Jeff Flake or Mark Sanford in 2012?

[ArrestPoliticians]

"Flake initially supported the Patriot Act and the Iraq War, but more recently has changed his position to one of cautious opposition, including voting against appropriations for both." -Wikipedia

 

[richiep]

I just watched a half minute of that CSPAN video just to get a quick feel for his "presence" and I have to say he comes across very well.

Compare that to Johnson, who might be the best overall on the issues. He comes across more as a sort of reminding me of Fox Muldur in this video clip! lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTq-XGn40gk

Compare that to BO, who also has a certain presence, even when he's wearing jeans and talking informally. If we are to seriously talk about someone to support for POTUS in 2012, this kind of thing is important.

 

[Indy4Chng]

My two cents...

We should run a governor or x-governor... Sanford would also be a good candidate (although I prefer Gary Johnson). The one huge advantageous of Gary Johnson is he could somewhat self-fund, which is going to be huge as the Republican party will not be rid of their neocon leadership and block the true conservatives.

The candidate should focus on 100% fiscal libertarism (as most likely the war/patriot act will be a distant memory) and we will be in the midst of a recession.

Also we need to think of the voting demographics... right now we have about 10% of the voting population with similar beliefs... but fiscal conservatives/libertarians makeup over 50% of the voting block and when republicans have dominated elections they have won on smaller government and fiscal reforms also many of the fiscal conservatives that our not ron paul conservatives, want a principled candidate and so we need to give them one.... then once we are in office we can break out the social libertarian agenda as well.

Does anyone else despise social conservatives like George Bush? They have destroyed the conservative name and have ruined our country. Damnit everytime they speak I want to break out a bible and knock them across the head with it... btw I am not atheist, I just don't think politics and religion should not mix and it sure as hell shouldn't be the difining issue that drives you.

 

[ArrestPoliticians]

I just watched a half minute of that CSPAN video just to get a quick feel for his "presence" and I have to say he comes across very well.

Compare that to Johnson, who might be the best overall on the issues. He comes across more as a sort of reminding me of Fox Muldur in this video clip! lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTq-XGn40gk

Compare that to BO, who also has a certain presence, even when he's wearing jeans and talking informally. If we are to seriously talk about someone to support for POTUS in 2012, this kind of thing is important.

I thought it was just me! I don't think he is a very polished or charismatic candidate AT ALL, but Ron Paul isn't exactly Mr Politician either and he was able to connect, so who knows.

Jesse was made for the limelight and TV, and can break through the media barrier because of his celebrity status. He is the best performer of the bunch, but the difficulty in getting a third party in the white house means that he will have to be our secret weapon until GOP alternatives are exhausted.

 

[literatim]

Gary Johnson has a scholars aura about him. I would like to see how he handles debates. Anyone have a video of his gubernatorial debate?

 

[ArrestPoliticians]

The candidate should focus on 100% fiscal libertarism (as most likely the war/patriot act will be a distant memory) and we will be in the midst of a recession.

I agree to some extent, but within this area the focus needs to be on monetary policy and free market economics, not "budget balancing". GOP neo-cons that have/claim to have balanced state budgets are a dime a dozen.

 

[BuddyRey]

You guys, why support just one when ALL of them could run?! If the '12 GOP roster has enough individualists to seem like a growing and serious contingent in the party (rather than a "lone kook" as they tried to paint Ron Paul) we would have a huge chance of winning. The media attacks wouldn't work nearly as well because they would have to be broader and more vague. The media can't simultaneously denounce three or four very similar candidates as "kooks" without it looking pretty funny to MSM-watchers. More candidates means a bigger chance at success!!!

 

[Mini-Me]

You guys, why support just one when ALL of them could run?! If the '12 GOP roster has enough individualists to seem like a growing and serious contingent in the party (rather than a "lone kook" as they tried to paint Ron Paul) we would have a huge chance of winning. The media attacks wouldn't work nearly as well because they would have to be broader and more vague. The media can't simultaneously denounce three or four very similar candidates as "kooks" without it looking pretty funny to MSM-watchers. More candidates means a bigger chance at success!!!

Great post! I wholeheartedly agree, so long as they don't take so much support from each other during the primaries that well-funded establishment candidates set themselves apart and pull in more concentrated support.

 

[BuddyRey]

Mark Sanford, despite all the Bilderburg conspiracy theorists.

It's a real group and there's nothing "theoretical" about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group

However you feel about the ultimate aims of the group, or whether or not its even a slight factor in world politics, U.S. politicians meeting there in secret with foreign leaders is a clear and blatant violation of the Logan Act.

 

[ArrestPoliticians]

You guys, why support just one when ALL of them could run?! If the '12 GOP roster has enough individualists to seem like a growing and serious contingent in the party (rather than a "lone kook" as they tried to paint Ron Paul) we would have a huge chance of winning. The media attacks wouldn't work nearly as well because they would have to be broader and more vague. The media can't simultaneously denounce three or four very similar candidates as "kooks" without it looking pretty funny to MSM-watchers. More candidates means a bigger chance at success!!!

The problem is scarcity. We only have so much money and time. Its better to pool our resources. I think we will probably only have enough for either 1 independent run or 1 GOP primary run, but I'm holding out that we can pull off both.

 

[BuddyRey]

The problem is scarcity. We only have so much money and time. Its better to pool our resources. I think we will probably only have enough for either 1 independent run or 1 GOP primary run, but I'm holding out that we can pull off both.

I think you might be forgetting just how many "mainstream" Republicans and Democrats could go for a Gary Johnson or Jesse Ventura Presidency. So much campaign funding will end up coming from these sources that, when inevitably the wheat is separated from the chaff, only the candidate(s) who really take root with the voters at large are left, and there won't be any more talk about "viability" as far as our pick(s) are concerned. Said candidate(s) can then more or less become self-starters with the generous contributions from Ron Paul diehards and even some non-diehards who still like the message.

Let's face it; a lot of U.S. voters go into the thing with a "horse race" mentality. It's not about philosophy or the ideals of liberty and Constitutional government, it's about "picking a winner." If we can provide enough candidates to give them that feeling of choice and at the same time let them feel like they're picking a sharp guy, an up-and-comer who can win, their primitive psychology will do the rest of the work for us (the MSM does it all the time)!

 

[ArrestPoliticians]

I think you might be forgetting just how many "mainstream" Republicans and Democrats could go for a Gary Johnson or Jesse Ventura Presidency. So much campaign funding will end up coming from these sources that, when inevitably the wheat is separated from the chaff, only the candidate(s) who really take root with the voters at large are left, and there won't be any more talk about "viability" as far as our pick(s) are concerned.

Let's face it; a lot of U.S. voters go into the thing with a "horse race" mentality. It's not about philosophy or the ideals of liberty and Constitutional government, it's about "picking a winner." If we can provide enough candidates to give them that feeling of choice and at the same time let them feel like they're picking a sharp guy, an up-and-comer who can win, their primitive psychology will do the rest of the work for us (the MSM does it all the time)!

The mainstream money MIGHT flow in to Ventura, but he will need a lot of volunteers to get ballot access and canvas. Johnson will be marginalized without massive inflows of money.

I do see your point, however.

 

[mitty]

gary johnson please. but unless he is married i doubt he could get elected

 

[Sarge]

I was mentioning to someone yesterday, I wished Jeff Flake would run to knock out McCain or Kyle.

We were discussing the Republican party being in shambles and the need to get the right person to get back to conservative roots. Six votes for him already.

We need several good guys running.

Jeff also voted against the bailout. I would like to see him in the Senate or run for President.

He is well liked in AZ here. I wish he was in my district instead of Shadegg.

 

[angelatc]

Would you support a Mark Sanford or Jeff Flake in 2012?

Not my ideal choices but guys I think that could actually win.

I like Gary Johnson, Judge Andrew Napolitano and Ed Thompson also.... but do they really have a chance?

A Sanford or a Flake campaign could open up the door for better candidates in the future. (reminding people that small government and fiscal responsibility is what we need)

Sanford. Flake supports amnesty.

 

[Cowlesy]

<---Sanford fan with his absolute opposition to the Real ID.

What about Schweitzer in Montana? All I know is that he is also anti-real ID.

 

[me3]

A lot of people missing the point. It is unlikely that a Republican will win the Presidency in 2012. What is important, is having someone who will run late and deep like Ron Paul, carries a 100% honest message, and has some stage presence.

Find people to support locally. Get behind 2010 liberty candidates. You don't need the Presidency if you control the base.

 

[itshappening]

I can see Johnson beating Obama if he has the right message and if people got behind him. it also depends on the political environment

Hannity is pushing Jindal and Palwenty pretty hard.

Sanford I dont know much about he's a southern governor and if he is attending bilderberg meetings that is a worry, he is a Reagan/Bush who will say everything right but not stick to it when/if he won office

 

[scandinaviany3]

sanford for pres and flake for vp

Would you support a Mark Sanford or Jeff Flake in 2012?

Not my ideal choices but guys I think that could actually win.

I like Gary Johnson, Judge Andrew Napolitano and Ed Thompson also.... but do they really have a chance?

A Sanford or a Flake campaign could open up the door for better candidates in the future. (reminding people that small government and fiscal responsibility is what we need)

yah makes sense sanford for pres and flake for vp...like it

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Mark Sanford lost all credibility when he went to the Bilderberg meeting.

There's a reason for this... why is RP on the Foreign Relations committee?



PS: BOTH are very good selections. Flake I prefer