Which candidate should be the Republican nominee?

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

It's interesting. The only candidate that (IMO) non hardcore-Republican voters would take seriously is Romney, but he might lose a lot of the Republican vote for being LDS.

Romney might also lose a lot of the Republican vote because he's seen as a RINO to most conservatives and "hard-core" republicans. My money is on Newt even though I like Romney and I wouldn't mind seeing a Detroiter in the White House.

[DGTess]

When the Republicans refused to invite Gary Johnson to the debates, I started researching him. So far I don't love him, but for the first time in my adult life, I hope to vote for someone instead of against the opponent.

In Virginia, only Romney and Paul will appear on the primary ballot. And the state party has decided to require a loyalty oath. I can't in good conscience say at this point that I will support the Republican nominee. In fact, I likely can't.

I may go Libertarian. I will also be closely following the Americans Elect project.

[ThetaPrincess24]

Originally Posted by AnotherKD

I know this doesn't answer your question, but I'm struggling with finding a person I actually like vs. someone who could actually win in the general. And I still have no idea. :/

I'm having the same issue.

[ThetaPrincess24]

Whoever it is, I hope it is someone who is a great debater. Regardless of one's feelings about Obama, he is a great debater & speaker. A Republican opponent needs to be the same or Obama will defeat them every time in a debate.

Based on the Republican debates alone, there are few who have risen to that challenge. Perry & Bachmann both look like deer caught in headlights. Gary Johnson unfortunately has not been in many of the debates but the few he was in, he looked extremely nervous & uptight.

[AnotherKD]

While I do think that Romney is a bit left for me, what I don't appreciate is other Republicans saying that they wouldn't vote for him simply due to his being in the LDS. I have heard the argument that they believe he would have to follow directions of the church while in office, possibly contradicting what he would normally do. That is no more true than someone like JFK not being able to be in office because he would have to follow the Pope's direction rather than anything else. I think it's not only shortsighted of them, but just another reason why people say that Republicans are bigoted, and I don't like it when the idiots unfortunately represent the entire group. :-/

[Psi U MC Vito]

There are also quite a few people in the Bible Belt, not entirely but predominantly Republican, who would refuse to vote for somebody they don't consider Christian. I htink that is a large reason there was all that mess about Obama being Muslim, though that held another element because of the massive anti-Islamism in this country.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

SO - those of you voting for the Republican nominee - tell me who and why. Why should I (or anyone) vote for your candidate?

Can a (generally blue dog) Democrat who likes watching politics chime in? I promise I'll behave.

Originally Posted by IrishLake

I think they are all nucking futs.

iLaughed.

Maybe I should run for office.

I'll organize Democrats for IrishLake!!

Originally Posted by AnotherKD

Unfortunately, I feel like I'm the opposite and Romney is too left for me! But, I think he'd have the better shot at the general.

Of the Republican candidates, I agree that he is probably the most electable in terms of the electorate as a whole. But . . .

Originally Posted by AGDee

I don't see Republicans voting for Obama instead of Romney. They might simply not vote at all.

I think Romney has two problems. First, there are people who will not want to vote for him because of the Mormonism. That will likely include many evangelical voters who otherwise would be part of the base for the GOP. My guess is that his choice for a running mate might be crucial here.

But perhaps even bigger is the second problem: He has a moderate track record, even if he is trying to position himself as more conservative now. There are many in the Tea Party movement who have already said that if Romney is the nominee, they will not support him but will likely put forth their own candidate. And that third candidate might well be someone who also appeals to the evangelicals leery of Romney's Mormonism.

So, if Romney is the GOP nominee, I fully expect to see a more conservative/libertarian candidate enter the race, either as an independent or as a third-party candidate. And I think that would hurt the Republican candidate more than it would hurt Obama. (Think Ross Perot in 1992.) I really think it presents a quandary for the GOP this year: Either nominate a candidate who is more conservative and won't draw opposition in the form of an independent or third-party candidate but who may have a harder time in the general election, or nominate the person who probably has the best chance defeating Obama in the general election, but who may draw third-party opposition and in the process strengthen Obama's chances in the general election.

That's how it looks to me right now.

[ebdelt]

As a moderate Republican I feel pretty torn myself. No one really excites me and that is going to be the biggest problem for the GOP candidate in the general election. Obama is beatable simply because he hasn't turned the economy around or lived up to his hype, so if the GOP can't win it will likely be because they didn't field a good candidate. I really like Jon Huntsman but his campaign hasn't really gotten off the ground. Maybe because he isn't participating in Iowa and is focusing more on New Hampshire, he isn't getting much press. Just seems like you need some momentum at this point, but we've seen a lot of the candidates peak and fall (Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich). Hell even Santorum is running 3rd in Iowa now, so I guess if Huntsman can do well in NH he has a chance. Check out his policies if you can, he's intelligent and rational.

I really liked Gingrich the last couple months and while I think he is a brilliant intellectual, his ego seems to get in the way and his campaign has lost A LOT of its steam in the last week or two. I worry about how he would handle himself in the oval office and if he would become someone who would only listen to himself and not others. I think voters don't view him as electable in the national election against Obama and that is his biggest problem, along with being a career politician with a lot of baggage.

Romney appears to be the most electable and I guess I could vote for him, but he's just kind of blah or something is off with him. He seems to just say whatever he thinks will earn him votes. I feel like I don't know who the real Mitt Romney is and what he stands for. I think we do need someone who is business-minded to help the economy and that is one of his strongpoints. If he does get the nomination and ultimately I think he will, he needs a really good VP on the ticket, maybe Chris Christie (NJ gov) or Paul Ryan (Budget Chair in the house and Delt ). That can excite the Tea Party base and voters concerned with the national debt and government spending.

[ADqtPiMel]

I don't discuss my own personal politics because of my job, but I think Romney is the closest the GOP could come to defeating Obama and I still don't think it will happen. MysticCat's post is completely on point:

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I think Romney has two problems. First, there are people who will not want to vote for him because of the Mormonism. That will likely include many evangelical voters who otherwise would be part of the base for the GOP. My guess is that his choice for a running mate might be crucial here.

But perhaps even bigger is the second problem: He has a moderate track record, even if he is trying to position himself as more conservative now. There are many in the Tea Party movement who have already said that if Romney is the nominee, they will not support him but will likely put forth their own candidate. And that third candidate might well be someone who also appeals to the evangelicals leery of Romney's Mormonism.

So, if Romney is the GOP nominee, I fully expect to see a more conservative/libertarian candidate enter the race, either as an independent or as a third-party candidate. And I think that would hurt the Republican candidate more than it would hurt Obama. (Think Ross Perot in 1992.) I really think it presents a quandary for the GOP this year: Either nominate a candidate who is more conservative and won't draw opposition in the form of an independent or third-party candidate but who may have a harder time in the general election, or nominate the person who probably has the best chance defeating Obama in the general election, but who may draw third-party opposition and in the process strengthen Obama's chances in the general election.

That's how it looks to me right now.

[AGDee]

I agree with MC's analysis of the situation. I have mentioned it here before, but one of the interesting things about the primaries when there is an incumbent for one party, is watching the other party tear each other part in debates but then have to come together to get their candidate elected in the long run. It's not easy for them to do, no matter which party it is. I think if Romney gets the nomination, he'll pick a conservative Southerner as a running mate to offset his moderate reputation.

[SWTXBelle]

- I have never understood why a vice presidential pick might be the deciding factor for a voter. Well, I could understand calling into question a candidate's decision making ability if they chose an undesirable v.p. (cough - McCain - cough) but to decide yes, I'll vote for a candidate I don't really like because I like his/her v.p. pick? Are you hoping the presidential candidate will join the choir invisible shortly after being sworn in? So often it seems like obvious pandering, which I find insulting.

[MysticCat]

It is pandering I think. I think the theory is that if the "iffy" candidate picks someone who appeals to whatever group, people in that group will say "Well, iffy nominee can't be that bad if candidate we like is willing to support him and work with him."

[AnchorAlum]

I would vote for Romney with no problem if he's the nominee. If Ron Paul is the nominee, then Barack Obama is going to be re-elected. I think that Romney is a better debater than you may think. He's certainly more cerebral than McCain. I also think that anyone who won't vote for him because he's "not a Christian" is simply an ignorant person who cannot be very educated.

And in '08 Obama had the thinnest of resumes and record for an opponent to "mine". That is certainly not the case now. Romney also has earned a paycheck in the private sector, which the President has not done.

Is Romney the tea party's ideal? No. He's a person who was elected as a Republican in one of the very bluest states and if he were any more right of center he would have had no chance. That said, I think that if the Republicans hold the house and can take the Senate, it won't matter because voters are so upset there will be some major shifting in Washington, and Romney's feet will be held to the fire. At least, I hope so.

I hope Rubio or even Christie would be considered for VP. That would be an attractive choice for those who are ready for strong and effective speeches on the trail.

[Psi U MC Vito]

President Obama has some private sector experience, though he was only out of law school for 6 years before being elected to IL legislature.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

- I have never understood why a vice presidential pick might be the deciding factor for a voter. Well, I could understand calling into question a candidate's decision making ability if they chose an undesirable v.p. (cough - McCain - cough) but to decide yes, I'll vote for a candidate I don't really like because I like his/her v.p. pick? Are you hoping the presidential candidate will join the choir invisible shortly after being sworn in? So often it seems like obvious pandering, which I find insulting.

I think that identity politics can be a big win, here. If you think "I don't like either guy, I'm staying home", you maybe would make it out to the polls for the chance to put the first Latino/woman/Jew/queer/whatever into the VP spot. It is one way of being part of history.