[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Reagan. . . THE SECOND COMING (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 11/5/2008 12:13:34 AM EDT
| I don't actually believe that there is any silver lining to this shit filled cloud, HOWEVER, what if this puts us in place to put in another (possibly currently unknown) Reagan in place in 2012? What if he fucks it up so bad, that people actually begin listening to what candidates say? |
| Honestly I think you are on to something. The republicans were destroyed by greed. The bridge to nowhere being the greatest example and the current subprime/financial mess was placed at their lap, though they weren't the only ones to blame. The dems are going to run wild for two years. But it will be two years when America is in recession and there will be no one to blame when things go wrong. The Republicans need to do some staring in the mirror and get back to what they are supposed to be about. Small government, lower taxes, and a free market place. We have been purged from power. And in some estimations rightly so. But I have full faith in the democrats creating an even bigger mess that we did. Then things will swing back our way, hopefully with a disciplined and intellectually honest party. And the next “Reagan” will be ready to lead the way. |
|
Quoted:
I don't actually believe that there is any silver lining to this shit filled cloud, HOWEVER, what if this puts us in place to put in another (possibly currently unknown) Reagan in place in 2012? What if he fucks it up so bad, that people actually begin listening to what candidates say? Reagan had been on the horizon for well over 4 decades when he finally won. Who do you see on the republican horizon? >crickets< When Reagan took office, we were far enough from the abyss that Reagan was able to pull us back. This time, we have slipped to far. The tipping point has been exceeded. We are going down and there is no stopping it. |
|
Quoted:
I don't actually believe that there is any silver lining to this shit filled cloud, HOWEVER, what if this puts us in place to put in another (possibly currently unknown) Reagan in place in 2012? What if he fucks it up so bad, that people actually begin listening to what candidates say? I have been saying this for months...an Obama Administration might have been what we needed all along: just to display the complete fucked-uptedness it will be. |
|
Quoted:
Palin 2012? If it were not for manchurian-mac choosing her for a running mate, would you even know her name? If republicans want to start winning they better get it through their skulls that losing a race does not qualify a person for a job. I don't think she's bad, she just isn't a leader. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Palin 2012? If it were not for manchurian-mac choosing her for a running mate, would you even know her name? If republicans want to start winning they better get it through their skulls that losing a race does not qualify a person for a job. I don't think she's bad, she just isn't a leader. Yet... She's a lot smarter than the media and Dems give her credit for. Now she's on the national stage and 4 more years of governing Alaska will give her that needed experience. |
|
Quoted:
Palin 2012? This election has completely ruined her career, one way or another I dont think she will be back again. The media in the next few weeks will completely trash her and have already started to blame the whole loss on her, this baggage will be to much to carry into 2012. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Palin 2012? This election has completely ruined her career, one way or another I dont think she will be back again. The media in the next few weeks will completely trash her and have already started to blame the whole loss on her, this baggage will be to much to carry into 2012. I hate to say it, But I am going to have to agree |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Palin 2012? If it were not for manchurian-mac choosing her for a running mate, would you even know her name? If republicans want to start winning they better get it through their skulls that losing a race does not qualify a person for a job. I don't think she's bad, she just isn't a leader. I think alot of us knew about her before Mac made the pick. I'm hoping for Palin, Jindal, or Petraeus in 2012. Or any combination of the two. -K |
|
Quoted: I don't actually believe that there is any silver lining to this shit filled cloud, HOWEVER, what if this puts us in place to put in another (possibly currently unknown) Reagan in place in 2012? What if he fucks it up so bad, that people actually begin listening to what candidates say? You're asking a lot, you know. Getting the retards to actually listen and think critically about what they hear is a tall order. |
|
Quoted:
I'm sick of Palin 2012. I like Palin alot. But inh alot of ways, Palin is one of the reason's McCain lost. Palin was too far right for some people. Palin would be completely unelectable as president. So you think we should continue to run 'moderates'. Huh. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't actually believe that there is any silver lining to this shit filled cloud, HOWEVER, what if this puts us in place to put in another (possibly currently unknown) Reagan in place in 2012? What if he fucks it up so bad, that people actually begin listening to what candidates say? Reagan had been on the horizon for well over 4 decades when he finally won. Who do you see on the republican horizon? >crickets< When Reagan took office, we were far enough from the abyss that Reagan was able to pull us back. This time, we have slipped to far. The tipping point has been exceeded. We are going down and there is no stopping it. You're right. Fuck it, I'll step up. I'm enough of a libertarian and gun nut that most people here and on the far right should support me. I'm enough of a centrist to grab enough people from the center. I'm enough of a social conservative that the Religious Right should at least somewhat support me, and I'm enough of a fiscal conservative that I can easily grab the Kennedy/Reagan-lovers. And as someone who's been steeped heavily in history, political science, and business, I know what works and what doesn't, and what to avoid. Who's behind me? Maybe I should get a platform together. |
|
If she wasn't too far right for me I don't see how she could be too far right for anyone else. I think that notion is more leftist propaganda. It's brainwashing people into thinking a conservative woman cannot win, or something like that. Or mysogyny from the leftists. They only like women that are dependant and weak.
If a VP was going to cost an election it should have been biden. |
|
Quoted:
If she wasn't too far right for me I don't see how she could be too far right for anyone else. I think that notion is more leftist propaganda. It's brainwashing people into thinking a conservative woman cannot win, or something like that. Or mysogyny from the leftists. They only like women that are dependant and weak. If a VP was going to cost an election it should have been biden. +1 Running wishy washy moderates is what got us here in the first place. Bush alienated a lot of his base with the medicare package, spending, etc... conservatism wins, if it's tried. It's been in short supply lately. |
|
Quoted:
Bobby Jindal is the future of the GOP... A new party with real fundamental beliefs and common core values that it is willing to stick to and fight for will leave the GOP in the dust bin of history. The only catch is, like the DimoKrat party, the members of this party will have to learn how to play the political game. The downfall of the GOP is the fact that the constituients are generally political idiots. They do not vote for the best candidates in the primaries, they vote for who they think can win not who they agree with.  Then in the general they get pissed at the candidates they put in the race in the primaries and then vote for the opposition to "Show them who is boss", again .
We need a party that is not spineless and I do not see the GOP being that party as a matter of fact I do not see any party that I agree with like that. 
|
|
I personally don't believe we lost the election because of the issues at all.
We lost due to Racism Votes and cult of personality votes attached to Obama's charisma and NLP. You think the NLP is tinfoil hattery? There is a link to a PDF floating around here somewhere outlining/detailing his use of hand signals, speech patters that baffles the shit out of me. I've never heard of it before, but after reading the article, it makes a lot of sense. Lets not be too damn hard on ourselves. The economy tanking, war fatigue, promises of "free money"...it was not our time. |
|
Quoted:
I'm sick of Palin 2012. I like Palin alot. But inh alot of ways, Palin is one of the reason's McCain lost. Palin was too far right for some people. Palin would be completely unelectable as president. No such thing as too far right. What was she to far right on? You centralists need to more over to the libertarian party and give the Republican party back to the right where it belongs. |
| I don't say this to offend anyone and I want to say this first, I was born in 71 and the safest I have ever felt in this world was when Regan was president. I loved the job he did and respect the man. What has to be said is this REGAN IS DEAD AND NOT COMING BACK! Stop looking for him. We may never see as good a president as him in our lifetime but that does not mean we should shun those that are not him. Many repbublicans out there have flaws but have great potential to be decent if not great leaders and waiting for a Regan or looking for someone to be as good as a Regan does a diservice to our cause and our country. Flame me if you want. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Palin 2012? If it were not for manchurian-mac choosing her for a running mate, would you even know her name? If republicans want to start winning they better get it through their skulls that losing a race does not qualify a person for a job. I don't think she's bad, she just isn't a leader. I think alot of us knew about her before Mac made the pick. I'm hoping for Palin, Jindal, or Petraeus in 2012. Or any combination of the two. -K Petraeus/palin would be interesting though |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Petraeus/palin would be interesting though If you seriously think bringing up the iraq nation building is a way to garner votes, you seriously need to pick up a newspaper. You apparently missed the events of 11/4 With what Obama is about to do to our foreign policy, Petreus should be in a VERY good position to pull an Eisenhower in 12... Once we leave Iraq (as you call it 'nation building') we are FUBAR everywhere else - kiss Afganhistan & Pakistan goodbye. And Petreus might be the only one who could exploit that properly. |
|
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2012/69_of_gop_voters_say_palin_helped_mccain
Only 20% of GOP voters say Palin hurt the party’s ticket, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Six percent (6%) say she had no impact, and five percent (5%) are undecided.
Ninety-one percent (91%) of Republicans have a favorable view of Palin, including 65% who say their view is Very Favorable. Only eight percent (8%) have an unfavorable view of her, including three percent (3%) Very Unfavorable. When asked to choose among some of the GOP’s top names for their choice for the party’s 2012 presidential nominee, 64% say Palin. The next closest contenders are two former governors and unsuccessful challengers for the presidential nomination this year –– Mike Huckabee of Arkansas with 12% support and Mitt Romney of Massachusetts with 11%. Three other sitting governors – Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Charlie Crist of Florida and Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota – all pull low single-digit support. |
|
Quoted: Palin 2012? FWIW, the Gipper's son (the good one) sure seemed to think she had some things in common with RWR a couple of months back... http://www.reagan.com/column.cfm?id=84 
|
|
ENOUGH ABOUT REAGAN.
Reagan appealed to the country and its situation TWO DECADES AGO. The world and the nation were very different then in many ways. I guarantee you, you try to run another Reagan and it WILL get your another four years of Obama or whoever else he picks as his successor. Reagan built a large part of his coalition on moral and religious conservatives and those who felt a threat from the very real, very visible Soviet Union. Twenty years later, the kind of religious conservatism he hitched his horse to is rightfully considered politically toxic by the majority of America, and the threat of a true hostile nation is dismissed as archaic or scaremongering. The things that won Reagan the White House DO NOT EXIST ANYMORE. Let Reagan go. Move forward. If we're going to retake the nation, we have to strip off the dead weight and crud our party and platform has built up. We have to go fast, lean, and mean, and we have to get working NOW because we don't have time to fuck around or make mistakes. Wailing and moping for the world and the society that existed twenty goddamn years ago WILL GET YOU NOWHERE. Your OODA loop is totally fucked, and you're refusing to even get to 'orient' yet. Let it go. Deal with here and now. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Petraeus/palin would be interesting though If you seriously think bringing up the iraq nation building is a way to garner votes, you seriously need to pick up a newspaper. You apparently missed the events of 11/4 With what Obama is about to do to our foreign policy, Petreus should be in a VERY good position to pull an Eisenhower in 12... Once we leave Iraq (as you call it 'nation building') we are FUBAR everywhere else - kiss Afganhistan & Pakistan goodbye. And Petreus might be the only one who could exploit that properly. Quite possibly. Of course, his career is now firmly in Obamas hands, and it will be very interesting if Obama sets his minions out to find any and everything he can dig up to destroy him before he retires. I also think Mark Sanford is a good choice. Petraeus-Sanford (or Sanford-Petraeus) would be a strong ticket. The fact that Petraus hails from NY is good for stealing votes in the NE. He is the son of an immigrant and has a very strong background. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't actually believe that there is any silver lining to this shit filled cloud, HOWEVER, what if this puts us in place to put in another (possibly currently unknown) Reagan in place in 2012? What if he fucks it up so bad, that people actually begin listening to what candidates say? You're asking a lot, you know. Getting the retards to actually listen and think critically about what they hear is a tall order. This is what my economics professor calls "rational ignorance". For most people, very little will change. They have no real stake in the issues (or so they believe), therefore it is not rational to spend the time looking deeply into all of the issues. What we need to do is convince people that they truly do have a stake in things beyond whether they can still get their beer, American Idol and Monday Night Football. |
|
Quoted:
I'm sick of Palin 2012. I like Palin alot. But inh alot of ways, Palin is one of the reason's McCain lost. Palin was too far right for some people. Palin would be completely unelectable as president. How wrong you are. We need more real conservatives like Palin. The reason McCain lost was that he was too moderate, and was too quick to attempt to appease everyone. We need someone who thinks like Goldwater. |
| Have people out side of Nebraska heard of Chuck Hagel? If so what is you opinion of him?Hagel |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Palin 2012? This election has completely ruined her career, one way or another I dont think she will be back again. The media in the next few weeks will completely trash her and have already started to blame the whole loss on her, this baggage will be to much to carry into 2012. I agree with the Canuck. She is done. USA Al Jeezera did their job 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Palin 2012? If it were not for manchurian-mac choosing her for a running mate, would you even know her name? If republicans want to start winning they better get it through their skulls that losing a race does not qualify a person for a job. I don't think she's bad, she just isn't a leader. Yet... She's a lot smarter than the media and Dems give her credit for. Now she's on the national stage and 4 more years of governing Alaska will give her that needed experience. Not even close BUD! She is not a viable candidate. Not now, not in four years, not ever. The republicans are out of options and we have no rising star on the horizon. Like posted above, Reagan was up and coming for decades. The republicans have nobody! Zip, Zilch, Nada. The party needs to be revamped and give up some ground to be viable. Abortion and the christian right is a ball and chain. I know that isnt proper here but it is a fact. Republcans need to get away from old, uptight, angry curmudgeon types and work young and "hip" figures into the party. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Petraeus/palin would be interesting though If you seriously think bringing up the iraq nation building is a way to garner votes, you seriously need to pick up a newspaper. You apparently missed the events of 11/4 With what Obama is about to do to our foreign policy, Petreus should be in a VERY good position to pull an Eisenhower in 12... Once we leave Iraq (as you call it 'nation building') we are FUBAR everywhere else - kiss Afganhistan & Pakistan goodbye. And Petreus might be the only one who could exploit that properly. Time will tell. 4 years is too long to wait on a bet, but your last burst of optimism was sure shot down. Quoted:
She's a lot smarter than the media and Dems give her credit for. Now she's on the national stage and 4 more years of governing Alaska will give her that needed experience. I was not at all implying she was stupid. I do however see her as a leader able to mobilize and motivate a movement. She is not a bad person, not the devil or 1/3 as inept as the media made her out to be. But leaders, are born. Quoted:
The party needs to be revamped and give up some ground to be viable. Abortion and the christian right is a ball and chain. I know that isnt proper here but it is a fact. Peaceful coexistence eh? Right from the carter playbook. Give up ground? Right from the bush-falusha playbook. Neither work. You do not win, buy running backwards. You post Full of fail it is. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Jindal-Perry 2012 I agree that Jindal should be at the top of the ticket, but I think Jeb Bush should be the running mate. Another Bush? No fucking way! +1 I think history is gonna favor Bush long-term like it did Truman, but that's not gonna happen in four years. His family is done in politics except in Texas for at least 20 years. |
|
the more i think about, the more i think this is the guy.
http://jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=783511 unfortunately he has recently said he wouldnt run for any other office. |