The American Spectator : The Presidential Naysayers Guide

Print Email

Text Size

Streetcar Line

The Presidential Naysayers Guide

By Quin Hillyer on 1.28.11 @ 6:09AM

Eeyore says nobody can win, or serve well.

(Page 2 of 2)

Michelle Bachmann fails the gravitas test. She’s a loud back-bencher who hasn’t really legislated.

Jim DeMint isn’t gonna run. Neither is Paul Ryan. Neither is Chris Christie, who shouldn’t run anyway, because he hasn’t been governor long enough to prove his bona fides and because he just appointed a dodgy Muslim to the state Supreme Court. Marco Rubio isn’t ready. Rick Perry is yet another Texas governor. Mike Pence threw away a golden opportunity. And Harold Stassen is campaigning in the Great Beyond.

….

There, did all those negatives get you riled up? Believe me that I can, and will, write plenty of nice things about many of these folks (not Huckabee, though) in the coming months. But if you are prone to be so easily riled, just go ahead and get rile-y. Stay tuned.

Page: < 12

About the Author

Quin Hillyer is a senior editor of The American Spectator and a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom. Follow him on Twitter @QuinHillyer.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (149) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Deborah D | 1.28.11 @ 6:39AM

Good summation of what we're likely to hear from both sides of the aisle about whoever ends up being our nominee. Now, please write a column to remind us all of Obama's negatives...I fear it might be too long!

richard ryan| 1.28.11 @ 10:55AM

Obama's negatives don't really matter any more. Any American who does not at this point understand the destructive powers of the left is a lost cause. The big deciding factor in 2012 will be the economy. That large chunk of the population that votes on this vague sense that "things are better now" rather than on governing principles will go with the incumbent. I'm bummed about Paul Ryan and DeMint not running, but we'll find out who has the mettle in the next year or so. Regarding Newt, it would be worth nominating him just for the chance to watch him shred Obama in the debates.

Alan Brooks| 1.28.11 @ 10:48PM

I say run Hillyer, he is more honest than any of the GOP starting lineup.
Now, you HAD a sure-fire winner in Kemp-- but you f*cked it up as usual since 1/20/'89; yet that isn't strange, the odd thing is you will continue to do so. Reagan was your flagship, and the flagship was decommissioned in '89 and scrapped in '04.

Mark James| 1.30.11 @ 9:54PM

It's going to have to be a newcomer, who has NO baggage and enters the race late so that the Dems can't make stuff up in time. John Hunstman Jr.

Appleby| 1.28.11 @ 6:41AM

Or as we say in Kanukistan: WHAT CAN YOU DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO?

Yep, a good Prole keeps his head down, his shoulders slumped, his feet dragging, and does what the Apparatchik in his district (Ridings we call them here) tells him Daddy thinks is best, because, after all, WHAT CAN YOU DOOOOOO?

Today is the 25th anniversary of the Challenger disaster, by the way. Why is everybody writing hand-wringing boo-hoo pieces about a speech that nobody watched, and not recalling Ronald Reagans eulogy for the astronauts?

Alan Brooks| 1.28.11 @ 10:50PM

Because there are no Reagans anymore. Kemp was the last one.
It is HISTORY.

Bill30097| 1.29.11 @ 5:32PM

Kemp? Are you serious???? He was great on taxes, a big spender and an absolute RINO on social issues.

Alan Brooks| 1.30.11 @ 12:39AM

Well, there you go. Your most likely shot in the '90s, Kemp, wasn't even good enough for you.
Ike and Reagan were your only postwar heroes.

Almost 66 years since the war ended- but you had only the 16 years of Ike and the Gipper.

Mark James| 1.30.11 @ 9:50PM

Check out John Huntsman Jr. He is as close to reagan as we'll see any time soon. Excellent man.

potkas7| 1.28.11 @ 6:53AM

While everything you say about Newt Gingrich is true and I agree he would not be an effective President, those same characteristics would make him a superb Vice President.

Does believe that if Gingrich was in charge of the Debt Reduction Committee that they would not have wrapped up their work with a menu of recommendations, a bullet-pointed action-plan, a Power-Point Presentation and a script for the Sunday morning talks shows plus a mass-market book and DVD explaining all the reasons why this is the course we must follow?

A President has to have "The Vision Thing." But to truly be effective he needs someone to guard his back, who knows how the machine works, can fit the pieces together, motivate the reluctant troops and get the stragglers into line.

Harry the Horrible| 1.28.11 @ 8:55AM

Newt?
Would you vote for a guy who served divorce papers on his wife while she was being treated for cancer so that you could marry your Congressional intern mistress?
Lets face it - Newt has "family values" issues that make him unelectable on a national level.

Sean| 1.28.11 @ 10:06AM

Also global warming issues.

Alan Brooks| 1.30.11 @ 12:45AM

You will probably end up running Tricia Nixon for president in 2012.
Or Julie Nixon Eisenhower- she's tanned, rested and ready.

Say! OJ is going to be paroled in the spring of 2016, run him for POTUS; he is tall, dark, and handsome.

Gretchen| 1.31.11 @ 7:16PM

Also, how can one vote for an aquatic salamander?

NVA Patriot| 1.28.11 @ 8:03AM

WTF...

It was a funny way to point out the silliness of our Socialist leader. But...it wasn't 'PRESIDENTIAL'

Fortunately polls work a lot like the wind, creates a lotta temporary confusion, but in the end dust settles and you have to choose.

There is only one Republican in the field right now who can fill a stadium. There is only 1 candidate in the field right now who despite their faults demonstrates and lives the love of America. After another 2 years of the great bowing Ber-ate-a-tor, 55% of Americans will vote for the candidate who loves America first, last, and always.

So far, only one candidate has shown that love and been in the fight one-on-one with the socialists defending America.

John Carnal| 1.28.11 @ 12:52PM

That is a great litmus test. Which one can fill a stadium. You name the stadium and she will fill it. Of course she can't win...yet. She gives Steve Jobs a run for his money when it comes to marketing. Love your country? She's your candidate. Love your precinct caption? She isn't your candidate.

wodiej| 1.29.11 @ 8:10AM

Couldn't agree more. When the time is right, she will hit the ground running.

chris| 1.29.11 @ 7:35PM

Palin doesn't have the draw power anymore. When was the last time she drew a crowd larger than expected. Didn't you see the 350 disappointing crowd size at her book signing of all places Anchorage Dec. 18, 2010. A week before Christmas. Costco had portable toilets setup outside for the crowd that didn't show.

SC Mike| 1.28.11 @ 8:27AM

I wonder what got to Pence. 'Tis a pity he withdrew so soon. I guess the money and backers didn't work out. Too bad.

Nancy in NC| 1.28.11 @ 4:22PM

I think the GOP may have lost their best opportunity when Mike Pence decided not to run. I truly think he could have beaten Obama. Hell, the guy even looks like a PRESIDENT, and he was a real conservative.

I don't know if the country can suvive 4 more years of Obama, and I'm almost positive that I can't. If one is not concerned about where he is taking us, then perhaps they are in the wrong country...or perhaps I am.

tatosian| 1.28.11 @ 8:30AM

Might be a better idea to focus on maintaining a majority in the House and gaining a majority in the Senate.
If the Republicans haven't screwed us (again) with their go along to get along pandering, I believe obtaining a majority in the senate to be a goal within our reach.
Achieve that and it's just a matter of controlling Il duce till we can usher him (and whatever he's stealing) out the door.

Paul| 1.28.11 @ 10:26AM

Those would both be good things, but Obama has not shown any unwillingness to circumvent Congress when it fits his needs. Witness all the czars he's appointed, and the bureaucracy that does his bidding regardless of the laws that have been passed.

tatosian| 1.28.11 @ 3:50PM

True enough.
Perhaps establishing a Czar oversight committee whose members will ensure those czars spend their time answering questions rather than administrating is an answer.
One of the duties of that committee would be examining the funding for the Czarist programs and defunding them. To whatever extent is possible.
Perhaps those committees could seek the help of citizen activist groups in carrying out their mission. I'm sure citizen groups would be glad to do their part.
These are extraordinary times that call for extraordinary measures.
Obama and his friends need to feel besieged. They shouldn't be allowed a trip to the bathroom without a gaggle of Republicans informing them what the per sheet cost of toilet paper is.
As for the gargantuan bureaucracy,well, times are tough. The country needs to save money, not bureaucrats.
For this sort of thing to happen, the Republicans would essentially have to stop being Republicans and be what we want them to be; our representatives.
What are the chances of that?

bluemount| 1.28.11 @ 5:13PM

I was thinking same thing: focus on Senate races, pressure all csars,EPA, any of BHO's crony friends who are working for him, prssure on MSM by going on the offensive. Wanted Pence, don't like any of the other candidates, they all seem so second rate anhasbeens, many destroyed by MSM to ever effectively run. That's what we are up against

tatosian| 1.28.11 @ 5:45PM

Yup.

Ken (Old Texican)| 1.28.11 @ 8:32AM

Quin,
I had an interesting thought. Let's ask Sarah to run...and announce simultaneously her running mate who is a rock solid Roman Catholic.

That way we get the two most numerous and focused streams of American Christianity on the same team.
or.....flip that ticket.
Now, let's talk about the 59%...I don't buy it!
Even if I did, that means Sarah and team would only have to win over 11 percent of the actual voters.....well OK, 13 percent to overcome ACORN and cemetary voters.
See here's the thing. One hundred percent of the voters know Sarah right down to her toenails. What other candidate has that "vetting" behind him or her?
What other candidate "owns" the respect and appreciation of 40% of the voters.....nationally on day one?
What other candidate can inspire those 40% to work hard and even drag their worthless brother-in-laws to the polls on election day?

I'll tell you my summation. If she is not on the ticket, in one role or the other, I honestly believe our country crashes and will not recover in my life-time.
PS: think about how many "down ballot" voters she will bring to the polls as discussed above.

Mimi| 1.28.11 @ 8:50AM

Ken , We need the strongest, most articulate candidate we can find...one that every-one will agree....He's the ONE....and that will be the one most CONSERVATIVE!!!

John Navratil| 1.28.11 @ 12:40PM

Mimi,

Good luck. Even Reagan didn't fill that bill. I really think we need to focus on someone who can EFFECT the will of the people as expressed by their Congress more than someone who can bend a recalcitrant Congress. The people seem to have the gang of 535 under more control now than in the last generation.

If we can get a President who can lead, great. But we will do very well with one that can follow or, at least, get out of the way.

Curly Smith| 1.28.11 @ 8:47AM

Your list gives me hope: Sarah Palin a 59 percent disapproval rating nationwide; John Bolton scares the hell out of people; Michelle Bachmann's a loud back-bencher who hasn't really legislated.

You've just identified three people that scare the Democrats. Now we just need to determine if they scare them for the right reasons. Are they trustworthy? Are they reflexively limited-government? Do they understand what made this country exceptional? Will they fight for their/our ideals? History immediately disqualifies many of the rest but the Scary Bunch still rides.

USSAlabama| 1.28.11 @ 9:59AM

Looks like Bolton.

John Navratil| 1.28.11 @ 12:40PM

We could do a LOT worse.

Occam's Tool| 1.28.11 @ 4:17PM

The other thing I like about John is what I like to call the "Marciano" factor---the Rock might miss you with the fist but then hit you with the elbow. Either way, your bell was rung.

Bolton has the Ivy factor, NO ONE can say he doesn't have the intelligence, and he would destroy Barack in a debate.

JayDick| 1.29.11 @ 10:40AM

Right! Bolton might be even more effective than Gingrich as a debater (and Newt would be terrific in a debate) and he's not nearly as prone to gaffs.

chris| 1.29.11 @ 7:44PM

In case you missed it from 2008 the voters also have to like and trust the candidate. Bolton and Gingrich and not liable or trustworthy.
Bolton has the smell of bush/cheney war for the wrong reasons on him.
Gingrich has been around to long and to many times trying to catch the golden ring, to many marriages. Voters look at him and see giant hypocrite written on his forehead.

Louis Jenkins| 1.28.11 @ 8:50AM

Mrs. Palin was hounded out of the governor's office by all of the potential lawsuits, accusations, etc. Now the detractors point to that as one reason not to support her. Of all the candidates (if she is one) she has the greatest possibilities. Perhaps another candidate will emerge, but so far the pickings are slim.

alice moore| 1.28.11 @ 8:56AM

Two more years of Obama and even Lindsey Graham will look good to the electorate.

I do not understand with the unemployment and inflation, that The Current Occupant should even have a chance in 2012. His economic numbers can be likened to Herbert Hoover's.

Many of those college kids that swooned for him are now in a job market they voted for. Educated White Women? Many of them have been downsized out of a job. You think they'd vote for another helping?

Then there are those who vote with the tribe. This could best be exemplified by the Irish-Americans in the 19th and earlier 20th century.Even so, some of the present day tribes may just sit out the election.

The biggest danger for the GOP/Conservatives is that segment of the party that will cut off its own nose to spite its face. If their candidate doesn't win they go sulking in their tents on election day by backing/running as a 3rd party or staying home. The Ruling Class loves this group. Bill Clinton sent them flowers in 92 and 96.

Say the ballot is Josef Stalin vs. Leonid Brezhnev. For the sake of argument we'll say these are the only two choices. The minions of Stalin-all of and then some- will assuredly vote on election Day. The Brezhnev side? "He's not Vaclav Havel! He's not Ronald Reagan!" They stay home and next thing you know they're in the cattle car. With Brezhnev they MIGHT be in the cattle car. With Stalin it's a certainty. Pragmatism goes out the window.

I mention that product of taxidermy because, it was his policies that contributed to the downfall of the East European Communist Bloc.

tatosian| 1.28.11 @ 4:41PM

Which tribes are you referring to?
In your view, not voting for a rank, partisan hack whose views one fundamentally disagrees with is cutting off one's nose to spite one's face?
Really?
Soooo I should just vote Republican and ignore the fact that the Republicans are no less responsible for our current state of affairs than the democrats?
I'm obligated (according to you) to support a party that has helped send jobs overseas, helps enforce a stultifying political correctness, welcomes illegal aliens so as to placate and increase the power of the Hispanic bloc and remained silent and powerless as Christianity (but not Islam) was wiped from the public square .
The Republicans as a party have not defended or fought for my nation, culture and civilization.
You obviously agree with what they have inflicted on the American people.
I do not.
Let Palin run as an independent American.
If she wins, well, you Republicans will do what you always do; grab the money and go along to get along.
Again, what tribes are you referring to?

alice moore| 1.28.11 @ 7:57PM

Talosian, I am saying the GOP is the hospitable place for conservatives. Are they perfect? No.

As for sending jobs overseas, I would blame the corporatists is both parties for that. Right now, under the Obama regime the exodus of jobs to overseas markets is worse.

It's very unlikely that all of our Conservative goals will be achieved by a silver bullet revolution. If it could happen--great!!!

In the meantime if we can only get a half a loaf now then we take it AND KEEP COMING BACK UNTIL WE HAVE THE WHOLE LOAF.

If a conservative referendum loses once keep coming back. The Conservative/Tea Party movement must take this page out of the leftist playbook.

A good start has been made already in the GOP primary process. Another place to keep hammering is the RNC and that Republican Senatorial committee.

I am no lover of party hacks. The list of candidates that Quin Hilyer nay says are all superior to the Current Occupant.

I agree with you on the ends. Much of the Conservative Agenda will be achieved by adopting The Long March Strategy.

Sarah Palin? I'd vote for her in a heartbeat. Like Ronald Reagan, to whom she is often compared, she may have to run a few more times. Like then, there is the media japes and the GOP establishment to overcome.

All of the other issues, like immigration, we are on the same page.

tatosian| 1.28.11 @ 9:13PM

Miss Moore-
No disrespect but I believe this half a loaf theory is just a mantra we comfort ourselves with. It allows us to continue to power the faux conservative party republicans who simply will not put themselves in harms way so as to stop this progressive juggernaut.
And it is always us who must bear the consequences of the inevitable Republican capitulation to those progressives.
Is this not so?
Why would sending another Republican to DC help us this time when it hasn't helped before now?
To keep doing the same thing over and over again and hoping for different results is insane isn't it?
We need the Tea Party as a stand alone entity. I know it is, but I can't help but feel that the Republicans already assume they've brought that organization into the Republican fold. Witness the haughty reaction of Republican "staffers" to Bachman's sotu response.
Also, McConnel recently took some freshman Republicans on a date to our war zone on the taxpayer's dime. Why'd they go? For us?
Perhaps we should start looking at ballot initiatives and voter referendums rather than supporting partisan politician crumb snatchers.
Again, no disrespect.

Michael L. Hauschild| 1.29.11 @ 10:52AM

Tatosian - 2, Moore - 0.

R Martin| 1.28.11 @ 9:13AM

In my view, your list of negatives become positives for Bolton. It's about time we had a president with a certifiable Y chromosome who, when he says he will protect and defend the country and its constitution, scares the pants off anyone or any government with opposite views. Picture the flight of metrosexuals from DC with a guy like Bolton in the White House.

USSAlabama| 1.28.11 @ 10:01AM

Bolton.

All of the above negatives are negatives - except scaring the hell out of someone.

I seem to remember people being afraid to vote for Reagan. Those people voted for Carter.

Mimi| 1.28.11 @ 9:31AM

If not Bolton...Who? He has a lot going for him in the Conservative circles...of all those who SEMI-ANNOUNCED.... He shows the MOST strength....and He,d give the "O" a run. It will get interesting for us "JUNKIES". The song and JIG the "O" is dancing NOW will fade...nobody is buying it....It is early ...stay tuned the best is yet to come!!!

Van | 1.28.11 @ 9:49AM

Quin, you are my favorite. Hope you are not planning to retire anytime soon!

Doctor Right| 1.28.11 @ 9:59AM

John Bolton:

He scares Liberals.

He scares the elitist cognoscenti.

He scares the one-world, U.N.-types.

He calls it like it is.

He's my candidate for now.

David| 1.28.11 @ 9:59AM

I just want to see Cain debate Obama. “Im sorry Mr. President, in the real world it doesn’t work that way. And I should know. Ive flipped burgers for a living.”

Quin| 1.28.11 @ 10:16AM

There is a pun near the end. That is all.

Run, John, Run!| 1.28.11 @ 10:21AM

Pray that John Bolton at least runs. Quin's simplistic "knock-down" of possible Republican presidential contenders is certainly depressing, but SOMEBODY has to be chosen. So, instead of worrying about what the masses will think, how about a gedank experiment, a la Einstein riding a light wave, instead: Just imagine how a Bolton would have decided all those issues we NOW can see as disastrous choices made by the chosen Obama! Iran would be a democracy, probably, we’d NOT have run up 3,000 BILLION dollars o debt, or more, and unemployment would be trending down, etc. Sometimes I think America is a game show, with the audience cum voters desiring the most outrageous leaders who will shock them more and more. A last gasp tactic in a stalled negotiation is to “toss in a grenade”, meaning to make some off the wall crazy-seeming demand, to jolt the whole process to get movement. Obama = an existentially desired GRENADE, America! Please run, Bolton!

RCV| 1.28.11 @ 11:52AM

Of all the potential GOP candidates, Bolton is clearly the most unelectable -- even more so than Palin. Quin has it exactly right. Bolton's personality is so offensive that even die-hard conservatives who have worked with the guy comment not so privately on how insufferable he is. He has potential - the potential to break Goldwater's record of states not carried. As a Democrat, I say, run, John, run. In fact, Bolton/Palin, Palin/Bolton, either one will do fine.

Mimi| 1.28.11 @ 12:22PM

Now we know we might just be on the right track... the Dem has spoken! You know the play-book....trash the best...clear the field for "O". It is so early how do we know if HE will even run....anything can HAPPEN...but its fun to ponder it!

Doctor Right| 1.28.11 @ 3:25PM

Name these "die-hard Conservatives" who so despise Bolton please.

Just as I thought.

Scared, RCV?? Yes...You are.

RCV| 1.28.11 @ 7:14PM

Dr. Right: I'm not exactly spilling state secrets here. My comments simply reiterate realities repeated by numerous conservative observers. You can take or leave those comments. As for being "scared", I'm not one of those people who see apocalyptic events on the horizon. If a conservative Republican were elected President in 2012, the Republic will survive just fine and life will go on pretty much the same as it has for the last 50 years. We are fortunate to live in a wonderful, stable democracy, and I have no great fears for the future of my country because we are a good and decent people.

Retched Commentary Viewpoint| 1.31.11 @ 1:30PM

I don't worry about silly abortion concerns on American goodness and decency matters.

Occam's Tool| 1.28.11 @ 4:12PM

If you remember, my dear RCV,when Bolton announced he wanted to run, I said...BOLTON!!!!

Gravitas? Yep. The Sumbitch at the switch factor? Yep. The Goldwater Conservative factor? Yep. The give the Mullahs watery diarrhea while their urine mixes with it factor? Yep.
Bolton has the Vlad Jabotinsky factor, in spades. Plus, he's a social conservative. I love him.

RCV| 1.28.11 @ 6:48PM

I don't argue with any of your points on the merits, Occam. He would certainly be a take-no-prisoners President.

My only point is, he is absolutely unelectable, and if you step back for a moment and use your analytic doctor's objective mind, you'd have to agree. I'm not sure his own mother would vote for him.

JimP| 1.28.11 @ 10:31AM

An excellent overall analysis of their negatives, IMHO. Way to go Quin, especially re Huck. Although, I actually think you were too kind to him here. But you clearly know the totality of his unsuitability.

Clint| 1.28.11 @ 11:05AM

Who was left off the list & why?

Occam's Tool| 1.28.11 @ 4:13PM

Ron paul. Too old and too racist.

Clint| 1.28.11 @ 4:26PM

The Israel Firster attempts to Play The Race Card on Dr. Ron Paul.

tatosian| 1.28.11 @ 5:59PM

Ron Paul's a racist?

Clint| 1.28.11 @ 6:23PM

"Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder, who has known Ron Paul for 20 years, unequivocally dismissed charges that the Congressman was a racist in light of recent smear attempts, and said the reason for him being attacked was that he was a threat to the establishment.
Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded No I don't, adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.

I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, I also understand what he's saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him, said Linder.
If you scare the folks that have the money, they're going to attack you and they're going to take it out of context, he added.

What he's saying is really really threatening the powers that be and that's what they fear,concluded the NAACP President."

RCV| 1.28.11 @ 6:50PM

Occam, what's the racism charge against Ron Paul based on? As you know, I think he's absolutely an unqualified wing-nut, but I know nothing to sustain any such characterization against him.

VBMax| 1.28.11 @ 11:18AM

Gee, whad'ya know, not one perfect human being on our candidates list. I guess we'll just have to re-elect the incumbent.
Seriously, this is the most impeachable President in the history of the republic. How about we remind people of all the crimes and misdemeanors he's perpetrated in only the first two years instead of elevating him as re-electable.
He has subverted and perverted everything that we hold dear as Americans. People have probably already forgotten his appointment of the "Safe Schools Czar" for example. You know, the pervert who's promoting "fisting" to our kids.
I can think of literally dozens of things this President has done that if hammered home to the public on a daily basis would change their viewpoint of his electability. (He may not even make it onto the ballot this time. Some states are passing eligibilty laws that would prevent it)

John Navratil| 1.28.11 @ 12:43PM

VBMax,

Shhhh! We don't want to get his base all excited again! Or should I say wee-wee-d up!

VBMax| 1.28.11 @ 2:00PM

Sorry, I'll try to be better :)

fundamentalist| 1.28.11 @ 11:19AM

So what is the approval ratings of the other potentials? I'm guessing not much better than the ratings for Palin, if the public even knows about them.

I have a few policy disagreements with Palin, but she has good instincts, like Reagan did. And I think both the left and right have been unusually unfair to her and I would vote for her just for that.

At this point, Palin looks like the tallest pigmy.

GW| 1.28.11 @ 5:05PM

She'd get slaughtered. I don't think Palin could win the primary anyway, but she's too polarizing. If Jesse Jackson ever won a Democrat nomination, moderates would flock to the Republican ticket. Fair on unfair, Palin is viewed similarly.

Quin| 1.28.11 @ 11:45AM

Maybe the field isn't set. Maybe conservatives should look to see if other potential candidates might fill the bill. Heck, maybe even Morning Joe might have a good idea (not himself) for a new entrant. Whatever. The point is, conservatives shouldn't be too quick to jump on any bandwagon. There's still plenty of time.

Van | 1.28.11 @ 9:39PM

What about? Ken Cuccinelli, Attorney General of Virginia.

Rick Parker| 1.28.11 @ 11:57AM

Why haven't you mentioned Donald Trump ? I heard he might through his hat in the ring. I would like to hear you response.

Quin| 1.28.11 @ 12:02PM

I do not consider Donald Trump to be a serious candidate.

Oldefarte| 1.28.11 @ 4:50PM

.....but seeing his wife as First Lady [and him repeating YOU'RE FIRED] would be interesting!!!!

Pelligrino| 1.28.11 @ 12:05PM

Quin Hillyer, please, it would be much more of a service to do articles on the following:

1. How the Left rigged it for the GOP to have a very weak (yes, his age was a handicap as he was no longer in his prime) John McCain as the party nominee. Was it the same for Sen. Bob Dole in 1996?

More importantly:

2. How the whole discussion you wish to lead becomes moot for most GOP/Convervative voters by next March/April 2012. Yes, fully irrelevant.

Why?

Simple: We'll have 8-9 on stage at TV GOP group debates in December 2011 and early January 2012. After Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, maybe just 3 will remain.

Why? (Iowa and New Hampshire are TINY electorates/percentages of the total US voter population. Yet they carry decision-making hugely disproportionate)

The GOP nominee/decided front-runner is long, long ago decided by the time my state is up for its primary in May. (And my state is much LARGER in population)

You follow this: You know -- 6 of the final 8 or 9 will have dropped out citing financial woes NLT the 4th or 5th state primary.

(not only that, they go on national TV press conferences about 48 hours after conceeding to tell us their personal endorsement --- as they try to save face/stay in good graces and line up for a key cabinet seat)

How broke is that?

More than 3/4 of the nation's voters have had (and never have) any real say-so in who is selected.

Our decision-making process for the highest office in the land is woefully BROKEN.

Or what am I do I fail to comprehend?

Van | 1.29.11 @ 9:30PM

Election math is simple.

If every person that voted R in the general election would show up for the primary, the eventual candidate would most certainly not be the establishment's or media's "chosen."

Clint| 1.28.11 @ 12:06PM

It's forward moving to do the vetting & drafting of Presidential Opponents to Obama right now.

Obama is Beatable.

Ken (Old Texican)| 1.28.11 @ 12:07PM

Quin,
I just have one question.
Why in the heck didn't the Republican leadership, (and you),, raise billy-hell when the MSM took Sarah over the coals after Tucson?

Quin| 1.28.11 @ 12:16PM

Ken,
I did raise hell. Here: http://spectator.org/blog/2011/01/12/media-jackaes and here: http://spectator.org/blog/2011.....t-at-palin and more coming in another post.

Ken (Old Texican)| 1.28.11 @ 2:01PM

Quin, I apologise. I read every one of those posts here and appreciated every one of them at the time they were written by you.

I guess what I was trying to say is that "here" we are the choir.
When I said "billy hell" I meant something like getting a congress person on the phone and demanding a press conference on the capitol steps I suppose....with everyone of you standing with him/her....yelling Amen.
..."At first they came for Sarah...but I wasn't a fan..."

bobmontgomery| 1.28.11 @ 3:16PM

Yes, Ken where are they? Not only on this issue but others. They think if they go on Greta at 10:00 p.m. they are speaking out. No, they do as you say and stand on the steps and tell Obama to go over there and kick some Revolutionary Guard or Muslim Brotherhodd a**, for example.

Pelligrino| 1.28.11 @ 12:11PM

Sorry. I apologize. (too many typos)

More than 3/4 of the nation's voters never really have true say in who gets selected for the major parties. Primary voting day in most states is a ho-hum affair (except for other primary ballot issues like state-wide and local offices)

Please help. What do I fail to comprehend about our presidential selection process?

Dai Alanye | 1.28.11 @ 12:12PM

Useful if less than profound. And I agree with your subtext---Rick Santorum is the man for the job. Anyone who saw him crossing swords with race hustler Al Sharpton on Hannity knows he is a great debater, and would have Obama shaking in his shoes.

As VP another effective debater, John Bolton, for his strength in foreign policy.

As for Palin, I love the gal but would prefer to see her heading Dept of Energy for now. Few needs of our economy are more important than developing everything from coal to nuclear, and she has the energy and vision to do the job as it needs to be done.

GW| 1.28.11 @ 5:07PM

I would rather abolish the Dept of Energy, but I agree Palin would be better suited for a cabinent position rather than atop the GOP ticket.

Willis| 1.28.11 @ 5:50PM

Just for the fun factor, how about Bolton as president and Palin as press secretary.

Oldefarte| 1.28.11 @ 12:23PM

Wow, New Orleans recovered better than the MGC...no doubt thanks to Blanco, Nagin, Cao, Melancon,etc, huh? The MGC just needs some levee boards operating its casinoes to fix their problems; or maybe a crime rate approaching DC's [and then all of NO's gamblers would take their business back to downtown NO]. Yeah, let's all political crusify Barbour, Allen, Lott,etc; while giving a pass to Rangel, Schumer, Conyers, Jackson, Mosley Braun, McKinney,etc. Damn, Barbour's managerial expertise would certainly pale in comparison to that of Obama, Pilosi, Biden, Emanuel, Hillary, [or Landrieu or Singleton, locally speaking] etc. Where are my HIPBOOTS????????

Quin| 1.28.11 @ 12:30PM

Oldefarte, New Orleans is demonstrably more lively and economically vibrant than the entire western half of the Mississippi coast. This is DESPITE the N.O. politics, not because of it. As author jason Berry described it in his updated version of "Up From the Cradle of jazz," ... "Politics failed; culture prevailed."

Oldefarte| 1.28.11 @ 3:12PM

That's comparable to saying a Rolls Royce runs smoother than a Jeep! Of course it does, since it/NO is no doubt hugely larger in size than the MGC. The former is diversified, whereas the the latter is a one trick pony [casinoes/gambling]. The MGC had absolutely no economy until gambling was established [and was previously a bedroom community of NO]. The MGC's gaming dominated economy is no doubt in the pits [as is Las Vegas'] due to individuals' income decrease due to this administration's asinine economic policies. NO historically suffers from their cajun/backward stupidity of personal exclusion in business [and social] matters. The tales of the necessity of political payoffs in order for outsiders to do business in NO are historical and numerous. The NO economy was buried in federal stimulus money post Katrina, and those Cresent City morons couldn't unprofitably lose money from same even if they tried to do same. If NO had to exist on their own enterprising business expertise, absent these federal dollars, that city would look like downtown Kabul. Considering their lone economic industry [gambling], and without economic diversification, the MGC has done reasonably well [and Barbour is and should be congratulated for same], as he and Mississippi immediately legislative allowed the casinoes to move onto shore/land post Katrina and establish a financial beachhead [otherwise they would have vacated/abondoned the state in droves]. The MGC is by far the economic bright light [and a large contributor to that state's economy] for the poor state of Mississippi, and Barbour deserves much credit for same!!!!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 1.28.11 @ 4:22PM

From a 2010 economic report concerning the MGC:

'.......The overall measure of business confidence of Mississippi Gulf Coast CEO’s and business owners improved slightly in the first quarter, and is up considerably when compared to the same quarter prior year. Expectations for the next six months, which is a component of the overall measure, remained positive overall but declined slightly from the fourth quarter. Interestingly, the gap between how executives feel about the current state of the economy compared to future expectations narrowed, suggesting that progress is being made and that business leaders are beginning to experience the improvements that have previously been forecasted. The overall index of the survey rose to 55 from 53 in the prior quarter, indicating overall business confidence is just above neutral. Similar progress to that of the Mississippi Gulf Coast was reported in a March survey conducted in Alabama1, though Mobile executives registered a slight decline in the Alabama Business Confidence Index.....'

Mimi| 1.28.11 @ 12:34PM

Talk about DEBATES...I've had my eye on MARK LEVIN since early 2009... Just the thought of THAT DEBATE would be worth it 's weight in GOLD. I wonder if he would ever give it a try!

wodiej| 1.29.11 @ 8:17AM

lol...oh geez, Levin would shred Obama.

Liz| 1.28.11 @ 12:42PM

The obvious danger is if the GOP allow themselves to be suckered into making a choice by the usual suspects -- the MSM and the Democrats. You know they are just champing at the bit for the GOP to take the bait, which is why we hear the first several names on this list bandied about endlessly. I keep hoping upon hope that there will be a candidate of serious substance out there in the coming months. There better be. Otherwise ... well, I don't want to give in to my sense of doom just yet.

Spoonman| 1.28.11 @ 1:55PM

Quin, my suggestion is a request of you - please prepare a column each month starting asap and discuss the pros and cons of each of the Republican candidates.

And let's be honest, we all know that none of the candidates will have all positives - that is being unrealistic. How about listuing things that each candidate needs to address to improve the publics opinion of them - for example, if Romney vowed to sign a bill repealing obamacrae, would that outweigh his negatives for his part in the fiscal mess created by Massachusetts health care insurance mandate?

Brett| 1.28.11 @ 2:04PM

Quin - is Bob Riley someone you're looking at? Based on the next-to-last sentence in your article, plus I think you've praised him in the past.

Quin| 1.28.11 @ 2:27PM

Good catch! Yes, I would love to see him take a look at the race, and for conservatives to take a look at him. This is no endorsement, but it is indeed an indication that I perceive potential merit in the idea.

Brett| 1.28.11 @ 2:44PM

I'm a resident of Alabama (and native). Riley is definitely the best Governor here in a long, long time. With his 6 years in the U.S. House, that gives a good foundation.

But he'll be 68 in 2012. Maybe it's unfair, but that just reminds me a little of Dole and McCain.

Bob Grant| 1.28.11 @ 3:23PM

I've always been intrigued by him. His background is exactly what one would look for as president: 2 full terms as governor (he didn't quit) and has experience in Washington as a multi-term member of congress.

Assuming he has no looming scandal, isn't obnoxious, and appears competent, he's worthy of consideration.

Oldefarte| 1.28.11 @ 4:30PM

As said, he's too old for serious consideration. Besides, no one outside the state of Alabama knows who Riley is. Barry would have a political field day with someone such as Rile[unfortionately
A younger candidate is a definate necessity, if winning is desired!!!!!

Bob Grant| 1.28.11 @ 5:22PM

I respectfully disagree. The conditions could be such that electorate will be looking for a competent, reasonable-looking, business friendly individual who has a strong executive background and knows his way around Washington.

And please let's not compare Barry 2012 to Bill Clinton circa 1996. The "conditions on the ground" couldn't be any different.

A proven record of competence could be the winning ticket. I wouldn't write him off so quickly.

Oldefarte| 1.29.11 @ 11:21AM

I also respectfully disagree with you partially. The electorite SHOULD BE [as you say] looking for a competent, business friendly candidate, but instead, ACTED STUPIDLY by electing a radical-extremist, socialists, incompetent [though with a HAAAAVARD Law degree, which is about as useful as a roll of toilet paper]. The current office holder and his band of theives will no doubt pull out their domestic terrorist AGE CARD [as they did with McCain, Dole, Reagan, Nixon, etc] and any other card that propagandly promotes his election!!!!!!!!!!

Ken (Old Texican)| 1.28.11 @ 2:24PM

Quin,
I can see three likely branches to our country's immediate future. I wrote my novel based upon one of these three futures.
I am saddened that you have not chosen to write one word...privately...or here in the "choir loft" about that.
Sir, I have negotiated billions in infrastructure contracts all over the middle east with their "kings and potentates".
I know the players.
If you simply deleted my review copy of the book I sent to you...you can still buy it at
www.texassaidno.com
I am now writing the sequel, and will wrap it into the same cover. The title will be "America Alone Said NO!"
Texassaidno will become...part one.

One of our major stockholders asked me the other day: "Ken...just where should I invest my money in these days?"
I replied: ".22 cartridges to shoot small game, and wheat berries in your garage."

Please, Quin, get your head out.
I am not an alarmist. Just, unlike you, I have been in the middle of countries coming down.

If we can't get someone of the CHARACTER of Sarah Palin in the oval office, we are in serious trouble.
Please put the above in your "prophecy file".

Alky| 1.28.11 @ 2:50PM

The Dems are terrified of Sarah Palin that's why she's demonized so much. Probably a good reason for her to run :)

GW| 1.28.11 @ 5:10PM

How are they "terrified" of her? Her numbers are rediculously low. Moderates don't want her; many conservatives don't want her. She runs, she'll lose. I'd rather not give the election to Obama.

Nunya| 1.28.11 @ 6:33PM

I like Sarah Palin, she seems to have a lot of the right qualities people look for in a leader--stong beliefs, able to communicate her vision, etc. Unfortunately, I am not convinced in her ability to be a successful President--except when I compare her to the current idiot-in-chief. Beyond that, I think she's been so demonized by both the left AND the right that I have little faith that she could actually carry the electorate. However, stranger things have happened (like Obozo)...

Bob Grant| 1.28.11 @ 2:55PM

Many people mistakenly believe Sarah is the one who is the most vetted, well known, and conservative, therefore, she's the most electable.

This could not be further from reality.

True, she's indeed the most well known potential republican candidate and her sinking poll numbers hammer home and inescapable reality: The more the nation (not commenters on AmSpec) becomes familiar with Sarah Palin, the more they find her off-putting, unelectable, and unfit for president.

As much as I respect her Christian beliefs, I cannot deny the political reality and my opinion of how she conducts herself.

My biggest fear is she wins the nomination and flames out faster than a cheap firecracker when she has to confront her opponents and the mainstream media DIRECTLY. At the first difficult question during an interview, debate, or speech, my fear is she'll rely the amateurish, petty tactics developed the past two years as a Fox news contributor and Facebook postings.

Quin,

If possible, can you or another contributor write an in-depth article about the financial reform bill that I believe could be just as dangerous as Obamacare to the economy?

MikeN| 1.31.11 @ 12:36AM

Wrong! The more I see of Palin the more I see she is the best we have. The fact that she was on a losing ticket and has been the great voice among Politicians since the election of 2008 shows she has what it takes Bob. 28 Months, Bob! They have spent 28 Months giving her the worst treatmnent of anyone in history. She is ready. Nobody else could withstand 28 Days let alone 28 Months. Shame on you. Republicans that are like you are losers and are not up to the fight. I will take Sarah Palin over you or any Republican that you favor anyday!

The Big E| 1.28.11 @ 3:03PM

With the state of economy being what it is, and the state of the world being what it is, we should be able to toss all the names listed in this article in a hat and draw one out at random to run and beat Barack Obama like a rented mule. And yet, here we are stumbling around talking about the negatives of everybody who's even remotely interested in running as if we have to run Jesus Christ Himself to have a chance of winning. Why? How have we gotten to the point where, in an election where Farmer Brown's old pig should be able to draw forty percent of the vote, we're talking like we're gonna lose if we don’t run the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan?

Of the last four people to hold the White House, two were Republicans, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. Neither of them were particularly stellar candidates. It is true that they beat Democrats who not particularly stellar either, but which of those three losing candidates (Dukakis, Gore and Kerry) had anything like the baggage that Barack Obama will carry into the next election? At a minimum, Obama’s done nothing to make a terrible economy better; he’s championed some of the most unpopular legislation in history; he’s overseen the bankrupting of the country with his, “If you find yourself in a hole and can’t get out, dig faster” fiscal policy; and he’s mismanaged foreign policy to such an extent that our friends know they can’t rely on us and our enemies know they don’t have to respect us - let alone fear us. On top of that, many of his supporters from 2008 are now unemployed and unimpressed (and just cast their first ballot for a Republican last November). He has overseen the largest voter registration exodus from the Democrat party in God knows how long, and even though he’s been the most left-wing President I can remember, he’s still managed to tick off his own base. And all that’s before anyone says a word about the rampant corruption and cronyism which runs through everything this administration does.

And we’re sitting here trying to figure out which of our candidates has the least negatives? To run against THAT record?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that beating Barack Obama in 2012 will be easy. I’m not counting the chickens before they hatch. The media’s going to back Obama even if he tries to outlaw motherhood, and they’ll accuse WHOEVER we run of being Satan in disguise. A certain percentage of the population will still vote for him simply because they think it’s cool to vote for a socialist (or a black man), or because their Union says they have to, or because they really want the government making all their decisions for them because, gee, life is so tough if you don’t have everything given to you. Guess what? That’s nothing new. The press will always be against us, and there will always be some voters who choose whom to vote for based on reasons so shallow that it makes one wonder whether there was a shortage of brain material the day their’s was crafted. But why do we always let these things put us on the defensive? Why do we always let the Democrats set the tone of the conversation and then merely react to their slanderous lies? Why are we so afraid to say what we really mean; to stand up and defend what we sincerely believe; and to go out in the public forum and call the thieves thieves, the thugs thugs, and the bums bums?

Why do we give a rat’s ass about what people who hate us anyway think of us? Why in the world would we want to choose a candidate on that basis?

I say go to the polls. Vote for whoever you think would do the best job. Don’t vote for anyone who bases his or her campaign on attacking his Republican opponents - if that’s all they have to offer in a campaign, then they’re not cut from Presidential timber anyway. If your choice doesn’t win, act like an adult and don’t whine about it. Then go out and work for whoever did win like they were who you wanted all along. Work for them like your future and your children’s future depend on the outcome because, guess what - it probably does.

Ken (Old Texican)| 1.28.11 @ 5:14PM

Big E,
well spoken.

Nunya| 1.28.11 @ 6:51PM

E, excellent post. Well stated.

Michael L. Hauschild| 1.29.11 @ 10:58AM

Very, very well spoken!

Pelligrino| 1.30.11 @ 12:35AM

Thank you, Big E. Yes, our futures do depend on swiftly unseating this current president, current staff, and MANY appointees.

All these folks listed in this blog have their flaws. (What real person of character, solid character, would ever place themselves willingly in this ever-burning 230 fahrenheit crucible called 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?)

12 out of 14 of these names would indeed beat POTUS if he is the Democratic candidate November 2012.

WE have to MAKE SURE that happens.

It will.

Rick Z| 1.28.11 @ 3:49PM

Jim DeMint looks solid on issues. Firm speaker. Sort of a Sarah Palin with experience and a track record.
He has SAID he is not running for President, but he IS touring the country and speaking on issues.

Of course, there have only been two senators elected President in the last century -- JF Kennedy and BH Obama.

Rudy Giuliani seems to have be targeted by the I-Hate-Sarah crowd (politics of personal destruction, and so forth). That makes a long climb back just to get started. Giuliani has an incredible record of accomplishment and solid leadership. What he did in NYC prior to 9/11 was astounding ... turned the city around from "Detroit" to a thriving first city. Put NYC on a solid financial footing. Solid leadership in the 9/11 aftermath - brought everyone together, to mourn and then begin to recover.

e track from saq| 1.28.11 @ 7:35PM

Very important that we pick a winner
I personally think him alittle lite in the pants
But the star with the right trajectory rising naturally upto the height of the office as it currently exsist is Mr Beck.Laugh I know,yet he does get it no one can deny.

wodiej| 1.29.11 @ 8:42AM

The article is great satire and the comments following is the point of writing it. Many demonized who is not their personal favorite for one reason or another and swears the winner is the one who is their choice. Guess what? No one is perfect.

My personal opinion is the person should at least have some successful executive experience, some real life experiences growing up, a real vision for what this country stands for, proven character to name a few. I feel Palin fits the bill and a great VP would round it off.

But I agree w another poster who said back the one you like and whoever ends up being the nominee, throw your support behind that person wholeheartedly. Stop the whining.

Michael L. Hauschild| 1.29.11 @ 1:57PM

Wodiej,
It is not so much whinning as it is the painful recovery from the devisating fall off of the Pence Bandwagon.

emo| 1.29.11 @ 10:30AM

most important thing is to nominate someone who the base will support. That way we lat least wont lose the House and will pick up 1-2 in the Senate

Ned the Red| 1.29.11 @ 11:27AM

Can't get rid of the General, take his army away.

Oldefarte| 1.29.11 @ 11:28AM

Oh, if anyone is truly interested in knowing the FACTS concerning this situation [ Meanwhile, if you think the national media had fun with George Allen's macaca and Trent Lott's Strom-for-president yearnings, wait until they get done with Barbour's White Citizens Council], I'd strongly suggest a reading of [the middle section] NORTH TOWARD HOME by Willie Morris!!!!!!!!

Run, John, Run!| 1.29.11 @ 2:46PM

It sure is fun, AND useless, to spout off about who can or cannot not only win the GOP presidential nomination but even win to become Numero Uno.

I’m especially intrigued with all the TALK about how Palin could NEVER go all the way.

For all you old farmers out there, who might have listened to Rush Limbaugh back in the day when the Clintons were ruining America from the White House, remember how towards the end of their time in that power position the hot topic became whether Hillary could be elected, as soon as the NY senate seat became one she MIGHT run for?

Limbaugh was dead certain she could NEVER win, given all her negatives.

Never say NEVER, my friends!

Pelligrino| 1.29.11 @ 3:59PM

Because it is so important to understand, I will share again the issue I attempted to raise here yesterday:

You can guesstimate, blog, and ponder all you wish about who will be the GOP presidential nominee for the Tampa Bay GOP convention and November 2012 election....

Your voice and vote do NOT matter.

We call voting having the "franchise." You -- as an adult registered voter -- are disenfranchised UNLESS you live in: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, or Florida.

Unless you live in one of those 4 states, you will NOT be making the choice for the GOP challenger to President Obama. (Okay, maybe it will still be between 3 GOP candidates on Super Tuesday March 7, 2012….but after that date – with 38 states yet to hold primaries – it will be DECIDED. History shows us that it always is. Only exception: Clinton vs. Obama in 2008.)

Every primaries election cycle is the same: The decision is made and all candidate challengers have dropped out by the end of week 1 of March.

Go online to see when your state conducts its 2012 primary (although just one year away, many states have STILL NOT firmed up what they are doing).

Our 'system' for selecting a president (both major parties) is broken. 3 / 4 of the electorate is silenced.

Why?

I believe because the big money donors, professional campaigners, and the MSM want to be the ones to decide for you who is selected. It is how elitists view things; they are not going to entrust you with decision-making. And, yes, this MSM gang includes many fellow travelers at Am. Spec.

shipley130| 1.29.11 @ 4:01PM

I think this got everything mostly correct. I take issue with the assessment of Haley Barbour. Why rebuild on the shores in Mississippi and for that matter, New Orleans? It's just another disaster waiting to happen, unless we decide to build like Okinawa does.
John Bolton didn't really suffer any political backlash, and out of all on the list, Mr. Bolton is my choice. So, John Bolton it is. Maybe he could scowl at the Pakistani leadership and get them to give up Bin Laden.

Barry| 1.29.11 @ 6:55PM

This guy has an agenda.
"Newt Gingrich: Great ideas man. Too radioactive. . . too mercurial."
WTF???
Um...
1.Divorced papers sent to 2cnd wife in hospital while she was recovering from cancer.
2. Cap n tax like t-paw except on the couch with Nancy.

yeah , he's too "mercurial". That's called shill speak.

If Palin.Mitt or Huck had that baggage they wouldn't have the gall to run.

Charlie| 1.29.11 @ 8:06PM

Regarding Thune ("What has he ever actually done?"): Since when does THAT matter? Our current president had done less than Thune. Or are you implying that the voters have now wised up about electing someone with absolutely no accomplishments or credentials? Or just Republicans with no accomplishments or credentials? How does this work?

Oh, yeah, I forgot about that double standard, that the former Mayor of Wasilla and Governor of Alaska was not qualified to be VICE-President, but a community organizer, state representative who mostly voted "present," and rookie U.S. Senator was somehow qualified to be the President. Now I get your point.

somnolence| 1.29.11 @ 10:05PM

Neither Bolton or Newt can generate enough money to run the distance. Sarah sure as hell can.

somnolence| 1.29.11 @ 10:05PM

Neither Bolton or Newt can generate enough money to run the distance. Sarah sure as hell can.

somnolence| 1.29.11 @ 10:19PM

I trust Limbaugh's observations about Palin much more than I do Bill Bennett's views or Bob Grant for that matter. Their view seem amicable to the Establishment, and that is discomforting to me.

Zinka Milanov| 1.29.11 @ 10:24PM

If perchance the GOP can find a candidate to replace the person currently in the oval room in early '13 we are going to have to hear and be taught through the rest of USA history that the mean honkies and crackers drove the most wonderful Potus ever out of office. (He will probably say that himself many many times through the years.) Personally I want Newt as Potus; anyone who can bring Allen Colmes close to tears, as Newt did on Hannity last year has my vote.

Boomerbabe| 1.30.11 @ 1:36AM

What about Darrell Issa?

T D| 1.30.11 @ 10:53PM

Great exercise to tote up negatives. How often do you do it for your colleagues about the coming collapse of the Washington Times and American Spectator not to mention their own professional failings?

It's not as bad as telling your kid he's ugly, dumb and will never amount to anything. Because we all know strangers don't have feelings. But ain't it fun to rile people up?

TheTotalConservative| 1.30.11 @ 10:54PM

Palin is the best bet. She has what it takes to beat Obama. I like Bolton as VP. The Foreign Policy GAP is closed. Two Rock Solid Conservative Fighters. The Leader/The Ambassador. Palin plus Bolton's Gravitas= Winning Combo!

TheTotalConservative| 1.30.11 @ 10:57PM

Palin is by far the best out there. She is getting better and it is time people like you fight for her. Is she the perfect candidate. No, but she is by far the best and she is battle tested. They can't hurt her anymore. Ten Percent is all she needs to convince and is she won the nominee, she likely could.

TheTotalConservative| 1.30.11 @ 11:03PM

Quin, Palin's Record is Sterling. She is one of only 2 Governors that saw job growth under their watch, the other is John Hoeven of North Dakota. You may have missed that being a Palin hater. She also can the closest to turning down the stimulus funds by 1 Vote. She is a proven fiscal Conservative that appeals to every type of Conservative. The Media does not spend 28 Months Trying to destroyer losers do they Hillyer. Palin is the best. Her record is impressive and needs to be told!

Marc Jeric| 1.30.11 @ 11:54PM

The guy is right - there are no viable Republican candidates. But then consider the past Democrat candidates and chief executives:
1) Carter - a functional moron;
2) Mondale - a blah-blah nothing from - which state was it?
3) Dukakis - a true nincompoop;
4) Gore - a bloviating gasbag;
5) Clinton - a disbarred felon;
6) Abu Hussein al-Nairobi - a revolutionary marxist and Community Organizer-in-Chief.

zinka milanov| 1.31.11 @ 12:16AM

Why start a list of past Dem leaders with Jimmah Cahteh? Go back to those two dynamos LBJ and Hubird Humphrey, or even Adlai Stephenson. As for a candidate being "battle tested," Tom Dewey (no one ever mentions him in a political gabfest) had great career credentials, but seems to have lacked It on the stump. Even Hellary could be said to be battle tested, but like Caesar got stabbed by her friends before she was given the crown.

MikeN| 1.31.11 @ 12:43AM

Quin you are a coward. Palin and Bachmann are the only fighters in the Republican Party. Sarah Palin has proven herself to be strong and tough. I want her as the nominee. Nobody else has the will and the instinct. I anyone can beat Obama it is Palin. She will not play nice which is exactly what we need. She is everything that McCain was not. She is sharp and tough and believes in all the right things. Politics is War and I want General Sarah Palin leading the battle. There are too many weak men in the Republican Party like you and Bob Grant. I want tough people. Sarah Palin is Tough and Presidential Timber. 28 Months of Media Attacks and she is still standing! We need to fight for Palin, because she is fighting for us. No More Weak Men!

MikeN| 1.31.11 @ 12:47AM

Quin you are a coward. Palin and Bachmann are the only fighters in the Republican Party. Sarah Palin has proven herself to be strong and tough. I want her as the nominee. Nobody else has the will and the instinct. If anyone can beat Obama it is Palin. She will not play nice which is exactly what we need. She is everything that McCain was not. She is sharp and tough and believes in all the right things. Politics is War and I want General Sarah Palin leading the battle. There are too many weak men in the Republican Party like you and Bob Grant. I want tough people. Sarah Palin is Tough and Presidential Timber. 28 Months of Media Attacks and she is still standing! We need to fight for Palin, because she is fighting for us. No More Weak Men!

MikeN| 1.31.11 @ 12:57AM

Palin is Tough and Proven. She is the Candidate the Democrat Party Media Complex does not want to face. They want to face Huckabee or Romney because they are weak and will play right into their hands. Romney is a RINO Supreme and Huckabee is a LightWeight and the Poor Man's Pat Robertson. John Thune is bland and unimpressive, he is owned by the Republican Establishment and is Mitch McConnell's Boy. Mitch Daniels is Romney with less charisma and hair. Newt is just a rotten human being, unfit to be President of anything requiring character. Michele Bachmann is a Robotic Palin without charisma. Rick Perry and Jim DeMint are too laid back old dudes. If they had Sarah's passion they would be great. Palin is Demint and Perry with Good Looks and Charisma and youth. The Media fears her because there is nobody else like her. Michele Bachmann does not even come close. Palin is the heir to Reagan.

zinka milanov| 1.31.11 @ 1:25AM

Tough is great (I want the meanest sobinthevalley as potus)but we have had tough crews like Nixon Haldeman Mitchell, and tough Bobby watching over Jack in the last decades, but the tough guys need to have whatever you define as Sense so we never again have things like Watergate, the Harding gang, or Monica the thong snapper screwing up the potus regime. Does Palin have an Alaska Mafia (an inner circle of advisors getting into her mind?)

Super Sachiko | 1.31.11 @ 1:38AM

my choice is still palin- your negatives against her don't really have a strong argument... http://conservatives4palin.com.....lling.html

Detroit7| 1.31.11 @ 1:59AM

As a female, I proudly support Palin to take on this feat. I agree, she has a very steep hill to climb. It's enormous but if the woman runs, I trust that she will put her all into winning in 2012. The others could try but will most likely lose. Why? the media wants Obama to win again. Yes, the media is harshest to Palin, but if she can't overcome them, then who would be able to? will the media be gentle to the boys if one of them is chosen? hell no. The media is attempt to sway the center to Obama's side. They will tear them apart the GOP candidate and as a result, he will not be able to stand because I have yet to see the character, integrity, strength and charisma that Palin possesses in any one of them. They will fold, compromise and lose. There is a reason why the left continues to go after Palin, not Romney, Newt, Cain, etc., to mock and ridicule. They get it, why can't we?

I am so proud that a woman politician like Sarah Palin has finally emerged. Even though my age group will overwhelmingly support Obama, and well honestly that's because the youth is blind and brain washed, I will stand with Sarah. I refuse to support the others in the republican party because they lack the backbone, character and gravitas to put our country back on the right track or even put it all on the line to win it for The People. Will I be throwing my vote away? I choose to think that my family and I will voting for the person we see best fit to do the damn job. And praying that the majority see it that way as well.

shamspade| 1.31.11 @ 2:36AM

All Sarah Palin has is a lifetime record of achievement in public service from the time she joined her local PTA right up until she became the most effective spokesperson for conservative issues in both 2008 and 2010. Her budgetary record in Alaska was a sterling accomplishment that had immediate and long-lasting benefits. They didn't even have a budget last year in DC. Get real.

Jose Luis Stecca| 1.31.11 @ 3:19AM

My pick would be Ted Nugent..

November 6th, 2012 - ANYBODY but Obama

Oldefarte| 1.31.11 @ 3:17PM

Quin, I respectfully disagree with you ['I do not consider Donald Trump to be a serious candidate']. Trump would make a hell of a president. He may not run, but if so, I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. Read his Newsmax [Sunday] interview----he accurately tells the truth. Maybe politically, he would not be viable because of his brutal honesty, but that is IMO exactly what this country needs!!!!!!!!!

Ken (Old Texican)| 1.31.11 @ 5:24PM

I just hope Sarah decides to give us another chance.

Oldefarte| 2.1.11 @ 10:45AM

Amen to that, Ken; and I'd add.....OUR ONLY CHANCE!!!!!!!!!

Adidas | 8.11.11 @ 4:30AM

is good

العاب | 4.11.12 @ 3:17PM

It sure is fun, AND useless, to spout off about who can or cannot not only win the GOP presidential nomination but even win to become Numero Uno

Latest Headlines

Foreign Policy as Farce

Jed Babbin|83 comments

Revenge of the Fruitcakes

Peter Hitchens|16 comments

The Biggest Fool of All

Doug Bandow|114 comments

When Did Matty Tell Hatty?

Frank Schell|18 comments

Can Liturgical Music Be Saved?

Patrick O'Hannigan|50 comments

Shah Na Na

Mark Tooley|22 comments

The Mole in Don Draper

James Bowman|31 comments

Jeff Sessions’ Conservative Populism

Matthew Walther|68 comments

The Spectacle Blog

High Court Strikes Down Arizona Voter Law

Jordan Gonzalez | 6.17.13

Waiting for the Middle East to Combust over Syria

Kaylin Bugos | 6.17.13

Snowden’s Online Q&A Leaves Many un-Aed Qs

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 6.17.13

Hannity: Secure the Border First

Jeffrey Lord | 6.17.13

A Grave New World: The Political Price of Overpopulation

Anne Hobson | 6.17.13

Serious Welfare Reform…in Massachusetts

Claire Healey | 6.17.13

Pelosi Misuses the Word “Sacred”

Rich Lizardo | 6.17.13

Keep the IRS Scandal Alive

Matt Purple | 6.17.13

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Pope Culture

By George Sim Johnston

A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck

By P.J. O'Rourke

Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
Dames at Sea

By John Corry
In the Absence of Guns

By Mark Steyn

In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The Metaphysical Martini

By Werner J. Dannhauser
Counting the Costs of Clintonism

By Robert H. Bork

The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
Chuck McHagel

By George Neumayr

It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted

By Douglas Bartholomew
It’s the Best Time of the Year

By Mark Steyn

The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
The Bush Crack-Up

By Brit Hume

Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?