SC Gov Mark Sanford

[Rob]

Politically, I find him to be more a Liberterian than Republican. 

What?  You mean he isn't a Born Again pro-Life gay-deploring fundamentalist?

No. He's secular and relatively pro-choice.

[Rob]

Does anyone think South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford (R) would make a good candidate in 2008 or possibly 2012?  I've met Sanford personally and I think he's a great guy.  Politically, I find him to be more a Liberterian than Republican.  Maybe he'd make a good VP pick.  That could change my standard endorsement of the Democratic ticket for the last twelve elections, assuming the presidential candidate on the Republican side is as acceptable as Sanford.

Sanford would be a great president... see my signature.

[Rob]

Politically, I find him to be more a Liberterian than Republican. 

What?  You mean he isn't a Born Again pro-Life gay-deploring fundamentalist?

No. He's secular and relatively pro-choice.

He might be secular politically, but personally he is Christian.  Also, he is not pro-choice.  He voted against the partial-birth abortion ban and transporting minors across a state to get an abortion (at least, according to Issues2000.org).

Well, that's fine as long as he doesn't try to impose his beliefs on everyone. And for a Republican from the Deep South... he is somewhat pro-choice.

[Rob]

I know squat about Sanford. Have no clue what he looks like, and I pay attention.

He's the guy in my signature.

[Rob]

He's also pretty overrated, people are just judging him based on pure potential. Does he have a great record as governor? According to our two South Carolinan posters, both independents, it's hardly stellar.

If he runs, I guarantee you that he'll win the nomination and probably the general too.

[Rob]

-

The last time a unknown Southern DEMOCRAT governor ran for president, he was elected...

Now what if an undistinguished Northern REPUBLICAN governor ran...

Pawlenty and Romney, I'm looking at you.....

Romney's a Mormon, and Pawlenty is a weird bastard.

[Rob]

Romney's a Mormon, and Pawlenty is a weird bastard.

LOL, your set on Sanford arent you Bob?

Hell yes . He's the only Republican I would vote for.

[Rob]

Oops!  My bad.  I guess I'm just linking the two due to their business similarities. 

Not bashing Bredesen in any way.  In fact, I kinda like him!

It's ironic that Democrats hate Bredesen and Republicans like him.

[Rob]

Oops!  My bad.  I guess I'm just linking the two due to their business similarities. 

Not bashing Bredesen in any way.  In fact, I kinda like him!

It's ironic that Democrats hate Bredesen and Republicans like him.

I dont hate him.  From what I can gather he's just tackling problems in a non-partisan way, I like that.

Bredesen for VP would be awesome.

[Rob]

No, the ticket to the White House is thru the State House.  Besides,Harold Ford wants to run for Senate on the Dem side.  He can't win, but he is determined to run.

You guys need to start using quotes. There are multiple conversations going on, and it tends to get a little confusing if you don't quote what you're responding to.

[Rob]

I've always liked Breseden and I still do, but I'm an pretty conservative Democrat anyway. 

I can imagine the real left-wing wackos hating him.  Normal Democrats should like him.

Yep. The DINO's of the left would vote Green if Bredesen was nominated.

[Rob]

The far left at some of my Democratic boards are bitching they will vote green if any of the follow receive the nomination... Bredesen, Warner, Bayh, Richardson.  They must really hate winning.

People like that are everywhere where I live. I guess they'd rather vote for that ing idiot Nader than win. More power to them! They're the reason the Democrats are completely out of power.

[Rob]

I've always liked Breseden and I still do, but I'm an pretty conservative Democrat anyway. 

I can imagine the real left-wing wackos hating him.  Normal Democrats should like him.

Yep. The DINO's of the left would vote Green if Bredesen was nominated.

The previous Republican governors of Tennessee were disasters. 

Bredesen has gone in there, cleaned up things, and turned Tennessee around in general.

I would support a man like that all the time, regardless of political affliation.

Same here.

[Rob]

Now, dumby AuH2O apparently wants to nominate another Goldwater who will lose to the Democrats in a landslide and take the Senate with him.  Yeah, that's not going bring on more socialism or anything.

Sanford is far from being a Goldwater. He'd do better in the North than most other Republicans.

[Rob]

Whats wrong with winning elections the way ya'll are winning them right now?  sh**t, Id do anything to be in the position the GOP is in politically across this country.

Except the GOP always seems to end up on top somehow. If the situation was reversed- if Gore was in the White House, both Houses of Congress were Democratic, and the Supreme Court majority was liberal- the GOP would stage a "Republican Revolution" like in '94 and kick them all out. They're just much better at politics.

[Rob]

Now, dumby AuH2O apparently wants to nominate another Goldwater who will lose to the Democrats in a landslide and take the Senate with him.  Yeah, that's not going bring on more socialism or anything.

Sanford is far from being a Goldwater. He'd do better in the North than most other Republicans.

Are you telling me that you honestly believe Sanford can be elected in Pennsylvania and Michigan?  I only know of him because I know politics.  In 2008, he will be 6 year governor of South Carolina.  Why not run Senator Thune, if we are looking to gain nothing by the virtue of our candidate?

In the meantime, bringing forward the governor of South Carolina will be a huge sign to the rest of the country that, inspite of having tons of great candidates from all over the country, we went with this guy, because he plays well with Evangelical Southerners.

What kind of message does that send?

It tells me that we are not a National Party.

No, he couldn't win Michigan or Pennsylvania. However, he could win New Hampshire, Wisconsin, and possibly even Oregon.

He doesn't play particularly well with evangelicals- he's pretty secular. And I hate to tell you this, but the GOP isn't a truly national party anymore. Neither are the Democrats.

[Rob]

Sen Sam,

 48% of the people voted for a conservative Jew in 2000 (at least as a Veep candidate).  Who would have ever thought that that would happen? 

I won't vote for Romney if he shows signs that he wants to be President of Mormon America.  I won't vote for Santorum if he show signs that he wants to be President of Catholic America.  However, If they want to be President of all America, then I see no problem with their religion.

Mormons don't believe in separation of church and state. Just look at Utah, a state wholly owned and operated by the LDS.

[Rob]

So, simply saying "niether are the Democrats" is an good enough excuse for not doing it?

I'm saying that the GOP doesn't particularly need to carry states in the Northeast, which is true.

[Rob]

So, simply saying "niether are the Democrats" is an good enough excuse for not doing it?

I'm saying that the GOP doesn't particularly need to carry states in the Northeast, which is true.

So "we don't have too" is a good enough excuse then?

Yes. Ignore the Northeast, and pour resources into the West, and the Midwestern battlegrounds.

The Democrats should ignore the South, and concentrate on the swing states. There's no need for a "national" strategy on either side.

[Rob]

So, simply saying "niether are the Democrats" is an good enough excuse for not doing it?

I'm saying that the GOP doesn't particularly need to carry states in the Northeast, which is true.

So "we don't have too" is a good enough excuse then?

You don't have to carry Vermont to win. Does that really bother you then that you have no chance of doing so?

You people lack vision.

No, we don't have to win Vermont, but it would be nice to stop dividing the country.  It woul dbe nice to acctually get more than 350 EVs.  It would be better if could accutally win 55% of the popular vote.

I agree, but it's not gonna happen.

[Rob]

Quick point: Kerry isn't an Irish Catholic (don't be fooled by the name) and certainly isn't an ethnic politician.
He comes off as more WASPish than a WASP like Bush, hence his poor preformance with Catholic voters and his impressive preformance with mainline Protestants.

Ethnic voters (and they're usually Catholic) are importent to both parties because on the one hand they are overwhelmingly Democratic by registration etc, but on the other hand they are usually somewhat socially conservative and don't have any problems with splitting their tickets (take a look at some of the statewide races in PA last year if you don't believe me).

Time to bash on the Jewish Catholics?
Yes, Kerry's grandfather changed his name from Kohn to Kerry.

Okay... I don't think that Al was trying to "bash" on Jewish people.

[Rob]

Well, I guess Smith only got 92% in South Carolina. Guess there was good Catholic turnout there. ha.

Oh dear. Someone knows less than he likes to let on. Go find out how many people actually voted in SC prior to the '40's...

Well, Smith did run very well in the Black Belts of the South, because voters were too racially polarized to care about religion. But in the predominantly white counties, his vote collapsed far below Davis and Cox, because of anti-Catholicism. Overall, he lost substantial ground- he even lost counties in Mississippi, for God's sake!

[Rob]

Good gracious!  This thread has become unrecognizable.

I agree. How the hell did they start arguing about that anyways? This sort of thing happens all too often.

[Rob]

By the late 30's the US economy was once again beginning to flounder, even though we were employing millions through the WPA and the CCC.  Don't kid yourself.  World War II is what ENDED the Great Depression.

About 15 million jobs were created under the FDR adminstration from 1933-1941 (before Pearl Harbor). That was an increase of about 50%.

The unemployment rate went from 25% to 17%, an 8% drop, under the New Deal.  It went from 17% to 9%, another 8% drop, in just two years once war industry revved up.

Unemployment only counts people who both
1. HAD a job
2. Are ACTIVELY looking for a job

It's an overrated statistic.

You're mom is an overrated statistic.

WHOA! Gotta give you points for originality there, John.

[Rob]

Basically, what I am reading from this conversation is that the Republican Party, in the eyes of its own members, is a party for Southern WASP's only.  We should not attempt to branch out and be leaders let alone leaders of a real cooalition.

Having a vision for leading the country is not nearly as important as holding onto power by sticking to a strategy that sqeeks out wins every 2 years.

We don't need states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Oregon, etc. to win, so we shouldn't even bother trying for them.  As long as we have Florida and Ohio, we are good.  No matter how slim our leads are there.

Vision=bad
Servicing the Narrow Interests of the Base Only=good

Soulty, the GOP made a conscious decision to become a southern-oriented party. You're just reaping what your predecessors have sown.