Coulter: If not Christie; Romney; lose.

[Alferd_Packer]

Has anyone mentioned he's kinda fat?

So was Taft.

 

[Drachasor]

So was Taft.

Taft would probably not be electable in modern times. A lot of past presidents wouldn't actually. Superficial crap matters too much.

 

[Schrodinger's Cat]

Taft would probably not be electable in modern times. A lot of past presidents wouldn't actually. Superficial crap matters too much.

Being morbidly obese does not just have superficial ramifications. It also means the person is at high risk of serious health problems. Particularly when considering that presidential candidates tend to be late middle age or older. I'd be reluctant to vote in the primaries for a mordibly obese person, because what if they then picked a really crappy V.P., who we'd be at risk of getting stuck with?

I'd also be concerned about them having the energy needed to be president.

 

[MaGZ]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/special-editorial-yikes_594095.html

"And two of the candidates—Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney—did provide respectable performances. But no front-runner in a presidential field has ever, we imagine, had as weak a showing as Rick Perry. It was close to a disqualifying two hours for him. And Mitt Romney remains, when all is said and done, a technocratic management consultant whose one term as governor produced Romneycare. He could rise to the occasion as president. Or not.

But in a week in which markets collapsed, Solyndra exploded, our Middle East policy was in meltdown, the Iranian nuclear threat became more urgent, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff fingered our “ally” Pakistan as a sponsor of terror against American forces in Afghanistan—none of the candidates really seemed up to the moment, either politically or substantively. In the midst of a crisis, we’re getting politics as usual—and a somewhat subpar version of politics as usual at that."


"...Watching this week as Mitch Daniels intelligently promoted his book and Paul Ryan cogently explained why crony capitalism is inconsistent with the rule of law, we of course lamented that neither of them had stepped up to the challenge. Jeb Bush apparently isn’t getting in. That would seem to leave Chris Christie. He is, in every sense, a big man for a big job. And it really is a big job. The presidency always is, of course. But in 2013, with the magnitude and urgency of the problems we face, don’t we deserve someone with a bigger sense of the task ahead, and a deeper sense of the solutions needed, combined with a proven record of bold governance, than the current field provides?"

Kristol should have also added, "Christie is good for the Jews."

That’s what the neocons are really look for.

 

[Roadtoad]

agreed...this graph might help.

You left out "Paris Hilton's Acting Career Takes Off." Do it over.

 

[Roadtoad]

Kristol should have also added, "Christie is good for the Jews."

That’s what the neocons are really look for.

Considering you have no evidence of this....

 

[Chaos]

Of all the things the nation faces, homosexuality is apparently the paramount concern with a surprisingly great many. That is not a good indicator.

Indeed it is alarming how many right-wingers get their panties in a twist over the prospect of having to treat homosexuals like equals.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

When will we elect the first gay president?

besides Lincoln, that is.

 

[bikerdruid]

When will we elect the first gay president?

besides Lincoln, that is.

the law of averages would point to the probability that there has been at least one more.
an openly queer prez would be quite the thing.
hey...40 years ago, the concept of a black prez was as bizarre.

 

[Minoosh]

"We have to run somebody and if we don’t run Chris Christie, it’s going to be Romney because Republican primary voters for some reason refuse to do any research before voting."

Can Ann Coulter say anything without insulting someone - in this case the very voters GOP candidates are trying to attract?

And why does she think Romney would lose?

 

[Upchurch]

Of all the things the nation faces, homosexuality is apparently the paramount concern with a surprisingly great many. That is not a good indicator.

Indeed. That Christie supports oppressing even a small portion of American citizens is not a good indicator at all. What other aspects of the Constitution is he willing to gloss over in the name of superstition? As I said, I need more information, but so far he's not looking too promising.

 

[mhaze]

Of all the things the nation faces, homosexuality is apparently the paramount concern with a surprisingly great many....

....of the people of this forum...

Most curious. I don't know any gays that have this attitude. The ones I know are like normal people.

 

[The Fallen Serpent]

....of the people of this forum...

Most curious. I don't know any gays that have this attitude. The ones I know are like normal people.

The homosexuals I know are normal people, not just like them. Most of them are in favor of homosexual rights though, so we might have different definitions of "normal." Not all of them are politically active. That tends to run the gamut.

I think the part I bolded above really speaks to a big part of the problem in my opinion.

 

[bikerdruid]

....of the people of this forum...

Most curious. I don't know any gays that have this attitude. The ones I know are like normal people.

mhaze.....
do you deny the point that the GOP front-runners are anti-gay?

 

[Upchurch]

Or, to take it a step further, does anyone deny that it is bad to oppress roughly 10% of US citizens simply because they are gay? Is that, at least, something on which we can agree?

 

[marksman]

the law of averages would point to the probability that there has been at least one more.

James Buchanan is the most likely candidate. Andrew Jackson used to call him "Miss Nancy" and it was widely rumored he had a long-term homosexual relationship with Alabama Senator Rufus King.

 

[Upchurch]

*crickets*

 

[JudeBrando]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/christie_feels_the_urge_QYtocnZuH6ArN54eGisgyL#ixzz1ZMAdV3mq

"After months of hedging, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is giving serious thought to jumping into the ring for a GOP presidential run -- and could make his decision next week, The Post has learned.

The announcement may come as soon as Monday, said sources familiar with Christie’s thinking.

The renewed consideration about a White House run came after prodding this week from some Republicans he idolizes, including former First Lady Nancy Reagan, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and former President George W. Bush, sources said."


"...Even Christie’s wife, Mary Pat, has warmed to the idea of becoming First Lady after months of discouraging a run...
...Mary Pat Christie now is committed to supporting whatever her husband decides, the source said.

Insiders say Christie is ready to put a presidential campaign together “pretty fast.”
And he’d have to, since filing deadlines for key primary ballots are just weeks off."

 

[R.A.F.]

Apparently the New York Post is out of "step", here...last night Christie gave a speech where he once again denied that he was running.

What is it that the repub's don't get?...he doesn't want to be president.

 

[Flo]

Apparently the New York Post is out of "step", here...last night Christie gave a speech where he once again denied that he was running.

What is it that the repub's don't get?...he doesn't want to be president.

"If asked if he wants to be Prime Minister, the generally acceptable answer for a politician is that while he does not seek the office, he has pledged himself to the service of his country, and that should his colleagues persuade him that that is the best way he can serve, he might reluctantly have to accept the responsibility, whatever his personal wishes might be."


Yes, Minister, "Party Games"