What Republican could possibly run for President next?

That's because Obamacare WAS their solution...in 1993. Devised by the Heritage Foundation and promoted by Chuck Grassley as the "Republican 'free market' alternative to Hillarycare".

And everything else are "solutions" they've run on for 30 years....more tax cuts, more defense spending, vague 'spending cuts' that never are outlined because they'd be unpopular or won't actually touch the deficit, promising the 'pro-lifers' an end to Roe, promising the Religious Right to get prayer back into schools or vouchers, promising the Social Cons to "stop the gay agenda", etc.

 

Like Tecoyah I actually liked Hunstman (am I a dyed in the wool staunch democrat) but this new Republican Party would never vote for a person with that much common sense.

They seem to be more interested in folks that are completely bat-shyt crazy like Michelle Bachman, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz.

The new Republican Party seems more concentrated on driving harder to the right into Tea Party territory where logic, common sense, moderation, and sanity is nowhere to be found.

I think it’s important to have a two party system and I am not opposed to all things republican, but if most of the people that self-identify as “conservative” or “republican” thinks that electing someone like a Ted Cruz is good politics or makes sense…

I got an old bridge to sell em from Brooklyn……………

 

You can continue to ignore the birther comments, Muslim comments, terroism comments, slander against his grades at Harvard, and petty attacks on Obama and his wife attacking "white people." I know better in my short 24 year old life. I've witnessed what it means to be a black man in America. Ideology certainly is a point of contention, but Republicans were willing enough to work with Clinton and won't do (*)(*)(*)(*) when it comes to Obama. I'm not oblivious to race like you are.

- - - Updated - - -

Peter King already submitted his canidacy, but he is a wall-street NY Republican so he has no chance in hell.

 

King doesn't stand a chance because he opposed the Shutdown openly. Christie wisely chose not to enter that fight....plus the Big Money Donors will be backing Christie.

 

You are aware that the Right openly conducted open-ended and openly HATE-FILLED investigative witch-hunts at government expense and under the control of a Special Prosecutor who was KNWON to hate Democrats directed against both Bill and Hillary Clinton and both their personal and professional lives? You are aware that essentially the Right impeached Bill Clinton for lying under oath about a private affair between consenting adults? You DO NOT get more hate-filled than that. Compared to how the Right treated Bill and Hillary Clinton for eight straight years, they are bloody well best of buddies with Barack Obama!

The reason that Bill got many of his bills passed into law under Republican control -- while they were doing their very best to destroy him -- was because he famously triangulated between parties and the public opinion polls and COMPROMISED; legitimately and sincerely compromised, not just mouthed the 'word' compromise like Obama does it. He worked behind the scenes with both parties to arrive at compromises and cut deals whereas Obama won't even talk to the Republican leadership unless his political back is to the wall. So forth and so on. So, no, it is not about racism.

 

As did McCain and all the other level-headed Republicans ("in name only").

 

The GOP and its loudspeaker, Fox News, brought race into it before the 2008 primaries were over. And they haven't stopped since.

 

Um . . . it was the mainstream media during the Democratic Primaries that began speculating about racism and Bill and Hillary Clinton in regards to their mean treatment of poor little innocent Barack Obama. Weren't you paying attention at the time?

 

So your helping the republicans now by telling us we should vote for Christie? If what you say is true why would you want your opponent to be a threat? I already know you dont. You want christie because you know he is a guaranteed loss.

 

Republicans are too stupid to pick someone like Christie. They are also not quite smart enough to realize that many people voted for Barack Obama because he's not Hilary Clinton.

 

Republicans don't need to be manipulated into picking a loser, they can do that all on their own.

 

Here's what the Republicans want:

CRUZ-COULTER IN 2016

 

Or how about Paul/Gohmert.....the dumber the better for Tea Party folks.

 

Name please.

 

It wasn't the mainstream media that put the Jeramiah Wright video every ten minutes for weeks on end.

The did not give the birthers a platform to shout from either.

 

Hummm........

You made my point!

The GOP candidate I want is Ted Cruz, Rand Paul or maybe Paul Ryan.

People outside of Limbaughlooney land cringe at the though of any of them.

 

Or perhaps you will have another.
Stay open to all possibilities.

 

It was both.
I am 56 and it was all extremist reaction to policies that didn't differ all that much from what has come before.
You are part of a reactionary minority that is becoming marginalized rapidly.

 

But conservatives deny deny deny deny deny deny.

I don't need any conservative idiot educating me on how race affects my life, or the life of our president as a black man in this country.

 

I know I'm gonna get hounded for this, but we need a real conservative candidate.

NOT CHRIS CHRISTIE!

That would be making the same mistake twice. In 2012, we nominated Mitt Romney, a pretty centrist guy from a blue state, and a significant part of the GOP base didn't come out and vote, and that's because they saw this choice: The man who invented ObamaCare, and the man who implemented it.

Conservatives in this country outnumber liberals 2:1. Every presidential election SHOULD be a blowout, but it isn't because so many people on our side don't turn their ballots in.

My honest opinion is that in order to save this nation we need another Ronald Reagan. That's probably not gonna happen, so we need the next best thing: somebody from the Tea Party wing. Somebody who can say things how they are, and give grassroots America something to go out and vote for. We tried a centrist, we should try a conservative.

 

Chris Christie is a conservative. He just doesn't obstruct on irrelevant social issues.

Romney didn't lose, Obama won. Ronald Reagan would have lost against Barack Obama. Barack Obama flat out won 2008 and 2012.

Funny you would say that. This is false. Conservatives lose 95% of the black vote, 80% of the latino vote, and over 70% of the votes from Gays, Jews, Asians, and other non-white voters. They lose 60% of the votes with women.

Look at the electoral college map. Which state will the Republicans take back from the Democrats? Republicans lost EVERY battleground state. Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, Virginia, North Carolina (200, and Ohio all need to be taken back. You can start by finding a way to not screw up Florida.

Ronald Reagan wouldn't even get Tea Party support today.

I don't mean to rip your post to shreds, but the conservative logic is just so misguided. You won't win an election on ideological purity. Chris Christie proved this himself. You have to give a little to get a little. If the tea party goes in with a neoconservative platform, expect the democrats to walk away with over 400 electoral college votes and 60% or more of the popular vote.

Look at Virginia... McAuliff is a joke of a candidate and won regardless of Obamacare crapping the big one.

 

So you, like them, are making up a definition that has no universality but allows you a comfort level for your dislike of the president's agenda.
We understand.

 

Sure- Diane Feinstein.

Kay Hagen

Mary Landrau

Charlie Crist

Jerry Brown.

 

It is my sincere hope that the Republican Party follows your advice.

Against Cruz, Democrats would probably have a blow out.
Against Christie, Democrats would have a run for their money.

I would prefer the blow out.

 

Ah, so it's not even enough to have a moderate candidate. You want him to act like he's not even from the GOP at all.