Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Published on January 23, 2012 By Draginol In Politics

Victor Davis Hanson has a very lengthy and interesting article today on the various Republican candidates.

I can’t say I’m terribly excited about any of them.

You’ve got Newt who is all over the place on issues and frankly, makes me think it’s more about him and his love of power than any thought of public service.

You’ve got Romney who I can’t even understand why he’s running in the first place as he doesn’t seem to be very passionate about anything.

There’s Santorum who I wouldn’t vote for except as a last resort.

And finallly…Ron Paul who I nod in agreement for awhile until he starts talking about foreign policy where he loses me (we didn’t deserve 9/11 and won’t vote for anyone who suggests otherwise, even obliquely).


Comments
on Jan 23, 2012

I'm about in the same boat, but I kind of rank them in this order.

  1. Ron Paul
  2. Newt Gingrich
  3. Mitt Romney
  4. Rick Santorum

I think that the financial part is the biggest issue right now, and the country is due for a military build-down like we've had at the end of previous wars, and Ron Paul's about the only one that will do both of those. His foreign policy? Not great, but secondary for me at this very moment.

Newt? He's a terrible candidate, but at least he can make a point in a debate and might be able to win over minds to our side. 

Romney would be the second coming of McCain and would give us results much like Bush's first 6 years, culminating in a repeat of the 2006 election... Only I think the republican party would have an even harder time recovering this time.

Santorum... is Nehemiah Scudder. He'd definitely lose though because he'd successfully push the moderates away.

I think if Santorum is the nominee, I'll vote Libertarian. If Romney is, I'll reserve my judgement based on his running mate. Otherwise I'll probably go ahead and vote for Paul and Gingrich, even though Newt doesn't deserve my vote.

 

 

on Jan 25, 2012

You’ve got Romney who I can’t even understand why he’s running in the first place as he doesn’t seem to be very passionate about anything.

He certainly doesn't wear passion on his collar!

However, he must seriously want the Presidency because this is his second time running having spent much time and his own money.

I can't warm up to Romney because of his flip flopping on social issues.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/romney-used-polls-to-determine-his-1994-abortion-position?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=515d6e3e80-LifeSiteNews_com_US_

 

on Jan 26, 2012

You’ve got Romney who I can’t even understand why he’s running in the first place as he doesn’t seem to be very passionate about anything.

I think Mitt entered with this belief that he was next in line and inevitable. In many of the debates he seemed like he was just trying to run out the clock. He might have nothing to worry about though as he seems to be the best the GOP has in the race at this point. I really wish Mitch Daniels were in it. It just doesn't seem like the GOP is all that serious about the '12 election at all even though Obama is quite vulnerable and has failed on virtually every issue.

on Jan 27, 2012

Anthony R
I think Mitt entered with this belief that he was next in line and inevitable. In many of the debates he seemed like he was just trying to run out the clock.

I agree.

Anthony R
I really wish Mitch Daniels were in it.

So does the GOP Establishment! 

 

Anthony R
It just doesn't seem like the GOP is all that serious about the '12 election at all even though Obama is quite vulnerable and has failed on virtually every issue.

I don't understand why you say that when we had 9 candidates at the start. The process is working. The vetting has been quite robust and as long as we don't allow the media to choose our candidate, we'll be just fine. 

Maybe Daniels as a VP?

 

Meta
Views
» 490
Comments
» 4
Category
Sponsored Links