I don’t know. He is not any dirtier than anybody else, depending on what’s important to you I suppose, but he does have baggage from his days as speaker of the house and the image thing is real regardless of whether the image itself is or not. In the context of today’s American body politic he is eminently qualified and competent. He can portray every bit of the confidence that Obama did in his campaign, and maybe more, only with real a substantive discussable platform under his feet. Scarred though it may be he also has a resume.
What he will also have though is the full wrath and fury of the media in ways that will make even their attacks on Bush look like playground horseplay. He will be drawn, quartered, skinned and fileted on a nonstop basis everywhere except FOX. Could he overcome all this and still be electable? If anyone could he could, but I don’t really know at this point. One BIIIIIG factor is that he is absolutely the universal diametric opposite of Obama, unlike McCain who sounded eerily like Obama himself in the 08 debates. On domestic policy anyway.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I don’t know. He is not any dirtier than anybody else, depending on what’s important to you I suppose, but he does have baggage from his days as speaker of the house and the image thing is real regardless of whether the image itself is or not. In the context of today’s American body politic he is eminently qualified and competent. He can portray every bit of the confidence that Obama did in his campaign, and maybe more, only with real a substantive discussable platform under his feet. Scarred though it may be he also has a resume.
What he will also have though is the full wrath and fury of the media in ways that will make even their attacks on Bush look like playground horseplay. He will be drawn, quartered, skinned and fileted on a nonstop basis everywhere except FOX. Could he overcome all this and still be electable? If anyone could he could, but I don’t really know at this point. One BIIIIIG factor is that he is absolutely the universal diametric opposite of Obama, unlike McCain who sounded eerily like Obama himself in the 08 debates. On domestic policy anyway.[/quote]
Yeah, I’m not sure that he’s electable. Frankly, the more I think over the republican candidates the more dismayed I become. If I could cobble together characteristics from a few of them, creating the ultimate candidate…Ah, what’s the use of that. I see Obama has pulled back even with the ‘generic republican candidate.’ 9% unemployment, downgraded credit, fast and furious, Solyndra, astronomical debt…How in the world is this guy polling this high? He won on nothing, and he might just do it again. Even with a record of failure after failure.
I have to agree with you Mufasa. I don’t know where they get the poll’s from but until the voters actually go out and vote, you just don’t know for sure.
[quote]dewing246 wrote:
I have to agree with you Mufasa. I don’t know where they get the poll’s from but until the voters actually go out and vote, you just don’t know for sure.[/quote]
Obviously that’s true, “won’t know for sure until it happens.” But polling certainly helps identify the most likely possibilities at the time. It’s worthy of comment as this process plays out.
[quote]dewing246 wrote:
I have to agree with you Mufasa. I don’t know where they get the poll’s from but until the voters actually go out and vote, you just don’t know for sure.[/quote]
Obviously that’s true, “won’t know for sure until it happens.” But polling certainly helps identify the most likely possibilities at the time. It’s worthy of comment as this process plays out. [/quote]
No…I agree with you, Sloth. In fact, Political Polling (and the subsequent statistical analysis) has become fairly accurate (when done by certain Agencies/Companies).
With that being said…I just have this “feeling” that in the case of what Republican voters will do in this Primary has a huge “X” factor that even the most accurate Pollers cannot predict.
This is what makes this GOP Primary so interesting (IMO).