• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Republican 2012 Candidates

138
Posts
13
Years
  • Yes, we need a strong third party that isn't shut down by the media saying "BUT CONFLICT MAKES MORE MONEY AND RATINGS"this is my theory of why we don't have a third party, the news media believes that conflict and fighting = High ratings and more people watching. ><;;; yes it'll definitely have more people watching the news, but will it HELP THE COUNTRY? No, it will most certainly not.

    There's the Libertarian Party which is currently the third largest party in the US and the fastest growing (That includes people who switch parties every few weeks).
    The Communist Party of America always have been a well known "behind the scenes" party with a long and interesting history in US politics.
    All other small parties (Social Democrats USA, Democratic Socialists of America, Socialist Party of America, Reform Party of America, Green Party, etc) are just ignored fabrics.

    And remember, "To be left wing is to be far right, to be right wing is to be far left".
     

    TRIFORCE89

    Guide of Darkness
    8,123
    Posts
    20
    Years
  • I don't think any Republican candidate can carry through with the grand win (thankfully :p), much like how the country is politically divided the Republican party itself is divided.

    I don't think the party leaders know quite who to try appealing to. You've got the tea party, the libertarians, the religious right, the fiscal conservatives, etc. Generally, these don't really overlap (the libertarians and the religious right, in particular)

    Whoever wins the nomination, won't have the full backing of the party no matter what.
     

    Ivysaur

    Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
    21,082
    Posts
    17
    Years
  • Next caucus in Michigan are going to be specially interesting. If Romney loses to Santorum at home, he will go back from "Mr. Inevitable" to "Dr. Isn't-there-anybody-better-really". Again.

    The longer this keeps going, the easier for Obama will be.
     
    9,468
    Posts
    15
    Years
  • It depends. If Romney looses Michigan to Santorum, South Carolina-style then it certainly does throw his campaign a huge monkey wrench. But if it's a close race he can recover easier.

    But yeah "the tea party, the libertarians, the religious right, the fiscal conservatives, etc. " are the components that make up the Republican Coalition so you have to appease them all :/
     
    10,769
    Posts
    14
    Years
  • Boy, it's frightening how the things that Santorum is saying aren't being challenged by the rest of the other candidates, the Republican party, or the Republican base. He wants to disband the public school system, he wants to ban not only abortion but birth control too, doesn't think women can be soldiers because they're too emotional. And he's winning in polls. That means a lot of people are okay with this kind of talk.
     
    14,092
    Posts
    14
    Years
  • Boy, it's frightening how the things that Santorum is saying aren't being challenged by the rest of the other candidates, the Republican party, or the Republican base. He wants to disband the public school system, he wants to ban not only abortion but birth control too, doesn't think women can be soldiers because they're too emotional. And he's winning in polls. That means a lot of people are okay with this kind of talk.

    I'll stop with my criticism of the Republican Party when they stop condoning freak shows like Santorum and Paul. What he says is pure hate.
     

    Ivysaur

    Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
    21,082
    Posts
    17
    Years
  • Why aren't other candidates challenging his views? Because thousands of people from the Republican base voted for Santorum and, by challenging his main ideas, they'd risk alienating them- and you need as many votes as you can get to beat an incumbent. It's late into the show already, only three real candidates are left, cards are on the desk, you don't want to get into a much deeper mudfight by now.

    Why isn't the Party challenging them? Because American parties aren't but electoral machines whose political leadership is left to the dude who gets nominated- so nobody can really challenge him, and, if he won, the Party would gladly support him for President. Of course, the powerful party members are supporting Romney, but they won't openly challenge Santorum. What if the people support him regardless and they are forced to eat their words and say he's the best candidate ever? Obama's team would choke on their own saliva. What if Santorum, with the support he already has, decides to still run for President as independent? He might get enough pro-Republican votes to make Romney lose, since it's very unlikely that he'd get that many Democrat votes. Ron Paul, in fact, is thinking about doing this, and that's one of the events that could shake the campaign up. He clearly hasn't got enough support to win but he can take enough support from the real fighters to decide the winner.

    What is sad is that, if people vote for him, is because they do agree with what he says. There is no other option, because there is a very electable candidate fighting against him they can vote for instead.
     
    Last edited:

    Mr. X

    It's... kinda effective?
    2,391
    Posts
    17
    Years
  • Politics have gotten to the point where I don't care anymore.

    Still, my vote is going for the one who I think will be able to cause the bigger ****storm.

    Right now its looking like either Santorum or Paul. Santorum is more likely (right now) to get elected then Paul so in the end, for the lulz, I'll be voting for good ole sanny.

    Edit - Now that I think about any, any Republican would be sure to cause a big ****storm.
     

    TRIFORCE89

    Guide of Darkness
    8,123
    Posts
    20
    Years
  • Politics have gotten to the point where I don't care anymore.

    Still, my vote is going for the one who I think will be able to cause the bigger ****storm.

    Right now its looking like either Santorum or Paul. Santorum is more likely (right now) to get elected then Paul so in the end, for the lulz, I'll be voting for good ole sanny.

    Edit - Now that I think about any, any Republican would be sure to cause a big ****storm.
    Between Santorum and Paul, I think Paul would be worse.

    As much as I dislike Santorum, if he ends up being presidency, I don't think he'll risk political suicide to do anything social. Right now he's appealing to the base and has said himself (although, I've never bothered enough to verify this) that his voting record is counter to his personal social beliefs. A kind of... he thinks it's wrong, but he wants you to be able to do it thing. Supposedly. I doubt that, but that's what he said.

    Paul in terms of the economy or health care would be worse I think. Libertarians are cool, but he's too laissez-faire on the surface
     
    10,769
    Posts
    14
    Years
  • As much as I dislike Santorum, if he ends up being presidency, I don't think he'll risk political suicide to do anything social. Right now he's appealing to the base and has said himself (although, I've never bothered enough to verify this) that his voting record is counter to his personal social beliefs. A kind of... he thinks it's wrong, but he wants you to be able to do it thing. Supposedly. I doubt that, but that's what he said.
    But Santorum's whole platform is social issues. I can't see him not pushing for them. And as much as I know that nothing that gets said on a campaign means anything as far as what they'll do if elected, Santorum has a long history of supporting and pushing really, really antiquated social views. At the very least he'll embolden people like him to pass laws like what happened in Oklahoma with the 'personhood' law there.
     

    Black Ice

    [XV]
    610
    Posts
    18
    Years
    • Seen Oct 4, 2023
    I don't know when it became acceptable opinion that America should become a theocracy.

    50 years ago people didn't want JFK in because they thought his religion would impact his decision-making. Oh, how times have changed.
     
    Last edited:

    Mr. X

    It's... kinda effective?
    2,391
    Posts
    17
    Years
  • On the surface it's not.

    But when we allow people to base laws and only use Religion as a excuse for why the law needs to be passed, thats when the line starts getting blurry.

    I'd like if Religion was separate from Government. As in, that the people we elect do not allow Religion to be the main factor that determines what they do or do not support.

    Even better, I'd like for our elected officials to never even have to say what religion they follow. Personally, I don't think someones religious ideals should play a part in their electability.

    Nowadays, Religion is a symbol. I'd like to leave Religion to the symbolminded, and keep the symbolminded out of politics. (Say symbolminded 10 times fast, and you'll get the joke... Hopefully.)
     
    1
    Posts
    12
    Years
    • Seen Jan 12, 2013
    I think we all know who the real winner of the Republican primaries is: Barack Obama.

    Jokes aside, the candidates this cycle are an...interesting bunch. And by "interesting", I mean crazier than shithouse rats.

    First, we have the inevitable nominee, Mitt Romney. I won't talk about Romney's policies, because, in all honesty, he's flip-flopped on so many issues that I'm not even sure what his policies are. I remember a joke that went something along the lines of "A conservative, a liberal, and a moderate walk into a bar. The bartender says 'Hi, Mitt.'". In all honesty, he seems like a man who isn't interested in helping and leading the country so much as getting money and power, and will say pretty much anything to do that. Half of what he says seems to just be pandering to weasel out votes, and the other half just reeks of "rich guy who is disconnected from reality". Like his infamous $10,000 bet early on, his assertion that his wife drives a couple of Cadillacs, the whole Nascar thing, him saying that he likes being able to fire people, and that photograph of him from his days at Bain Capital. Everything about him oozes "rich guy who's disconnected from reality".

    Speaking of oozing, Rick Santorum. While all of the candidates are crazy in their own special way, Frothy really goes above and beyond in his craziness and religious zeal. He's likened gay sex to dog ****ing and child rape, grossly misinterpreted and then condemned a JFK speech on religious freedom, spouted some nonsense about the president being a snob because he wanted to educate our children, and there's that whole thing about his last name and the campaign behind its second meaning. The fact that he's experiencing a come from behind victory makes me ashamed to be American.

    And on the subject of things that make me ashamed to be American, Newt Gingrich. I could literally go on for pages about how much of a lying, heartless, hypocritical, thick headed, sociopathic cry baby he is, but I'll just confine it to a sentence. He wants to build a base on the moon, he divorced his first wife while she was in the hospital recovering from cancer, cheated on his second wife while she was suffering from multiple sclerosis, tried to establish a polygamous relationship with her and the woman he was cheating on her with, and when that failed, divorced her, and all the while he was arranging for the impeachment of Bill Clinton based on Monicagate, caused a shut down of Washington because Bill Clinton made him sit at the back of a plane, and MY GOD I WANT TO PUNCH HIM SO MUCH GAAAAAH

    *ahem* And finally, there's Ron Paul. I wouldn't really mention him at all, since he hasn't won a single state, even Maine and Idaho, the arguable homes of Libertarianism, and it doesn't seem like he'll be winning any states any time soon, given how low his favorability rating is, but if I don't I'll be swarmed by Paulbots, so nonetheless. First fault: the Paulbots. My god, the Paulbots. Now, unless you've been reading comment sections or browsing Youtube, or have been looking at Internet polls (and I take it most of you aren't doing these things), you haven't really experienced the sheer annoyance that is the Paulbots. Basically, what they do is come in and swarm comments sections, the like/dislike buttons, and Internet polls to make it look like there's a huge amount of support for him when there isn't. It's bloody annoying (and before you ask, he did do this back in his 2008 run, but not to the extent that he is doing it this cycle, and I wasn't as involved in politics as I was now so it wasn't as much of a bother). Outside of that, there's the fact he wants to repeal the Civil Rights Acts, has published racist newsletters comparing blacks to zoo animals, wants to completely de-regulate the economy even though that's what caused this bloody recession in the first place, has some intellectual basis in the teachings of Ayn Rand and Objectivism (which would automatically keep me from voting for him), and has some support from some...rather questionable groups. Something amusing I read in a comments section of a Youtube video (don't ask why I was reading that, I don't know) basically sums up my thoughts on him: "RON PAUL 1912!!!"

    Ugh. I sincerely hope that none of these kooks get elected into office. I know I certainly won't vote for them, because a) they're all crazy, b) I don't turn 18 until December, and c) I'm very left-wing in my views (think Ralph Nader, Clement Attlee, Nelson Mandela, almost all of Scandinavia, etc.) and I couldn't really ever see myself voting Republican. Sometimes I can hardly see myself voting Democrat.

    As for who I'm rooting for the most out of these four (I am personally endorsing Obama in the general election unless Nader changes his mind and jumps in), I'd say Romney. It'll be a major step for America to put a Mormon on the national stage after we, you know, massacred Mormons and exiled them to Utah in the 1800s. Can't see him winning the election, but the Republican party putting up a Mormon has some huge implications.
     

    Ivysaur

    Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
    21,082
    Posts
    17
    Years
  • Romney needs to win it before the Convention. If he doesn't bring enough delegates, I can see a coalition between the other three dudes to either put Santorum in or some fifth outsider (Jeb Bush is a recurrent name in the political chitchat these days).

    Right now, his projected advantage over the other candidates together is a slim +36, with still 1400 delegates to go.
     

    TRIFORCE89

    Guide of Darkness
    8,123
    Posts
    20
    Years
  • The Democrats are already a center-right party, Obama in particular. So...the right wins regardless.

    I just want this primary to end already. Every day they continue to reveal themselves to be idiots. And the Republican base is scary!

    Santorum as a flavour of the month is lasting a whole lot longer than the others did.... which is worrying.

    If it comes to someone surfacing at the convention, who have said they'd jump in? Jeb Bush, Trump, Palin?
     
    Back
    Top