What do you want from your Presidential candidate?

[gabosaurus]

When you evaluate who you wish to nominate and/or vote for in the General Election, what kind of issues and viewpoints do you look for?
Despite what many of you may believe, my support for Obama is not guaranteed. If I could talk with him in person, one on one, I would ask some serious questions. I would do the same with the eventual GOP nominee.

**What is your stand on American involvement in the Middle East? If you are considering an escalation in the area, I can't vote for you. If you can't commit to complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan by 2016, I can't support you.

**Are you in favor of eliminating or greatly reducing foreign aid to unfriendly countries? If you plan to continue wasting money on aid to Pakistan and ANY country in the Middle East (including Israel), I can't support you.

**You must acknowledge that attacking any country in the Middle East (including Iran and Syria) for any reason will start a worldwide conflict that would be impossible to win. Any country (including Israel) launching a war of aggression on another state must be left to their own devices. The American people will not stand for the loss of thousands more lives just so politicians can thump their chests in like warring peacocks.

**Are you committed to finding alternative sources of energy? This country can not continue to be held hostage by foreign powers that have their hands on the oil tap.

[red states rule]

When you evaluate who you wish to nominate and/or vote for in the General Election, what kind of issues and viewpoints do you look for?
Despite what many of you may believe, my support for Obama is not guaranteed. If I could talk with him in person, one on one, I would ask some serious questions. I would do the same with the eventual GOP nominee.

**What is your stand on American involvement in the Middle East? If you are considering an escalation in the area, I can't vote for you. If you can't commit to complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan by 2016, I can't support you.

**Are you in favor of eliminating or greatly reducing foreign aid to unfriendly countries? If you plan to continue wasting money on aid to Pakistan and ANY country in the Middle East (including Israel), I can't support you.

**You must acknowledge that attacking any country in the Middle East (including Iran and Syria) for any reason will start a worldwide conflict that would be impossible to win. Any country (including Israel) launching a war of aggression on another state must be left to their own devices. The American people will not stand for the loss of thousands more lives just so politicians can thump their chests in like warring peacocks.

**Are you committed to finding alternative sources of energy? This country can not continue to be held hostage by foreign powers that have their hands on the oil tap.

Gabby it is a safe bet you will vote for Obama no matter what he does, what he says, or how bad the economy gets

He is your dream liberal candidate

He is going to gut the military and put alot of our troops out of a job. Unlike other government workers the troops do not belong to a union so no union dues for his re-election fund. So screw em.

He is growing government at a break neck pace, He is busting the budget and setting new records on the nations credit card balance

He has pissed thru billions on his "green" energy plan yet refuses to lift the drilling bans that would put tens of thousands of people back to work (and lower the cost of gas for the working folks)

He is doing nothing to stop Iran from getting nukes and ignoring the threat Israel is dealing with.

No matter what, you should be ringing door bells for Obama, and screaming "racist" to anyone who does not have an Obama 2012 bumber sticker on their car

[gabosaurus]

Gabby it is a safe bet you will vote for Obama....

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/7/12/0714561f-f16d-4c0d-a8a8-674dd95199fe.jpg

[pegwinn]

Gabby,

I don't care about the issues as much as I care about the character of the candidate. That is why Gingrich had better pray for snow in hell before I will vote for him. The closer the guy can get to the leadership traits and principles I learned in NCO school the better his chance for me voting for him.

Issues are secondary in my opinion. That is because there are literally hundreds of issues and I am not going to agree with him on every one. Of course there are exceptions but those should be fairly few and far between.

Character counts because I have to trust him to do the right thing when I am not looking.

[ConHog]

Gabby,

I don't care about the issues as much as I care about the character of the candidate. That is why Gingrich had better pray for snow in hell before I will vote for him. The closer the guy can get to the leadership traits and principles I learned in NCO school the better his chance for me voting for him.

Issues are secondary in my opinion. That is because there are literally hundreds of issues and I am not going to agree with him on every one. Of course there are exceptions but those should be fairly few and far between.

Character counts because I have to trust him to do the right thing when I am not looking.

My stance as well. I can live with a candidate who I don't agree with on particular platforms if I trust that he is a man who says what he means and does as he he says he will do (or she)


Gabby it is a safe bet you will vote for Obama no matter what he does, what he says, or how bad the economy gets

He is your dream liberal candidate

He is going to gut the military and put alot of our troops out of a job. Unlike other government workers the troops do not belong to a union so no union dues for his re-election fund. So screw em.

He is growing government at a break neck pace, He is busting the budget and setting new records on the nations credit card balance

He has pissed thru billions on his "green" energy plan yet refuses to lift the drilling bans that would put tens of thousands of people back to work (and lower the cost of gas for the working folks)

He is doing nothing to stop Iran from getting nukes and ignoring the threat Israel is dealing with.

No matter what, you should be ringing door bells for Obama, and screaming "racist" to anyone who does not have an Obama 2012 bumber sticker on their car

It is equally obvious that you wouldn't vote for Obama if he announced that he has the cure for all diseases, an unlimited power supply, a million bucks for every tax payer, AND a way to provide world peace. So get off your high horse.

[pegwinn]

It is equally obvious that you wouldn't vote for Obama if he announced that he has the cure for all diseases, an unlimited power supply, a million bucks for every tax payer, AND a way to provide world peace. So get off your high horse.

:clap: I had some world class whining Marines once and I used a variant of that speech with them. Something to the effect of they'd bitch about the price of gas if the Marines gave them a brand new car for free.

[ConHog]

:clap: I had some world class whining Marines once and I used a variant of that speech with them. Something to the effect of they'd bitch about the price of gas if the Marines gave them a brand new car for free.

Whiny Marines..............wow umm I didn't know Marines were issued whines. :laugh2:

[pegwinn]

Whiny Marines..............wow umm I didn't know Marines were issued whines. :laugh2:

They're not. But, there are all those pawn shops outside the front gate that they can afford to buy it even on a privates pay.

[Little-Acorn]

What do you want from your Presidential candidate?


http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?33557-The-most-important-characteristic-of-the-2012-Republican-nominee

Aside from being able to defeat Obama in November (pretty much guaranteed by the condition of the economy, unemployment, and O's record of socialist legislation and financial irresponsibility), what is the most important characteristic the Republican nominee must have?

It's not whether he's had affairs, or even lied about them, or whether he feels your pain... and it's not even "how conservative he is" - all the current Republican candidates are conservative enough for the reversal of trends we need in the next four years, though obviously none is perfect.

What's the most important characteristic?

It's the ability to get conservative legislation INTRODUCED AND PASSED so he can sign it into law as President.

I know, introducing and passing legislation is Congress's job, not the President's. In fact the President has a relatively minor "official" part in making laws - he simply signs (or vetos) what Congress sends him.

But a President has the ability to exert major influence on what Congress sends him, in part through meeting with Congressmen and explaining what he will and won't veto while working out packages with them. And the biggest part of his influence, is through the Bully Pulpit.

Notice the fits of screaming hysteria that country has gone through for the last year or so, not in trying to CUT the Federal budget, but simply in trying to reduce its rate of increase a little. And the effort has had ZERO results so far - just some "automatic" cuts" in the rate of increase, which it looks like will be quietly legislated away before they go into effect in Jan. 2013.

Have you ever wondered how President Reagan managed to get a ***33 PERCENT*** cut in the Income Tax Rate, in his very first year in office? (When he took office the top rate was 75%, he cut it to 50% and cut all the other rates proportionately. Then he did it again later, finally winding up at 28%, less than HALF the rate he started with). In today's Congress, it would be a feat impossible to even imagine.

He did it by using the Bully Pulpit. Reagan would go on national TV and say to people directly, "Here's what I want to happen, here are the advantages and disadvantages, I think you as Americans deserve this an can handle the responsibility etc., SO PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSMAN AND TELL HIM TO VOTE FOR THIS." The speech, given many times for different agenda items, was longer than that, but that was the gist. Having a Republican-majority Senate helped, but even the Dem-majority House caved when huge public pressure fell on them.

The most important characteristic the Republican nominee for President in 2012, isn't just to be conservative. It's to be able to get his conservatism INTRODUCED AND PASSED thru the Congress so he can then sign it into law.

At this point, looks like it will be either Romney or Newt. Both have extensive baggage, both have noteable conservative achievements, both have major liberal black marks on their records. And all that stuff is far less important than CAN HE GET CONSERVATIVE LEGISLATION PASSED AND SIGNED INTO LAW.

Part of it depends on what Congress he gets, of course. Republicans will likely keep the House, hopefully with at least the same majority they have now, and there's a good chance they will get a Senate majority (do you believe the liberal pundits, in both parties, who scream it isn't so?). And hopefully there will be a higher percentage of no-tax-increases-and-CUT-the-budget newcomers, as happened in 2010. If so, that will make it a lot easier for the Republican President to actually legislate conservatism (REDUCED govt spending and regulation) into law.

But there will be several more Congressional elections between now and when the Republican president leaves office in 2021, and leftists (in both parties) gaining a majority in one house is always possible. If that happens, then between Newt and Romney, whihc is more likely to be able to get conservative legislation through Congress and onto his desk for signature?

Between Newt and Romney, which of them is more able to persuade members of Congress to vote for his conservatives policies, in enough numbers to get it passed? Which is more able to persuade the American people that NOW IS THE TIME to call or write your Congressman and tell him to pass this legislation?

The most important characteristic the Republican nominee will bring to the White House is NOT promises or perfect hair or a pixie smile or even "I stick strictly to the Constitution". It's "After 8 years with me in office this country will be a lot closer to obeying the Constitution, and I can make that happen better than my opponent for the nomination."

Which candidate can get Congress to pass more conservative legislation even if/when they don't want to?

Newt or Romney?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

A friend of mine brought up another important point that I had missed.

Once a Republican gets elected President, he will be subject to literally the weight of the whole world, trying to get him to change his policies. At least it will seem that way to him - the media will present a 100% united front, both to him and to the rest of the world, saying that he is cruel, heartless, completely at odds with what the American people want, none of his policies will work and he is completely insane for even trying them.

Newt, at least, has had direct experience with that little tupperware party. When Republicans were voted into majorities in the House and Senate in 1994 and Newt became Speaker, that entire circus swung into action against them. And Newt's support among congressional Republicans melted away like butter on a hot stove. He was left to bear the brunt of the task of getting tax cuts passed (he managed to get the Cap Gains cut through in the face of repeated vetos from Clinton). But as he tried to keep Republicans on the smaller-govt course they had started on, more and more of his fellow Repubs stopped cooperating with him, and rapidly turned into big spenders fully as liberal as the Democrats they replaced, and the so-called "Republican Revolution" collapsed.

So another important characteristic the Republican nominee this year must have is: He must be able to stand up to the haranguing, pressure, smears, and lies of a full-court press from the media and other leftist Democrats, that will often appear as a united front against him and his agenda.

Newt has gotten a good taste of this already, though that doesn't mean he knows how to defeat it. Romney hasn't really had such a taste yet, except vicariously by watching what has happened to other Republicans.

So, who will be better able to get conservative legislation thru Congress, AND be able to stay the course in the face of the inevitable media-led eight-year gauntlet of attacks, smears, and vilification?

Newt or Romney?

[pegwinn]

Leadership Traits For Congress (http://the--realist.blogspot.com/2007/02/leadership-traits-for-congress.html)

Leadership Principles For Congress (http://the--realist.blogspot.com/2007/02/leadership-principles-for-congress.html)

Guido the legbreaker can get things done. LBJ proved that. I want to know that the Commander in Chief is worthy of the people he is supposed to lead. I know that is a harsh standard to hold a politician to. But, we require as much from a young serviceman.

[jimnyc]

When you evaluate who you wish to nominate and/or vote for in the General Election, what kind of issues and viewpoints do you look for?
Despite what many of you may believe, my support for Obama is not guaranteed. If I could talk with him in person, one on one, I would ask some serious questions. I would do the same with the eventual GOP nominee.

The entire package, add it up, deduct, and vote for the best. I don't think there will ever be a candidate that is "perfect" for me, unless I choose to run myself! :coffee:


**What is your stand on American involvement in the Middle East? If you are considering an escalation in the area, I can't vote for you. If you can't commit to complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan by 2016, I can't support you.

Escalating? Only if pushed, then destroy the aggressor. I want John Wayne in office. Someone who isn't going to take any crap, backs up his words and scares the crap out of dictators and terrorists. Complete withdrawal depends on what the Generals on the ground say, and whether it's safe for the men and the mission at hand.


**Are you in favor of eliminating or greatly reducing foreign aid to unfriendly countries? If you plan to continue wasting money on aid to Pakistan and ANY country in the Middle East (including Israel), I can't support you.

Unless we're getting something out of it, fuck 'em. If they're an "unfriendly" country to us, don't give them shit. I understand "strategically" why we give aid to Pakistan, but if it were me I say they only deserve a good ass kicking from us.


**You must acknowledge that attacking any country in the Middle East (including Iran and Syria) for any reason will start a worldwide conflict that would be impossible to win. Any country (including Israel) launching a war of aggression on another state must be left to their own devices. The American people will not stand for the loss of thousands more lives just so politicians can thump their chests in like warring peacocks.

Then you wouldn't vote for me, or anyone that I would support on this cause. There are a few countries over there I think need a few good bombs dropped on them. If Iran ever becomes on the edge of having a nuclear bomb, and perhaps ready to toss it at Israel, someone needs to go in and take out their ambitions, and maybe a few mullah's and Imam's while they are there.


**Are you committed to finding alternative sources of energy? This country can not continue to be held hostage by foreign powers that have their hands on the oil tap.

Drill away, both on land and in the sea.

[cadet]

I'm gonna put simply what i look for in a presedent. Its quite simple really.
A brain.

Sadly, that's not a very common trait in politics. I personally think we need somebody with experience. Like raising a buisness out of nothing, cause that's all america is in its basics, and can be run as such. I want an old guy who's seen the $h!t over the years, preferably 60-70 years old.

Cause as we all know, when your young, if your not a Dem you have no heart, and if your old and aren't Rep, you have no brain.

[gabosaurus]

I'm gonna put simply what i look for in a presedent. Its quite simple really.
A brain.

You want a politician with a brain?
Next think you know, you will be wanting one with common sense.

[pegwinn]

You want a politician with a brain?
Next think you know, you will be wanting one with common sense.

Brain + Common Sense = Ron Paul

[ConHog]

Brain + Common Sense = Ron Paul




:alcoholic:

[pegwinn]

:alcoholic:

Always knew there was something wrong with you :coffee:

[Little-Acorn]

Brain + Common Sense = Ron Paul

Check his foreign policy.

Common-sense fail, to the point of suspecting no brain either.

[pegwinn]

Check his foreign policy.

Common-sense fail, to the point of suspecting no brain either.

Non intervention is a fail?

Trading and making friends is a fail?

Not giving money to all and sundry is a fail?

Please define success.......