Here are some thoughts about the various candidates for president the Republicans are putting forward. My knowledge of these guys is not exhaustive, so I confess freely that I'm simply giving my gut reaction to who these guys are and what they stand for. I can't say I'm thrilled with any of them. I was proud of Ronald Reagan; I was happy with George Bush 41; I was satisfied with George Bush 43. I wish we had a Reagan, someone who inspired confidence and leadership.
Mitt Romney - the problem here is his Mormonism. Politically, I agree with most of what I've heard. He went a bit soft on abortion when governor - understandable, but that doesn't make it right. I suspect it went against his convictions, but he was willing to "go soft" in order to get elected. Not a nice trait. But the big thing will be that, with a Romney administration, Mormons will FLOOD into Washington, and there will be a huge stamp of "legitimacy" stamped upon Mormonism in general. All in all, I would vote for him if he's the nominee, and I think he is electable. He has a presidential aire about him, but I wish he wasn't a Mormon.
Note: here's the link to a memo from Mark DeMoss, asking evangelicals to vote for Romney:
Rudy Guliani - the problems are legion here. Socially, he is no better than a Democrat. Pro-abortion, pro-gay rights, etc. His private life is also a mess. His pluses are that he is hard on security and he is probably electable. He would make many Democrats feel comfortable voting for a Republican because he's liberal on so many issues but hard on terrorism and security. I would say he is very electable. However, the conservatives will not vote for him, I suspect. I'm pretty sure I couldn't, even if it meant (gulp) Hillary in the WH. I'm also afraid that if he is nominated and wins, the secular Republican power brokers will realize they don't need the "evangelical vote," and our pro-life stand will be compromised. We may even lose the pro-life plank of the party platform. We simply cannot allow this to happen.
Here's a particularly powerful anti-Guliani post:
John McCain - tough on defense/terrorism, but wishy-washy on so much, and weird to boot. I don't think he'll be a factor.
Tom Tancredo - single issue candidate: immigration. He's good on that particular issue, but he simply doesn't have the appeal to lead and win.
Ron Paul - don't know much about him. His followers seem a bit loony. Some of his positions are solid, but I don't think he'll be a factor.
Fred Thompson - I had high hopes for this guy, but he has not missed an opportunity to disappoint. He seems to lack energy, vision, and public charisma. I don't think he'll be a factor.
Mike Huckabee - an ordained pastor has no chance of ever being elected President of the United States. Forget it. His last name doesn't help; "President Huckabee?" No way, he's unelectable. Sounds like somebody from "Mayberry RFD," which doesn't bother me at all, but I think it would bother the rest of the country. Not a factor.
Sam Brownback - I don't like his last name either. Seems to hold good positions on many issues, but again, I don't think he's a factor.
Duncan Hunter - never heard of him.
Some discussions on the web:
Bottom Line: I think it will be Guliani or Romney. Of these two, I would much prefer Romney.
I'm sad there is no one who inspires me, no one who makes me proud to be a Republican, like Reagan did. Even both Bushes were more inspiring than this lot. We may be in trouble.
No comments:
Post a Comment