what are the chances of another person joining the GOP nomination for President?

I figured you were voting for improvement, when you voted for Obaminable.

BTW:
If you wanted McCain in 2000 why didn't you vote for him in 2008? Originally Posted by LexusLover

His time had passed.

If you wanted McCain in 2000 why didn't you vote for him in 2008? Originally Posted by LexusLover

I voted for Gore in 2000. McCain wasn't on the ballot!

Check the polls. Ron Paul is consistently near the top.

Chris Christi is the only one I can think of that would have a chance at this point. I do not think he will run. The nominee will likely be either Perry or Romney. Originally Posted by Laz

1. Not a national fundraiser. He's be crippled. Plus all the big organizers in Iowa and NH, both of which are ground game States, are already committed somewhere.

2. Who is his constituency? He might split a bit off Romney's vote, but the GOP establishment is behind Romney. They would discourage Christie from running. Only additions will come from lunatic fringe, and probably none from there, either.

As for Bush III, I think he's waiting for 2016.

Pat Buchanan has been really quiet . . . Is he letting the Bachman nut job so his bidding?

These paulsies are as gullible as ron is
disingenuous. I will never excuse his
posturing on earmarks. Made sure
everyone knew he was against earmarks
would vote against bills with them.
The whole time he KNEW the bill would
pass. It is deceit of the lowest order.
His underlings have no foresight.

Chris Christy is an antihandgun ecoweenie.
His economic conservatism is a creation
of political neccesity, rather than a core value.

Huntsman......ha ha you jest
Johnson.....pffft be serious

We are discussing the best GOP contender.
Best does not mean most liberal or milk toast.

There is only one man in the GOP line up
who doesn't act/look like a metrosexual.

All of you Jackasses- and it is your true
political animal- need to give up on trying
to convince others that your intent is good
for the GOP field.
Under no circumstance could an honest
American lover of liberty and free enterprise
opt to vote for a socialist redistributive usurper.

A crypto-marxist on the other hand will
always find a reason to enable el presidente.

Your support of Paul is as substantial and
consequential as are his antiearmark votes.

No suprise really.
It's a way to vote present.
Along with the comfort in knowing that
there's no way what you talk about will
be addressed and exposed for its shortsightedness.

Perry is flawed, he's an aggie NISM.
Still, he is conservative enough to make up
for his quirks. He seems to learn from most
of his mistakes. Most important of all;
Perry said his job as president would be to
make his job far less significant. I'm paraphrasing,
but the gist is a major scale back of the cent govt
and a transferral of duties, monies, and power
back to the States. I hope SS gets nixed in
his second term.

And no his hair doesn't dazzle me as much
as it obviously does to certain crypto-marxists.
Not including the GOP females, I have more
hair on my head than the entire GOP field combined.

I'm not only a member of the Hair Club for men.
I'm a donor.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/us...unted.html?hpw

Interesting speculation swirling around Chris Christie. And most interesting of all is that it's coming from establishment Republicans who one would think are stalking horses for those who are presently supporting Romney! Apparently the Republican insiders figure that Romney can't win the nomination and that anybody who can win the nomination can't beat Obama. Of course what they have to still deal with is that the TeaNuts will hate Christie just as much as they hate Romney (or anybody else who stands a snowball's chance in hell in the general election).

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/us...unted.html?hpw

Interesting speculation swirling around Chris Christie. And most interesting of all is that it's coming from establishment Republicans who one would think are stalking horses for those who are presently supporting Romney! Apparently the Republican insiders figure that Romney can't win the nomination and that anybody who can win the nomination can't beat Obama. Of course what they have to still deal with is that the TeaNuts will hate Christie just as much as they hate Romney (or anybody else who stands a snowball's chance in hell in the general election). Originally Posted by TexTushHog

those teanuts r funny, they want to find a guy who can duke it out with Barack because they know things will get dirty, but u cant out chicago chicago. lol yheir best fighters r gingrich & santorum, but 4 some reason those nuts dont like them.

Someone needs to step up because I don't like a single one.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/us...unted.html?hpw

Interesting speculation swirling around Chris Christie. And most interesting of all is that it's coming from establishment Republicans who one would think are stalking horses for those who are presently supporting Romney! Apparently the Republican insiders figure that Romney can't win the nomination and that anybody who can win the nomination can't beat Obama. Of course what they have to still deal with is that the TeaNuts will hate Christie just as much as they hate Romney (or anybody else who stands a snowball's chance in hell in the general election). Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Funny thing article today in which Herman cain says Christie is too liberal:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...s-too-liberal/
and another article where McCain is telling Christie it's too late too join:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ions-christie/

There are some who say that Christie image would be a tough sell to Americans- he's overweight and would be the heaviest President we had in many years.

Christie is too liberal for the TeaNuts. That's why he can win in the general election, just like Romney and Huntsman. It's also why they can't win the primary.

I still do not expect Christie will run. Of those in the running it is still early and lots of changes could occur. Just look at the beating Perry has taken.

I still do not expect Christie will run. Of those in the running it is still early and lots of changes could occur. Just look at the beating Perry has taken. Originally Posted by Laz

Laz Perry's demise doesn't surprise me at all- he wasn't that well known outside of texas- but he was all hype- he didn't create jobs- or let's say meaningful ones- and the ones created were by default not because he had great ideas. He cut education spending where Texas ranks near the bottom- he was soft on border control- his HPV mandate smacked him in the face- he talked about secession from the Union- he accepted Obama's stimulus money and balanced his State's defecit with it- he was a fluke.
Also, Perry never has been a good debater- when he was running for re-election as governor he avoided a lot of debates- he has no charisma whatsoever look at him during the debates he looked stiff, unprepared and debating totally was not his thing.

Laz Perry's demise doesn't surprise me at all- he wasn't that well known outside of texas- but he was all hype- he didn't create jobs- or let's say meaningful ones- and the ones created were by default not because he had great ideas. He cut education spending where Texas ranks near the bottom- he was soft on border control- his HPV mandate smacked him in the face- he talked about secession from the Union- he accepted Obama's stimulus money and balanced his State's defecit with it- he was a fluke.
Also, Perry never has been a good debater- when he was running for re-election as governor he avoided a lot of debates- he has no charisma whatsoever look at him during the debates he looked stiff, unprepared and debating totally was not his thing. Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

I have my problems with Perry also. I was not a supporter. I was just pointing out that a lot of change could still occur.

You losers are in trouble. LOL