Talk Elections

go.

doesn't this somewhat depend on how he performs as President?

Nobody should be able to honestly answer this question yet.

I'd vote for the Republican, regardless. So yes, I can honestly answer this question. Isn't this question about as ridiculous as this board?

of course

Guess I will support a republican.
Though, obviously, it depends on the republican nominee (and for a lesser extent, how Obama will perform).

What if the GOP selects Mitt Romney? It will be either Mitt or Huckabee, and I sure as hell don't want Huck to be the nominee.

Republican, especially if Huckabee wins it.

If The Republican is crap, I'd vote 3rd party.

almost certainly neither

LOL, so you're saying the GOP is so pathetic they can't find anyone new and will have to jump back to two guys who won't even be in public office anymore?

No. I'm going by history. The GOP traditionally nominates the runnerup the next time around. Since it's unclear as to whether Huckabee or Romney was the runner up, it could be either one. It could be someone knew, but history says otherwise.

Bush lost to Dole in 1996?

I find it very unlikely that I could vote GOP for president. Republicans would really have to reinvent themselves post-W.

Which way is that?

Pretty much the opposite of where they are now.

If Obama does poorly I will vote Republican, if he does well I will still vote Republican to put my two cents in to try and avoid a Democratic landslide.

Socially, Fiscally, or Both?

If Obama does well I will vote for him. If he falls on his face it depends how socially conservative the Republican nominee is.

Unless Obama has an awful first term AND the GOP nominates someone acceptable to me, I'm voting for Obama.

I would love to have Mitt Romney as our nominee in 2012 and really hate if its Huckabee. Of the two Romney is probably more electable since Huckabee placed 6th among non-Evengelicals and that group is the only reason he got what he did. Romney was competative in more regions and in more groups, unfortunately thats not enought win. Whens the last time someone came so close to winning both Iowa and New Hampshire usally the result one in the GOP is the complete opposite of the result in the other state like 1980 and 2000. 

First poll like this where I can't give a snarky "won't vote" answer. :(

Obama, almost certainly.

     I would lean towards the Republican, though it depends on who it is. There are certain Republicans (Huckabee, Jindal, Pence) who I would never vote for for President.

Mitt Romney

Obama -2008 may be the last presidential election I have ever even considered voting Republican.  With the GOP turning ever more rightward (even more so after McCain's likely defeat this year), I just don't see myself leaving the Democratic Party.   

depends who the Republican is. If it's Sarah Palin or Bobby Jindal, I'll drag myself out to the voting booth for Obama regardless of his performance. If it's some inoffensive Bob Dole-esque character I probably won't both voting unless there's some strong financial incentive for me to do so.

If the next four years are a rollicking good time under Obama, I might also vote for him as a sign of affirmation. Much like what I would have done with Bill Clinton in 1996. It's possible, perhaps even likely, that this could be the case given that Obama's first term would essentially entail my college years. Whereas Bush's Presidency included my H/S years, which were undoubtedly the worst time of my life. So, naturally, I'll always have a negative opinion of the "Bush Years" and a positive opinion of the "Clinton years" because my life was so much better during the latter.

In all likelihood Obama, though of course it depends on his performance in office and such.

If the GOP moves populist in the next few years, I might be an Independent or Democrat by 2012. I seriously hope they don't take that route. But it will depend on how Obama does as President and who the GOP nominates. I won't want to vote for Huckabee or Palin. I hope that the party moves back towards their small government, low spending roots. I'll evaluate my options when the time comes. I know I said I'd not vote for Romney this year, but I'd be open to him in 2012 because he probably could've fixed the economy.

If Huckabee/Palin/Jindal is the nominee in 2012, you know I'd likely be happy. But why would you leave a Populist GOP?

Look at his political matrix score.

Oh wait, a minute, I forgot he was Libertarian.

I really don't want to leave the GOP because I really hate Democrats. if they became Populist, my whole reason for being one would be gone. I'm a staunch fiscal conservative that believes in low taxes, low spending and less government except in extreme cases (I supported the bailout). I'm pro-choice, pro-immigration, and pro-civil unions, semi-pro gun control, so I don't agree with the GOP 100% on social issues.

I just think it would be a disaster if the GOP debate just another big government party. Their reason for existing would disappear. That being said, I don't know what party I'd join if the GOP abandoned their libertarian government policies. I hate the Democrat party so much that I doubt I could ever join them. Too many nut cases in the party for me to want to be a part of it.

Yeah, there is a c;ash of Libertarians and Populists in the GOP right now.

The populists are more of the social conservatives who take them very seriously. I don't hate the populists, I just hope we don't vote in that direction and destroy our small government agenda. Bush has done enough to ruin that during his terms.

I don't think Bush is Populist myself, he is really just stupid.

He's a big government guy, but he cut taxes and then increased spending. So he isn't technically a populist, but he spends like one.

Bush is really just a confused monkey who should've never been President,

That's a bit harsh for me. Bush was the right man to have in the White House for the times during 9/11, but his second term has been very ineffective since the immigration debunkle.

Sorry if I was too mean, I was trying to be polite as possible. I think Bush was right on 9/11 and Terrorism, but that is about it.

He's been unfairly hurt by a lot of things outside of his control, including the mess in the economy. That was building up for some time and the Democrats were the main players in enabling the poor to buy those homes. A lot of these problems just collapsed while Bush was in office.

Yeah, but Bush was too weak to defend himself in my opinion. And if Obama wins, I am blaming it all on Bush.

Well, I think he'll just be glad to be out of there so he can't get blamed for all the problems we have today. He has always been vilified in the media ever since he took office, except for the few weeks following 9/11. It's hard to defend himself when the mainstream media has worked for 8 years to create this culture of hatred of Bush. So if Obama wins, it will be mostly because of Bush, the economy, and the fact that McCain didn't have a decent campaign team to attack Obama on the issues and defend himself in the process.

Yeah, I will never like Bush, but at the same time I feel kinda sorry for him. He has just become so pitiful.

Bush is not the same as my philosophy, straight up. He is a Rockefeller neocon trying to be a Southern Populist. He has the New Englander Wall Street tinge on him.

If he was economically left, would the Chinese be spoonfed by him? Would he have balanced the budget? Would we have a near-Socialist almost president? No.

Saying Bush is Populist pisses me off big time.

But it's basically true. There's nothing libertarian about Bush except he cut taxes. The rest is basically just like your philosophy.

I still think he is Fiscally Conservative, he is not Populist. I am tired of Libertarian Propaganda.

Populist or not, I still hate Bush.

I don't see how he can be economically left, when Wall Street gets what they want (which is what Bush has done.)

Are you scared that the GOP will kick Libertarians out or something, depsite that is what is going to happen?

I am afraid of what would happen if the GOP took a populist turn. We'd certainly lose a large base of fiscal conservatives which would really ruin our party. The GOP would basically be Democrats with social conservative views. If that happened, another third party would form and probably replace the GOP way into the future. The fiscal conservatives aren't going away. There will always be a large faction of us. We are what America stands for. Less government, low spending, low taxes. Personal responsibility. That philosophy isn't dying out.

I would like to Vote for Jim Webb in 2012 so iam hoping Obama loses this election.

Just because "populism" in the political matrix term means social conservative/fiscal liberal doesn't mean Bush is one just because he spends a lot.  Bush spends liberally, but not in what a populist would (ideally) spend in.  He's into deregulation of schools and the health system, not to mention privatizing social security.  A big deficit spender is by no means a populist, at least not necessarily.  Don't Republican presidents tend to spend and not slash enough programs to cover it anyways?

Thank you for helping me clear it up.

I'm pretty certain that spending beyond your means is a universal politician trait that transcends ideology or party.  Everybody's got to at least butter up their constituencies with pork.

Populist or not, G.W. Bush cannot be labeled a "Conservative" in the true sense of the term. 

Almost certainly Obama, unless he fails to pull the vast majority of our troops out of Iraq in his first term.

Why not Pence?  He's vehemently small-government.  Is it because of social issues?

Any Republican??
Really?
What about Ron Paul, Colin Powel, Snowe, Susan Collins, Chuck Hagel, or Lieberman if he switches?

Yes, against Mr Socialist I would.

     Yeah, from what I've heard out of Indiana, Pence is way too socially conservative for my tastes. I guess if Obama is enough of a failure, I would become somewhat open to voting for Pence.

Depends on what my political stances I have in 2012.

In 2004, I was a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist who felt guilty about participating in "bourgeois" politics by making a useless vote for Kerry.

In 2008, I'm a solid right-winger whose voting for McCain.

I really like Pence, since he is the type of Republican that was serving in congress in the Clinton years.  Since I couldn't care less about most social issues, I would be very open to vote for Pence if Obama is a failure or mediocre president.

Ditto here.

Social issues for me are easily substitutable and closer to political tools than anything.

Romney?

I've never heard that before. He'd lose.

I think so.  In 2005, Bill Weld (former Gov. of MA) tried to get the Republican nomination to run for Gov. of NY, but he lost. 


First I'm hearing it too.  Though I have heard Meg Whitman is considering it. 

My dream ticket for a presidential race would be:

Susan Collins (R-ME)/Mike Pence (R-IN)

It really depends on whether Lugar serves in the Obama administration or not.  If he does, Daniels would almost certainly choose Pence to vacate his seat.

That's a pretty lofty dream.

Just a quick question, how well is Senator Bill Frist's (R-TN) Reputation? If it is fairly well, he could be on The 2012 ticket, maybe or maybe not.

He's too wedded to the Bush years.  He led the free-spending Senate that the GOP will be running away from for the next few years.  In that other world, where Bush had a +50% approval rating, he probably would've been the '08 nominee. 

The only way Frist ends up on a national ticket is if he becomes governor of TN in 2010.  I have a feeling, however, that Harold Ford will be running and don't think Frist would beat him. 

I see ... Hmm, Too bad he was too Bushy on economy, otherwise I would've supported him, now I won't.

Other than Huckabee, who should I hope for in 2012?

You'll be voting for Obama in 12' barring some political conversion.

If I'm reading your political matrix correctly, your best bet would be Palin.  Maybe Thune, if I'm assessing him right.  It's tough for you because I don't see the GOP nominating a populist.

I like Palin and I'd possibly vote for her post-primary if she won, but I doubt she'd ever get the nomination. I do admire Thune, at least Socially (if I can get more info on him, that'd be excellent.) I wish the Democrats would nominate a more Social Conservative candidate, but I doubt that will ever happen again.