Run Herman, Run!

[Craig4]

It might be nice and a healthy thing for our democracy if the Republicans didn't have a gladiatorial combat leading up to their convention leaving a bloody, wounded carcass of a candidate as the survivor. It might also be nice if they picked a candidate who could be elected.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

It might be nice and a healthy thing for our democracy if the Republicans didn't have a gladiatorial combat leading up to their convention leaving a bloody, wounded carcass of a candidate as the survivor. It might also be nice if they picked a candidate who could be elected.

My conspiracy theory is that they threw the fight in both '08 and '12 because nobody wanted to clean up after Bush. Like all conspiracy theories this gives me a knowledge placebo, comforting my fears. In this case my great fear is that the GOP really thinks spittle flecked maniacs and drooling halfwits are electable just because they share delusions.

 

[Ladewig]

It might be nice and a healthy thing for our democracy if the Republicans didn't have a gladiatorial combat leading up to their convention leaving a bloody, wounded carcass of a candidate as the survivor. It might also be nice if they picked a candidate who could be elected.

Could we ever go back ~50 years to back room brokering and repeated rounds of votes? I have no idea whether such an approach would be an improvement or not, but I think the Republicans have a small but very vocal group who has come to have a great distrust of people who have influence at the national level. (See Clive Bundy incident before he mentioned slavery. Also, many folks still don't understand why the national GOP hasn't impeached President Obama.)
Those folks would be up in arms if the current selection system were replaced.


Also, I wonder if the rooms would still be smoke-filled.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Also, I wonder if the rooms would still be smoke-filled.

I'm struck with an image of a hipster GOP vaping in back rooms.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Could we ever go back ~50 years to back room brokering and repeated rounds of votes? I have no idea whether such an approach would be an improvement or not, but I think the Republicans have a small but very vocal group who has come to have a great distrust of people who have influence at the national level. (See Clive Bundy incident before he mentioned slavery. Also, many folks still don't understand why the national GOP hasn't impeached President Obama.)
Those folks would be up in arms if the current selection system were replaced.


Also, I wonder if the rooms would still be smoke-filled.

Haven't we gone back to that, in a fashion, with the caucuses? As Billary could tell you, "Ignore the caucuses at your peril." And that's largely a question of getting in those back rooms and selling your soul to the local interests, isn't it? (Or bad-mouthing the winner of the primary to the extent that the locals will want to drop them.)

 

[TimCallahan]

Originally Posted by bobtaftfan
Why do so many liberals make fun of any Republican candidate who says anything about feeling that God wants him/her to run? I'm guessing these liberals don't realize that over the years quite a few Democratic candidates, including JFK, have made similar statements, and that even today you'll find a few Dem candidates who will make such statements.

Personally, I think Herman Cain was an inept candidate, and I would not support him in the GOP primary if he ran again because I think he'd get stomped in the general election.

Concerning the first hilited area, any candidate who thinks God wants him to run is at very least pretentious and deserves all the ridicule he or she gets. As to the second hilited area, can you give specific examples and cite sources?

Concerning the final hilited area, I'll take bobtaftfan's failure to answer as, "No."

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

Has any Democratic Party presidential candidate said God told him or her to run since say 2000?

I'm sure if Obama or Hillary or even an outlier like Russ Feingold had said something like that, we'd never be hearing the end of it.

I for one would never shut up about it.

 

[Craig4]

Could we ever go back ~50 years to back room brokering and repeated rounds of votes? I have no idea whether such an approach would be an improvement or not, but I think the Republicans have a small but very vocal group who has come to have a great distrust of people who have influence at the national level. (See Clive Bundy incident before he mentioned slavery. Also, many folks still don't understand why the national GOP hasn't impeached President Obama.)
Those folks would be up in arms if the current selection system were replaced.


Also, I wonder if the rooms would still be smoke-filled.

Of course they would be up in arms. I just wonder if they realize how the system they use makes Republican candidates unelectable.

 

[Ladewig]

Of course they would be up in arms. I just wonder if they realize how the system they use makes Republican candidates unelectable.

Given that the majority of those people are willing to blame everything but the system, I would say they don't realize it.

Liberal candidates "buy" votes
Too many RINO candidates are willing to compromise on uncompromisable issues
Media bias keeps us from getting our message out
Many liberal voters are too uneducated to understand how harmful liberal policies.
More voters would show up if we just went further right.

 

[quixotecoyote]

Of course they would be up in arms. I just wonder if they realize how the system they use makes Republican candidates unelectable.

Funny how many Republicans we've had and still have in government for a party that's so unelectable.

 

[Trakar]

Funny how many Republicans we've had and still have in government for a party that's so unelectable.

There is a difference between being able to win local elections where gerrymandering has created lopsided districts with sufficient partisanship to insure that party affiliation is more important to the electorate than individual policy stances and being able to win in a national general election.