Posted on 07/18/2014 10:41:47 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom
[...] But new polls indicate that his longtime major political weakness has not gone away: Republicans do not entirely trust him, seeing him as a liberal Northeasterner in an increasingly conservative party.
Meanwhile, Christie remains the Democrats favorite possible GOP candidate. That could help him in a general election. However, he has to win over Republicans to win primaries before he could reach the mountain of a November vote.
A Gallup survey out Friday has numbers that show what we mean. In the crowded field of possible Republican presidential candidates, from Mike Huckabee to Rick Santorum to Scott Walker, Christie has lowest favorability rating among Republican voters. [...]
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
OK, to avoid posting a vanity :-) let me turn the question around. If those of us who would prefer not to have a Democrat in the White House in 2017 could pick the Democrats’ 2016 Presidential ticket for the same purpose that they would like to pick the GOP’s ticket—i.e., ensure that the Dem ticket would go down in flames—who, among the reasonably possible candidates (not Debbie Wasserman-Shultz, etc.), would we choose?
the mob likes him or he wouldn’t have become governor of NJ so what does that tell you?
Hillary Clinton.
The more people hear her, the more they won’t like her.
Joe Biden....
[ Right. Any Republican who is the nominee will be tarred and feathered. Look no further than McCain and Romney. Two liberal Republican squishes. By the end of the election, by the time the media and Dem operatives (but I repeat myself) got through with them, they were damaged goods. ]
Hell i would have loved Newt in 2012 because at least Newt (dispitte being a bit squishy and progressive on some issues) would have at LEAST fought BACK!
I wonder if Lurch will make another run for it.
“... a liberal Northeasterner in an increasingly conservative party.”
Is the GOP “increasingly conservative”? I’d like to think so, but would need some evidence to really feel good about it.
So is Mitt Romney, John McCain, Peter King, etc.
Anyone who is guaranteed to lose the POTUS race because they are either way too moderate(McCain, King, etc.) or way to Progressive Liberal (i.e. Romney)
Water, Pope, bear...
BINGO. The idea of a Newt candidacy was not really about Newt per se, as much as it was about the way a long Newt V Obama campaign would have unfolded, including, but not limited to, the debates. It would have been a national discussion of the Tea Party vision versus the Occupy Wall Street vision.
Now I know some will say "wait, Newt is not really Tea Party" - and that's true. But when Newt was ON, the good Newt, he articulated the limited government vision better than perhaps anyone we've seen in a long while and for Newt to have won the nomination, this is what he would have had to continue to do, as he did early in Iowa, and then again in SC (instead he got drawn into Mitt's negativity in Florida and it was over).
It would have been clarifying. An electorate contrasting Newt would have been forced to be a little higher information than they are now. Would it have worked? I dunno. It would have been risky, but safe didn't work either. And if Newt was elected, would he have been a disappointment? Probably in some areas.
But Newt would swing the bat. Mitt was out on called strikes...
If MSM had called balls and strikes, they would have Newt-ered Gingrich.
Joe Biden. He’s stupid and being a white male he is automatically in a group that does not like him and which it is OK not to like. The real question is what designated loser are the RAT organs going to pick for us , again , this time?
As is normally the case, you missed the main point, and simply tried to make yourself “look” smart and snarky. Fail.
Now, I can explain it to you, but I can’t understand it for you.
You exhibit an arrogance that is typical of poor self-confidence.
Secure people don't have to build themselves up by tearing others down.
You do that regularly...not just to me but to a lot of people.
You are to be pitied!
You deserved it. You totally ignored the bigger point in my post - then pulled a tiny byte out of context, and tried to make yourself look good by doing so. Now, this gives us two choices about you. Either you’re not smart enough to get the main point, or you were being a b-tch on purpose.
So, A or B, because logic dictates it HAS to be one or the other. There’s no other choice.
I still haven't seen any evidence that you are brilliant or witty.
Say something smart and funny...so that I can laugh with you and not at you. I need a good laugh...my TV remote is screwed up!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.