Tom Tancredo

[Zundfolge]

So how is Ah-nold working out for Kalifornia??

No worse than any Democrat would have.

Of course you cherry picked my post and conveniently skipped this part: Certainly there are limits and you don't want an outright liberal Republican in office (frankly I think the country is better off with Obama over McCain since McCain would have done 90% of what Obama has done but without the hue and cry from the right) but if you don't win elections you don't get a say in how things are run.

In the case of McInnis or Maes, neither of them is "too liberal" to be a decent Republican governor of Colorado.

[Driftwood]

Certainly there are limits and you don't want an outright liberal Republican in office

Ahnold IS a freakin' liberal Repub! In every sense of the word!

[OgenRwot]

You gotta remember though, Arnold is a California Republican. Just like some people are pissed off at Scott Brown in MA. He's a Mass Republican which means he's much more liberal than you or I would like. But he is soooo much better than Kennedy. Same for Arnold, yeah he's pretty liberal and he's done some bad stuff but he has also done things that no Democrat would have ever done.

Multi party systems don't work well. Look at Europe.

[Ranger]

You gotta remember though, Arnold is a California Republican. Just like some people are pissed off at Scott Brown in MA. He's a Mass Republican which means he's much more liberal than you or I would like. But he is soooo much better than Kennedy. Same for Arnold, yeah he's pretty liberal and he's done some bad stuff but he has also done things that no Democrat would have ever done.

Multi party systems don't work well. Look at Europe.

+1

[jmg8550]

I don't like politicians in general. They will lie, cheat, steal, whatever to get into office. Then once they do, they crap all over the people who put them there. We have been voting for bags of crap for a long time. Just picking the one that doesn't stink as bad. Our government is broken and needs some serious changes. Back to the way our founders intended it to be. And I think term limits for all branches of government needs to be imposed.

[Troublco]

Either way it's a committee and you won't make everyone happy at the same time, ever. I do agree that changes need to be made. I like the Term Limits idea, but it seems to me that politicians need to be limited from being politicians. Don't let them spend two terms as a congressman, two terms as a senator, two more as a governor, and so on. Being a politician was never supposed to be a lifelong career.

[Ranger]

If I were re-writing the rules I think I would disallow anyone who has a net worth greater than 51% of the population, we have far too many millionaires in office right now, and once they gain office they have to freeze all their assets, just like the president has to.

[Zundfolge]

I used to be staunchly opposed to the idea of term limits ... if the people wanted politician X for 70 years than they deserve him.

However I've come to realize that term limits is a bad idea who's time has come.

Its not about "evil rich guys" or even about "too damn many lawyers", the problem is with entrenched interests. People get in, and build walls of power around themselves making it harder to get the bad ones out.

I say 2 terms in the Senate or 3 in the House (or one term in each) and you're done. Go home.

[OgenRwot]

Now Tancredo is saying that "the Tea Party and 9.12 groups are part of the 'establishment'" just because they wrote a letter pleading for him to not run. This guy has a bigger ego than BO. The only guy that thinks it's a good idea to run on a third party ticket is Tom. He's going to announce at noon he's in the race and we might as well kiss our asses goodbye. Introducing Governor Hickenlooper, we're fucked.

[Ranger]

He's going to announce at noon he's in the race and we might as well kiss our asses goodbye. Introducing Governor Hickenlooper, we're fucked.

Ahhh, don't count on that just yet. First off, I don't think he'll pull THAT many conservatives away, second I think America in general is fed up with liberalism (as happens every time we get a liberal president) and that works FOR us. It's going to be a tough race no matter what, we just don't have a good pony in the race.

In modern history, democrats are unable to hold the office of the president for more than one term (Clinton is, of course, the exception) - the reason is the debt they get us into and their policies and high taxes. The country is very unhappy right now and I think that by itself is a good boost to our numbers this year.

No matter who runs against Hick, and it'll likely be McGinnis, I believe it's a 50/50 shot - there are no shoe-ins here. Just because McGinnis sucks doesn't mean that he can't pull down the vote - we really haven't seen HIS ads against Hick yet nor do we know what dirt he'll dig up.