Replies

What we are really dealing with here is a candidate that is 51-percent-or-more in acceptability

Jim Robinson isn't with you on the 51% - he wants 100% or nothing.

It's interesting - Jim was a good sport by even responding to my questions, but he's not given up a name or names that we all should at least look at and possibly build up to nomination. Now, perhaps it's a little early but the candidates are out there, they are already politicians, at least those who can actually win - who are they and why can't FR get behind someone early in the game at 100%. That would possibly discourage others from even running?

My fear is that we will go through the same BS as leading up to the 2009 election - end up with no candidate or a McCain type candidate that is simply unacceptable to lots of us, everyone here on a different page and once again Obama as POTUS.

Even you rant against Romney but no names are mentioned that would even be in the 51% category. By the way, I just mentioned Newt and Romney - I'm open to supporting someone that has the 'right' stuff.

It's interesting - Jim was a good sport by even responding to my questions, but he's not given up a name or names that we all should at least look at and possibly build up to nomination. Now, perhaps it's a little early but the candidates are out there, they are already politicians, at least those who can actually win - who are they and why can't FR get behind someone early in the game at 100%. That would possibly discourage others from even running?

Speaking for myself, I can't get behind someone 100% until I see how they perform in the rough-and-tumble competition of the primary campaign. All I can do at this point is point out who will not be acceptable, based on past actions (and in Romney's case, past GOP primary performance).

We really need to focus on taking back Congress in 2010. But in regard to 2012, the fact is, we need a presidential candidate who can unite us. Romney is demonstrably not that person.