Conquer Club

Just thought I'd throw it out there....

Stewart Alexander 2016!

kentington 2016!

Although I don't need the votes. I will be taking over as America's dictator.

If he ran I'm pretty sure the dems would take it again. I don't think the repubs going more conservative is what's going to do it.

Baron Von PWN wrote:If he ran I'm pretty sure the dems would take it again. I don't think the repubs going more conservative is what's going to do it.

I wouldn't disagree but I think I'd rather lose with someone principled then win with another big gov't repub.

Baron Von PWN wrote:If he ran I'm pretty sure the dems would take it again. I don't think the repubs going more conservative is what's going to do it.

A charismatic small-c conservative candidate with character and a well thought-out vision for the nation and plan for the future could do it. Rand Paul, at least right now, isn't that man.

Allen West 2016!

Ray Rider wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:If he ran I'm pretty sure the dems would take it again. I don't think the repubs going more conservative is what's going to do it.

A charismatic small-c conservative candidate with character and a well thought-out vision for the nation and plan for the future could do it. Rand Paul, at least right now, isn't that man.

Someone who manges to be fiscaly conserative and socialy liberal would stand a very good chance.

Wether GOP can get it's head out of its ass and realise that is another question.

Baron Von PWN wrote:

Ray Rider wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:If he ran I'm pretty sure the dems would take it again. I don't think the repubs going more conservative is what's going to do it.

A charismatic small-c conservative candidate with character and a well thought-out vision for the nation and plan for the future could do it. Rand Paul, at least right now, isn't that man.

Someone who manges to be fiscaly conserative and socialy liberal would stand a very good chance.

Wether GOP can get it's head out of its ass and realise that is another question.

I doubt the GOP gives a shit. They're still getting their money, right?

As long as the country was educated, I feel like a libertarian would be everyone's favorite candidate.

Won't matter who the GOP chooses if the teaparty loons continue to destroy their candidates chances with their crazy extreme right wing agenda.They need a serious rethink..

Baron Von PWN wrote:

Ray Rider wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:If he ran I'm pretty sure the dems would take it again. I don't think the repubs going more conservative is what's going to do it.

A charismatic small-c conservative candidate with character and a well thought-out vision for the nation and plan for the future could do it. Rand Paul, at least right now, isn't that man.

Someone who manges to be fiscaly conserative and socialy liberal would stand a very good chance.

Wether GOP can get it's head out of its ass and realise that is another question.

The only person that fits that definition (right now) is Chris Christie.

Rand Paul is too conservative (although not as conservative as his father, he will be seen as an extension of Ron Paul).
Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan are too socially conservative.

I just don't see the Republicans getting away from the social conservative side of things. They'll convince themselves that there was something strange afoot this year, they didn't like their candidate because he wasn't charismatic enough, stuff like that and they'll nominate somebody else. In case we forgot, Romney was not very socially conservative until he had to run in the primary. Christie's charisma could push him past the obligatory "moving to the Christian coalition" crap that happens in the primary.

Army of GOD wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:

Ray Rider wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:If he ran I'm pretty sure the dems would take it again. I don't think the repubs going more conservative is what's going to do it.

A charismatic small-c conservative candidate with character and a well thought-out vision for the nation and plan for the future could do it. Rand Paul, at least right now, isn't that man.

Someone who manges to be fiscaly conserative and socialy liberal would stand a very good chance.

Wether GOP can get it's head out of its ass and realise that is another question.

I doubt the GOP gives a shit. They're still getting their money, right?

As long as the country was educated, I feel like a libertarian would be everyone's favorite candidate.

Libertarians will never be a popular choice electoraly. The ideology is too harsh and intellectual. In theory a libertarian candidate would have allowed the banks and auto industries fail. Maybe long term economically that would be the best call.

Short term though a lot of people would be out of work and the recession the USA went through would have been much more painful and even more difficult for the average joe.

I'm pretty sure one of the main reason's Obama won is the auto bail out. That had to be on people's minds in ohio.

thegreekdog wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:

Ray Rider wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:If he ran I'm pretty sure the dems would take it again. I don't think the repubs going more conservative is what's going to do it.

A charismatic small-c conservative candidate with character and a well thought-out vision for the nation and plan for the future could do it. Rand Paul, at least right now, isn't that man.

Someone who manges to be fiscaly conserative and socialy liberal would stand a very good chance.

Wether GOP can get it's head out of its ass and realise that is another question.

The only person that fits that definition (right now) is Chris Christie.

Rand Paul is too conservative (although not as conservative as his father, he will be seen as an extension of Ron Paul).
Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan are too socially conservative.

I just don't see the Republicans getting away from the social conservative side of things. They'll convince themselves that there was something strange afoot this year, they didn't like their candidate because he wasn't charismatic enough, stuff like that and they'll nominate somebody else. In case we forgot, Romney was not very socially conservative until he had to run in the primary. Christie's charisma could push him past the obligatory "moving to the Christian coalition" crap that happens in the primary.

I wonder if this tension will eventually cause the republican party to fracture, if the extreme fringe of the party keeps demanding policy nearly completely unacceptable to such a large portion of the population how can they hope to win?

Moderate republicans will eventually go crazy and have to wonder if they should go elsewhere. Which could be a new party? who knows.

Baron Von PWN wrote:I wonder if this tension will eventually cause the republican party to fracture, if the extreme fringe of the party keeps demanding policy nearly completely unacceptable to such a large portion of the population how can they hope to win?

Moderate republicans will eventually go crazy and have to wonder if they should go elsewhere. Which could be a new party? who knows.

I'd personally prefer them to keep the name and have the true conservatives band together under a new name.

Baron Von PWN wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:

Ray Rider wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:If he ran I'm pretty sure the dems would take it again. I don't think the repubs going more conservative is what's going to do it.

A charismatic small-c conservative candidate with character and a well thought-out vision for the nation and plan for the future could do it. Rand Paul, at least right now, isn't that man.

Someone who manges to be fiscaly conserative and socialy liberal would stand a very good chance.

Wether GOP can get it's head out of its ass and realise that is another question.

The only person that fits that definition (right now) is Chris Christie.

Rand Paul is too conservative (although not as conservative as his father, he will be seen as an extension of Ron Paul).
Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan are too socially conservative.

I just don't see the Republicans getting away from the social conservative side of things. They'll convince themselves that there was something strange afoot this year, they didn't like their candidate because he wasn't charismatic enough, stuff like that and they'll nominate somebody else. In case we forgot, Romney was not very socially conservative until he had to run in the primary. Christie's charisma could push him past the obligatory "moving to the Christian coalition" crap that happens in the primary.

I wonder if this tension will eventually cause the republican party to fracture, if the extreme fringe of the party keeps demanding policy nearly completely unacceptable to such a large portion of the population how can they hope to win?

Moderate republicans will eventually go crazy and have to wonder if they should go elsewhere. Which could be a new party? who knows.

Good point, and it's worth noting that the Republicans have now lost the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections.

patrickaa317 wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:I wonder if this tension will eventually cause the republican party to fracture, if the extreme fringe of the party keeps demanding policy nearly completely unacceptable to such a large portion of the population how can they hope to win?

Moderate republicans will eventually go crazy and have to wonder if they should go elsewhere. Which could be a new party? who knows.

I'd personally prefer them to keep the name and have the true conservatives band together under a new name.

To me it seems like the conservative side of the party is the side in charge. not the other way around. Which suggests it would be the moderates who split off. Though The conservative fringe is the more radical so they'd probably be more likely to split off, while moderates would stick around