on each candidate in the race:
Mitt Romney - He may not have the strongest conservative credentials of the bunch, but he's a solid debater, has great business experience and knows how to campaign. He's not my dream candidate, but I wouldn't hold my nose voting for him either. When compared to Obama, he'd be the Second Coming.
Ron Paul - I apologize to any Ron Paul fans, but this guy is a disaster waiting to happen. While I love some of his economic positions, his overall foreign policy is indefensible. Any GOP presidential candidate that is OK with Iran having a nuke, is not acceptable in my opinion. While the Obama team would like to face Gingrich in general election, they would LOVE to face Paul.
Newt Gingrich - Best debater of the bunch. Big ideas - some good, some hokey - but he's always thinking. The problem Newt has is his electability and the ease with which the media and the Obama campaign (one in the same) could eviscerate him in the general election. He's also taken his share of questionable positions for someone who claims to be a true conservative, but I think he'd govern further right than some pundits believe.
Rick Santorum - Solid values conservative, but he lost his last election by 20 points. That scares me. He's charging hard in Iowa and may become the conservative alternative to Romney if he finshes in the top 3. My other concern is that he spent his political career in the House and Senate and has not run an organization. That being said, he's right on the issues.
Rick Perry - Horrendous debate performances crippled his campaign early, but he seems to be making a small comeback. I wouldn't be surprised if he performs better than expected in Iowa this week and that could vault him back into the mix. My concern about Perry is that if he won the nomination, he would be stripped bare in the debates with Obama. Afterall, he wasn't just bad in some of the Republican debates, he was awful.
Michele Bachmann - Full disclosure, I'm not a fan of Michele Bachmann. It has nothing to do with her policies, but her delivery and approach. It's like nails on a chalk board to me. I'd certainly vote for her if she were the nominee, but I don't think she could beat Obama head-to-head. I'm hoping she'll exit stage right after she finishes last in Iowa.
John Huntsman - Although he's not on the ballot in Iowa, I thought I'd comment anyway since he could have a reasonably strong showing in NH two days after Iowa. This guy received some of the worst political advice in memory. He came out positioning himself as a mushy moderate, but may actually have one of the most conservataive records of any of the candidates. The Wall Street Journal called his economic policy the most conservative of the bunch and I believe he is the only GOP candidate to fully back the Paul Ryan budget. He's taken a few positions I don't like, but generally speaking, he'd be a very acceptable nominee when compared to the alternative.
Final Analysis - I'd find any of these candidates acceptable (with the exception of Paul), but I believe that Romney is the best positioned candidate to beat Obama based on his attributes. He's not the perfect candidate based on my conseravtive principals, but I think he is the most electable at this time and that is my primary concern. We simply can't absorb four more years of Obama's socialist policies and we need to ensure that we nominate a candidate with the best possilble chance of beating him.
All of that said, where is Paul Ryan when we need him?
Reader Comments (7)
Interesting to see your perspective on the race. You summed up my thoughts in the last line of your post. I don't love any of these guys, but we've got to live with one of them.
Happy New Year!
Its always good to hear your thoughts Chuck, your analysis is spot on , but i like Newt a
lot and he is my first choice but deep inside i see Mittens getting the nod and do believe
he stands the best chance of beating Obama......
We will just have to wait and see how things work out and whomever is the last man or
woman standing put all we have behind them......
Good hunting in 2012 Chuck and Happy New Year to one and all .....
Lets take our country back, 'Obama must go in '12'.
Dawg, I like Newt as well. He actually used to live right behind my folks in Marietta, GA when I was in college. I think he would destroy Obama in a debate, but my concern is the election would be more about him than about Obama and what his liberal policies have done to the country. The media would certainly do everything in their formidable power to make that the case.
You summed it up nicely, Chuck.
PS- I hear ya regarding Paul Ryan. The man is sharp. But I understand him raising his young children now over running a presidential campaign.
Remember when he squared off against Obama and handed him his lunch? Paul Ryan quietly showed that he was the smartest guy in the room. And when Obama realized everyone else also saw that, the daggers in Obama's eyes really came out big time -- talk about hate.
If Romney's the nominee he'd strengthen his hand with Ryan or Rubio as his VP candidate. I'll settle for veto-proof majority in House and Senate even if Obama wins.
I think Newt is un-electable. Just when you start to like him he puts his foot in his mouth. Sorry but he's too fat and been divorced too many times. Fat hasn't worked since they had to put a bigger bathtup in the White House for Taft.
Pardon my french, but Ron Paul is crazy as bat shit. With regard to Herb's comment above, apparently that logic doesn't extend to First Ladies with asses the size of a Winnebago.
Yesterday, the Campaigner-in-Chief that is Barack Obama unsuccessfully tried stealing the GOP’s Iowa Caucus thunder by holding a “virtual” Iowa media event of his own (naturally).
Of course, it (he) failed.
More importantly, for many Americans, this story brought to mind a VERY REAL visit to Iowa that the former Senator once made that is just impossible to forget. That’s because a craven image of a constantly campaigning candidate was captured for all eternity -- an image so disrespectful and disgraceful, it seared minds like a lightning bolt that scorched the Earth where he once stood.
Tom Harkin’s Iowa Steak Fry was about to officially begin when Barack Obama willfully decided he would NOT stand at attention to face the American Flag. Then, as the first notes of the Star-Spangled Banner echoed across the land, Obama REFUSED to put his hand over his heart during the playing of our National Anthem.
Repeat: Obama REFUSED to put his hand over his heart during the playing of our National Anthem.
Think about that.
United States Code, 36 U.S.C. § 301, states that during a rendition of the national anthem, when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart.
It should also be noted that during yesterday’s “virtual” Iowa event, a “nostalgic” Obama was full of pride at what had happened in Iowa.
Sadly, Obama’s disrespect for America did not start that fateful day or with that image. But THIS we know for sure: When the words “Obama” and “Iowa” appear together, that despicable image of Obama is THE ONE THING that comes to mind.
Here’s the link to the original Time Magazine-published photograph of Obama:
http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1662530_1446035,00.html
Or just Google “Tom Harkin’s Iowa Steak Fry - Photo Essays - TIME” and scroll to photo 8 of 14 before it disappears.
PS- I’m just one American who sees RIGHT through the person who’s pictured there on the left.