LevinFan on February 24, 2013 at 8:51 PM

Same to you LevinFan. Hope your big day tomorrow goes as planned.
See you around Hot Gas next time.

He was a doctor for a long time. That puts him in a unique position to explain to the American people how all the regulations kill healthcare.

I didn’t mean anything by the question other than to get a point of reference on your thinking of a true con.

I don’t view Jindal as a moderate or wishy washy though, and yes I think Rand may get moderates (if he stays away from espousing too much Libertarian foreign policy views).

But I also think it is the height of hubris that Rubio/Cruz/Paul/Ryan would even think they are ready for the top job. (I know, Obama but that’s a serious facepalm).

Rubio/Cruz or Paul would be better off making a play for senate leadership first or a governorship. Same with Ryan in the House

And I agree on your assessment of previous candidates flaws.

can_con on February 24, 2013 at 8:43 PM

I used to think the same thing about wanting an executive instead of someone from the Senate.

However at this point I’ll settle for a conservative with a backbone.

I mean Romney was a former Governor and CEO but I’d take Rand Paul or Cruz in a second over Mittens.

So just b/c someone has executive experience or more experience in gov’t doesn’t necessarily make them a better or more qualified candidate. Some are tainted by being in DC longer.

It has to be a case by case basis.

Cruz may hold off since he’s new but I really hope he doesn’t. Check out his voting record, I think that makes him alot better suited than many others with more experience.

I may not be able to respond after this (we shall see) as I have to get some sleep for a big day tomorrow…. been nice chatting with you.

LevinFan on February 24, 2013 at 8:31 PM

I didn’t mean anything by the question other than to get a point of reference on your thinking of a true con.

I don’t view Jindal as a moderate or wishy washy though, and yes I think Rand may get moderates (if he stays away from espousing too much Libertarian foreign policy views).

But I also think it is the height of hubris that Rubio/Cruz/Paul/Ryan would even think they are ready for the top job. (I know, Obama but that’s a serious facepalm).

Rubio/Cruz or Paul would be better off making a play for senate leadership first or a governorship. Same with Ryan in the House

And I agree on your assessment of previous candidates flaws.

What do you mean by last true con elected by today’s standards?

Are you implying that our standards now are too tough? I sure hope not b/c the issue we had too many candidates last go around with major flaws in fundamental areas:

SOcialized healthcare: ROmney and Newt had serious issues. Even Santorum voted for Medicare Part D.

Global warming: ROmney and Newt

Bailouts: Newt and Romney

Soft on illegals: Newt and Perry; honestly the entire GOP is pretty bad on this one.

I don’t disagree with you. Just feel that Rand will not win moderates, plus he is a first term senator which I don’t think the country needs as the top executive.

Jindal may not be the most conservative, but he is the most conservative one that can still attract all spectrums of voters. Other than his hokey SOTU rebuttle, he will be hard to marginalize without having racism charges shoved back in their faces.

I would support any eventual nominee, but my hope is the country goes for someone with executive experience, not a senator.

Just curious though, in your opinion when was the last “true con” elected President by today’s standards?

can_con on February 24, 2013 at 7:35 PM

First I think Rand does and will appeal to moderates. ANd for the record I don’t respect wishy washy moderates. They are weak and go whichever way the wind blows. PResent them with a strong conservative leader and most will follow.

Secondly the last thing we should to is nominate someone based who we think can supposedly win. We nominate the best person and what happens happens.

We’ll see if Jindal even runs, if he does I’d be more than willing to check him out.

The last true con was Reagan.

And he does really come off as New Reagan.

Illinidiva on February 24, 2013 at 5:58 PM

I don’t agree with the comparison though. Rubio is a good speaker, but he has his story and not much else except speaking skills. Reagan was an ex-governor, also an older “father figure” populist.

Rubio is the shiny new upstart and has a long life to live before he can be put in the same league as Reagan.

I still like Rubio. He just needs to get a little more experience. Would like to see him try governorship first.

LevinFan on February 24, 2013 at 6:53 PM

I don’t disagree with you. Just feel that Rand will not win moderates, plus he is a first term senator which I don’t think the country needs as the top executive.

Jindal may not be the most conservative, but he is the most conservative one that can still attract all spectrums of voters. Other than his hokey SOTU rebuttle, he will be hard to marginalize without having racism charges shoved back in their faces.

I would support any eventual nominee, but my hope is the country goes for someone with executive experience, not a senator.

Just curious though, in your opinion when was the last “true con” elected President by today’s standards?

2016 can play out two ways in my opinion:

If the American Idolification continues, Rubio will be the nominee and will win. He is the republican Obama.

If the American people are fed up enough with the state of the country and start taking their choices more seriously, then I think either Jindal/Perry or Rand Paul will be the nominee. If it’s Rand, he loses. If it’s Jindal, he makes it a tough fight but outcome uncertain. Perry the same.

I hope the electorate is serious this time, but doubt it. Time will tell.

Not sure if just winning is enough and not certain as to whether electing a republican Obama is in the best interest of the country.

I know. Rubio ain’t Obama. But he ain’t Reagan either.

can_con on February 24, 2013 at 4:40 PM

Again I agree on some of the things you said and strongly disagree with some other things…

You hit the nail on the head in that Rubio is the GOP obama.

You did it again by saying if the American Idolification continues Rubio may be the nominee or if we’re fed up enough than Jindal or Rand will be.

Here’s where you lose me though. If country is fed up enough than why can’t either Jindal or Rand win. Real conservatism wins. We sure haven’t had it the last to potus election cycles.

Plus I know Rand can communicate conservative values. He did great last Sunday with Chris Wallace, especially when Rand explained how we still have huge trillion dollar increases over about the next 10 years, that the sequestration is a joke.

We lost b/c conservatives didn’t show up, we don’t need to bend anymore. Get a good conservative and we will win. I’m sick of the defeatist attitude.

He may be better as Senate Minority Leader than we give him credit for.

can_con on February 24, 2013 at 4:28 PM

Politics is basically American Idol now. Sorry about that. There are airheads who totally vote on superficial things who have been empowered. Luckily for us, they still cannot vote via text on their phone. Yes, Rubio is Obama 2.0 but he is a better upgrade from Obama. And he does really come off as New Reagan.

Plante actually used the verboten words “State-Run Media.”

I will never trust the Democrats simply because they’re afraid of Fox News. Oh yes, they send people on Fox News, but it’s always their best messengers, the ones who can repeat the talking points and not be trapped by a legitimate question.

I doubt this will change, the Republicans don’t believe they have a media problem so they’ll never get serious about the message.

Remember January when we put the Social Security taxes back, and you have to start paying them again?

This cuts your take-home pay at least 2%.

We’re also cutting the Federal Government’s budget 2%.

Do what every wage-earner in the country is doing… sort out your budget, cut the least important 2%, move on.

IF you’re less competent at budgeting than the average American citizen, then you shouldn’t be in charge of trillions of dollars of Government funding. And you certainly shouldn’t get more money to play with.

If you put Jindal and Rubio together you’d have a great candidate. But we can’t. I just think that Rubio’s natural skills are a larger plus than Jindal’s experience. There are ways to give Rubio gravitas. That is what I think immigration reform is about and why I think that there emphasizing foreign policy with him. Not sure how you make Jindal more interesting.

Illinidiva on February 24, 2013 at 2:09 PM

2016 can play out two ways in my opinion:

If the American Idolification continues, Rubio will be the nominee and will win. He is the republican Obama.

If the American people are fed up enough with the state of the country and start taking their choices more seriously, then I think either Jindal/Perry or Rand Paul will be the nominee. If it’s Rand, he loses. If it’s Jindal, he makes it a tough fight but outcome uncertain. Perry the same.

I hope the electorate is serious this time, but doubt it. Time will tell.

Not sure if just winning is enough and not certain as to whether electing a republican Obama is in the best interest of the country.

I know. Rubio ain’t Obama. But he ain’t Reagan either.

See that’s the same argument all the romney types said about why Palin couldn’t win in 2012. That she didn’t finish the term, too polarizing…blah blah blah.

It doens’t matter who the nominee is they will be marginalized and brutally attacked by the lapdog media. Just look at Mr. Electable, the moderate wimp Romney and how he was portrayed as a tax cheat, a felon, and a murderer. Plus if she ran she has the name recognition and would have a ton of grassroots support. The reason we lost in 2012 was b/c the base didnt turn out. That’s where we need to focus. There are still more of us them those filthy libs.

There’s nothing I want more than for the Cuda to run.

LevinFan on February 24, 2013 at 2:19 PM

It might seem like the same argument as all the Romney types said in 2012 but there is one key difference I will add:

The reason Palin couldn’t win in 2012 was; she didn’t run. Nobody stopped her from trying but herself as far as I know. She read the tea leaves and realized she couldn’t win given all the variables.

Plus, in the intervening period, the media has portrayed her as the villain to the messiah. Add in the whole “Blood libel” fiasco and I feel she has been irreparably tarnished.

She will again read the tea leaves in 2016 and if she decides things are different and decides to run, I think at that point, it will be shown if the base thinks she has what it takes.

Like I said, I am an admirer of hers.

Me too.

fight like a girl on February 24, 2013 at 2:31 PM
Me three..:)

idesign on February 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM

Sweet, endearing, sick…she’s always running, but not for office any more.

Me too.

fight like a girl on February 24, 2013 at 2:31 PM

Me three..:)

There’s nothing I want more than for the Cuda to run.

LevinFan on February 24, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Me too.

I am an admirer of both Palin and Jindal, and for sure he needs to hone his speaking skills, but remember that whomever is the eventual candidate will not be going up against “the greatest orator of our time”.

As for Palin, I didn’t see the movie, but I don’t argue with why she needed to resign. I just think she has been too marginalized by the media,by going down the fox news/reality show route, and by essentially being an observer/critic/base participant for 8 years (by then). I would be happy to see her run for a senate seat or eventually work in a cabinet.

can_con on February 24, 2013 at 1:50 PM

See that’s the same argument all the romney types said about why Palin couldn’t win in 2012. That she didn’t finish the term, too polarizing…blah blah blah.

It doens’t matter who the nominee is they will be marginalized and brutally attacked by the lapdog media. Just look at Mr. Electable, the moderate wimp Romney and how he was portrayed as a tax cheat, a felon, and a murderer.

The sad part was he lacked the balls to defend himself and to fight for conservatism.

We know Palin is not afraid to fight the lamestream media and can eloquently make the case for conservatism.

Plus if she ran she has the name recognition and would have a ton of grassroots support. The reason we lost in 2012 was b/c the base didnt turn out. That’s where we need to focus. There are still more of us them those filthy libs.

There’s nothing I want more than for the Cuda to run.

To levinfan:
I see becoming President as a package deal.
It’s one thing to want the right guy,its another to actually get that person.
By all rights we never should have never gotten ozero,if it were not for race, sexual preference,axlerod, etc. he never would have got there.He had to lie big time about hillary to get there as well.
Typically its not rocket science to tell who has what it takes to win.
You need lots of money. Mitt-yes,Newt-no,Santorum–no
You should have chariasma,not a must, only if you want to win.
Your name has to be a household name,rare winners are not.
Managerial experience is good and there are lots of other aspects like a fairly clean closet that alladd up or don’t.

rodguy911 on February 24, 2013 at 1:41 PM

I agree with some of what you said but not all of it.

A huge thing you left off was someone who’s an actual conservative and has the guts to fight the media and the dem smear machine.

Romney despite having the dough had neither of these qualities.

It’s time to support real conservatives who would make the changes needed once in office. If they don’t win, they don’t win, but we can’t not support these guys just because so called conventional wisdom says they’re not electable.

LevinFan on February 24, 2013 at 12:59 PM

…yes…maybe Cruz than Paul…I think can_con may be right about Palin…she is still eminently more qualified than JugEars ever was…but she needs to do one whole stint as a Senator or Govenor again or even as a Congressperson or Cabinet member…or, the media will always be rapid raping her.

Do Nothing, and Don’t tell anyone to do anything, and let people hire do nothing government workers who would not otherwise be qualified.

And you can end up with inspectors who don’t inspect the drug facilities like we have here in MA. Luckily no one from Massachusetts died..they were all deaths in flyover country…from tainted cortisone shots…Duval is responsible for not seeing that people inspect the facilities…all they have to do is show up and collect their check.

Corruption in the Post Romney era is rampant. I know you heard how awful things were here when Romney was governor…that was The Boston Globe. They are quieter than mice now.

Yes We Can was pioneered in MA by David Axelrod, an out of town tryout for president campaign. Yes we can Yes we can. Do nothing. Have no record. Get elected. The excitement is infectious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-4cRvuTDU4