Jeff Flake or Mark Sanford in 2012?

[newmedia4ron]

Would you support a Mark Sanford or Jeff Flake in 2012?

Not my ideal choices but guys I think that could actually win.

I like Gary Johnson, Judge Andrew Napolitano and Ed Thompson also.... but do they really have a chance?

A Sanford or a Flake campaign could open up the door for better candidates in the future. (reminding people that small government and fiscal responsibility is what we need)

[austin356]

Mark Sanford would be a great nominee. Someone I could actually vote FOR.

[Shotdown1027]

If either showed a committment to non-interventionism and civil liberties, yea.

[AJ Antimony]

I doubt they both support a non-interventionist foreign policy, sound money, and strict constitutional interpretation.

[literatim]

Mark Sanford lost all credibility when he went to the Bilderberg meeting.

[speciallyblend]

once they fire mike duncan , i might believe one word out of their mouths! the gop leadership are corrupt manipulating liars!

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Gary Johnson.

Has already said he'd run if Obama won. Will be a really viable candidate in the primaries. Two-term governor.

I really feel he could be the next president. The way the country is going, it should be easy to make Obama a one-term president running on a "are you better off now than you were four years ago?" message in 2012.

[robmpreston]

Mark Sanford, despite all the Bilderburg conspiracy theorists.

[ArrestPoliticians]

We don't need another "total failure" Reagan type. Gary Johnson or Ventura, people that have a chance AND have put themselves on the line in supporting Ron Paul. That should be the litmus test.

[Jeremy]

Does Gary Johnson have a chance? Uhhh... he was a governor... Jeff Flake is a congressman

Mark Sanford.... don't even know anything about him

I support Gary Johnson

[Jeremy]

Mark Sanford lost all credibility when he went to the Bilderberg meeting.

Oh that's who he is? Come on, if I was invited I would go!!! :confused:

[0zzy]

Oh that's who he is? Come on, if I was invited I would go!!! :confused:

But...but...Bilderberg! New Worlds! Judge Judy!

AHH!

[Jeremy]

Sanford is a former congressman and IS the current governor of South Carolina which is an early voting state in the primary so he has that in the bag. No campaign for him in New Hampshire and Iowa.

Why does being current matter? Huck, Rudy, Mitt weren't. And besides, wouldn't that mean Gary has more time? Besides, can't he fund (part of) his own campaign?

[Dorfsmith]

Jeff Flake voted against patriot act, and is against the war now.

He has a better record than most Republicans. I like Flake.

[steph3n]

Mark Sanford lost all credibility when he went to the Bilderberg meeting.

not a good example. with all the hype if I got invited darn sure I'd go!

[RSLudlum]

Sanford is a former congressman and IS the current governor of South Carolina which is an early voting state in the primary so he has that in the bag. No campaign for him in New Hampshire and Iowa.

And on top of that he was recently on capitol hill pleading congress to stop with the bailouts, of corps and states, while others like Gov. Paterson (NY) and Gov. Schwarzenegger (CA) are begging for fed funds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZI7Kwntz1k

Sanford also called back our state congress without pay to cut the budget by $500,000,000. "They caused this mess, it's time for them to clean it up!"
His entire governorship has been riddled with the state congress having to override his vetoes of pork laden bills. He declined Real ID and vetoed DNA sampling at time of arrest. Also supports private school education.

As far as interventionist policy, I don't really know, that could be a major problem.

[qh4dotcom]

Jeff Flake would really cut down the government spending.

I visited his opponent's website and she really went after him...to the point that she almost made me change my mind about Flake

http://rebeccaschneiderforcongress.com/

[richiep]

All three would be ok by me as far as positions go (I'm not looking for perfection). What we need to look at is who is decent enough that we could support (someone who meets say 90% of our standards) but has factors that makes them a good candidate. Someone who is perfect issue wise, but is a poor candidate is not a good choice. Its drives me crazy that I have to say that, but we have to look at this the way that Hooters looks at who they are going to hire, and they would not hire me (a 50 year old male).

Jeff Flake has a good presence on TV, but from what I know, Gary Johnson is like a machine when it comes to campaigning. I'm not as familiar with Sanford (or his son lol) Seriously though, I understand he's somewhat good on issues, but I don't think I've ever seen him on TV anywhere.

[RSLudlum]

Sanford in front of House Ways and Means Committee 10/28

Opening statement starts around 20min mark, in which he mentions "The Forgotten Man"....entire meeting is 5hrs in total

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&tID=5&src=atom&atom=todays_events.xml&products_id=282081-1

[literatim]

As for Jeff Flake, I would probably support him if he decided to run.

[ArrestPoliticians]

"Flake initially supported the Patriot Act and the Iraq War, but more recently has changed his position to one of cautious opposition, including voting against appropriations for both." -Wikipedia

[richiep]

I just watched a half minute of that CSPAN video just to get a quick feel for his "presence" and I have to say he comes across very well.

Compare that to Johnson, who might be the best overall on the issues. He comes across more as a sort of reminding me of Fox Muldur in this video clip! lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTq-XGn40gk

Compare that to BO, who also has a certain presence, even when he's wearing jeans and talking informally. If we are to seriously talk about someone to support for POTUS in 2012, this kind of thing is important.

[Indy4Chng]

We should run a governor or x-governor... Sanford would also be a good candidate (although I prefer Gary Johnson). The one huge advantageous of Gary Johnson is he could somewhat self-fund, which is going to be huge as the Republican party will not be rid of their neocon leadership and block the true conservatives.

The candidate should focus on 100% fiscal libertarism (as most likely the war/patriot act will be a distant memory) and we will be in the midst of a recession.

Also we need to think of the voting demographics... right now we have about 10% of the voting population with similar beliefs... but fiscal conservatives/libertarians makeup over 50% of the voting block and when republicans have dominated elections they have won on smaller government and fiscal reforms also many of the fiscal conservatives that our not ron paul conservatives, want a principled candidate and so we need to give them one.... then once we are in office we can break out the social libertarian agenda as well.

Does anyone else despise social conservatives like George Bush? They have destroyed the conservative name and have ruined our country. Damnit everytime they speak I want to break out a bible and knock them across the head with it... btw I am not atheist, I just don't think politics and religion should not mix and it sure as hell shouldn't be the difining issue that drives you.

[ArrestPoliticians]

I just watched a half minute of that CSPAN video just to get a quick feel for his "presence" and I have to say he comes across very well.

Compare that to Johnson, who might be the best overall on the issues. He comes across more as a sort of reminding me of Fox Muldur in this video clip! lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTq-XGn40gk

Compare that to BO, who also has a certain presence, even when he's wearing jeans and talking informally. If we are to seriously talk about someone to support for POTUS in 2012, this kind of thing is important.

I thought it was just me! I don't think he is a very polished or charismatic candidate AT ALL, but Ron Paul isn't exactly Mr Politician either and he was able to connect, so who knows.

Jesse was made for the limelight and TV, and can break through the media barrier because of his celebrity status. He is the best performer of the bunch, but the difficulty in getting a third party in the white house means that he will have to be our secret weapon until GOP alternatives are exhausted.

[literatim]

Gary Johnson has a scholars aura about him. I would like to see how he handles debates. Anyone have a video of his gubernatorial debate?

[ArrestPoliticians]

The candidate should focus on 100% fiscal libertarism (as most likely the war/patriot act will be a distant memory) and we will be in the midst of a recession.


I agree to some extent, but within this area the focus needs to be on monetary policy and free market economics, not "budget balancing". GOP neo-cons that have/claim to have balanced state budgets are a dime a dozen.

[BuddyRey]

You guys, why support just one when ALL of them could run?! If the '12 GOP roster has enough individualists to seem like a growing and serious contingent in the party (rather than a "lone kook" as they tried to paint Ron Paul) we would have a huge chance of winning. The media attacks wouldn't work nearly as well because they would have to be broader and more vague. The media can't simultaneously denounce three or four very similar candidates as "kooks" without it looking pretty funny to MSM-watchers. More candidates means a bigger chance at success!!!

[Mini-Me]

You guys, why support just one when ALL of them could run?! If the '12 GOP roster has enough individualists to seem like a growing and serious contingent in the party (rather than a "lone kook" as they tried to paint Ron Paul) we would have a huge chance of winning. The media attacks wouldn't work nearly as well because they would have to be broader and more vague. The media can't simultaneously denounce three or four very similar candidates as "kooks" without it looking pretty funny to MSM-watchers. More candidates means a bigger chance at success!!!

Great post! I wholeheartedly agree, so long as they don't take so much support from each other during the primaries that well-funded establishment candidates set themselves apart and pull in more concentrated support.

[BuddyRey]

Mark Sanford, despite all the Bilderburg conspiracy theorists.

It's a real group and there's nothing "theoretical" about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group

However you feel about the ultimate aims of the group, or whether or not its even a slight factor in world politics, U.S. politicians meeting there in secret with foreign leaders is a clear and blatant violation of the Logan Act.

[ArrestPoliticians]

You guys, why support just one when ALL of them could run?! If the '12 GOP roster has enough individualists to seem like a growing and serious contingent in the party (rather than a "lone kook" as they tried to paint Ron Paul) we would have a huge chance of winning. The media attacks wouldn't work nearly as well because they would have to be broader and more vague. The media can't simultaneously denounce three or four very similar candidates as "kooks" without it looking pretty funny to MSM-watchers. More candidates means a bigger chance at success!!!

The problem is scarcity. We only have so much money and time. Its better to pool our resources. I think we will probably only have enough for either 1 independent run or 1 GOP primary run, but I'm holding out that we can pull off both.

[BuddyRey]

The problem is scarcity. We only have so much money and time. Its better to pool our resources. I think we will probably only have enough for either 1 independent run or 1 GOP primary run, but I'm holding out that we can pull off both.

I think you might be forgetting just how many "mainstream" Republicans and Democrats could go for a Gary Johnson or Jesse Ventura Presidency. So much campaign funding will end up coming from these sources that, when inevitably the wheat is separated from the chaff, only the candidate(s) who really take root with the voters at large are left, and there won't be any more talk about "viability" as far as our pick(s) are concerned. Said candidate(s) can then more or less become self-starters with the generous contributions from Ron Paul diehards and even some non-diehards who still like the message.

Let's face it; a lot of U.S. voters go into the thing with a "horse race" mentality. It's not about philosophy or the ideals of liberty and Constitutional government, it's about "picking a winner." If we can provide enough candidates to give them that feeling of choice and at the same time let them feel like they're picking a sharp guy, an up-and-comer who can win, their primitive psychology will do the rest of the work for us (the MSM does it all the time)!

[ArrestPoliticians]

I think you might be forgetting just how many "mainstream" Republicans and Democrats could go for a Gary Johnson or Jesse Ventura Presidency. So much campaign funding will end up coming from these sources that, when inevitably the wheat is separated from the chaff, only the candidate(s) who really take root with the voters at large are left, and there won't be any more talk about "viability" as far as our pick(s) are concerned.

Let's face it; a lot of U.S. voters go into the thing with a "horse race" mentality. It's not about philosophy or the ideals of liberty and Constitutional government, it's about "picking a winner." If we can provide enough candidates to give them that feeling of choice and at the same time let them feel like they're picking a sharp guy, an up-and-comer who can win, their primitive psychology will do the rest of the work for us (the MSM does it all the time)!

The mainstream money MIGHT flow in to Ventura, but he will need a lot of volunteers to get ballot access and canvas. Johnson will be marginalized without massive inflows of money.

I do see your point, however.

[mitty]

gary johnson please. but unless he is married i doubt he could get elected

[Sarge]

I was mentioning to someone yesterday, I wished Jeff Flake would run to knock out McCain or Kyle.

We were discussing the Republican party being in shambles and the need to get the right person to get back to conservative roots. Six votes for him already.

We need several good guys running.

Jeff also voted against the bailout. I would like to see him in the Senate or run for President.

He is well liked in AZ here. I wish he was in my district instead of Shadegg.

[angelatc]

Would you support a Mark Sanford or Jeff Flake in 2012?

Not my ideal choices but guys I think that could actually win.

I like Gary Johnson, Judge Andrew Napolitano and Ed Thompson also.... but do they really have a chance?

A Sanford or a Flake campaign could open up the door for better candidates in the future. (reminding people that small government and fiscal responsibility is what we need)

Sanford. Flake supports amnesty.

[Cowlesy]

<---Sanford fan with his absolute opposition to the Real ID.

What about Schweitzer in Montana? All I know is that he is also anti-real ID.

[me3]

A lot of people missing the point. It is unlikely that a Republican will win the Presidency in 2012. What is important, is having someone who will run late and deep like Ron Paul, carries a 100% honest message, and has some stage presence.

Find people to support locally. Get behind 2010 liberty candidates. You don't need the Presidency if you control the base.

[itshappening]

I can see Johnson beating Obama if he has the right message and if people got behind him. it also depends on the political environment

Hannity is pushing Jindal and Palwenty pretty hard.

Sanford I dont know much about he's a southern governor and if he is attending bilderberg meetings that is a worry, he is a Reagan/Bush who will say everything right but not stick to it when/if he won office

[scandinaviany3]

Would you support a Mark Sanford or Jeff Flake in 2012?

Not my ideal choices but guys I think that could actually win.

I like Gary Johnson, Judge Andrew Napolitano and Ed Thompson also.... but do they really have a chance?

A Sanford or a Flake campaign could open up the door for better candidates in the future. (reminding people that small government and fiscal responsibility is what we need)

yah makes sense sanford for pres and flake for vp...like it

[HOLLYWOOD]

Mark Sanford lost all credibility when he went to the Bilderberg meeting.

There's a reason for this... why is RP on the Foreign Relations committee?

;)

PS: BOTH are very good selections. Flake I prefer

[scandinaviany3]

And on top of that he was recently on capitol hill pleading congress to stop with the bailouts, of corps and states, while others like Gov. Paterson (NY) and Gov. Schwarzenegger (CA) are begging for fed funds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZI7Kwntz1k

Sanford also called back our state congress without pay to cut the budget by $500,000,000. "They caused this mess, it's time for them to clean it up!"
His entire governorship has been riddled with the state congress having to override his vetoes of pork laden bills. He declined Real ID and vetoed DNA sampling at time of arrest. Also supports private school education.

As far as interventionist policy, I don't really know, that could be a major problem.

Yah know i think on the bildberg thing i would give a pass to...i would want to spy and know what the heck they are doing...

But fighting real id and being a wall for spending...like it a lot and will be great selling point!

[scandinaviany3]

And on top of that he was recently on capitol hill pleading congress to stop with the bailouts, of corps and states, while others like Gov. Paterson (NY) and Gov. Schwarzenegger (CA) are begging for fed funds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZI7Kwntz1k

Sanford also called back our state congress without pay to cut the budget by $500,000,000. "They caused this mess, it's time for them to clean it up!"
His entire governorship has been riddled with the state congress having to override his vetoes of pork laden bills. He declined Real ID and vetoed DNA sampling at time of arrest. Also supports private school education.

As far as interventionist policy, I don't really know, that could be a major problem.

Ok i am sold sanford in 2012...

lets put flake as his vp...

Johnson sec of state

ron paul sec of treasury

walt williams sec of commerce

[scandinaviany3]

We should run a governor or x-governor... Sanford would also be a good candidate (although I prefer Gary Johnson). The one huge advantageous of Gary Johnson is he could somewhat self-fund, which is going to be huge as the Republican party will not be rid of their neocon leadership and block the true conservatives.

The candidate should focus on 100% fiscal libertarism (as most likely the war/patriot act will be a distant memory) and we will be in the midst of a recession.

Also we need to think of the voting demographics... right now we have about 10% of the voting population with similar beliefs... but fiscal conservatives/libertarians makeup over 50% of the voting block and when republicans have dominated elections they have won on smaller government and fiscal reforms also many of the fiscal conservatives that our not ron paul conservatives, want a principled candidate and so we need to give them one.... then once we are in office we can break out the social libertarian agenda as well.

Does anyone else despise social conservatives like George Bush? They have destroyed the conservative name and have ruined our country. Damnit everytime they speak I want to break out a bible and knock them across the head with it... btw I am not atheist, I just don't think politics and religion should not mix and it sure as hell shouldn't be the difining issue that drives you.

how much is gary worth?

He would have to put up romney levels of money 100 million to have that be important for president.

Governor campaigns in smaller states are very cheap compared to a presidential election.

I think the key thing here is we need a unity candidate for the party that we lead on supporting and that has no serious negative baggage for the whole party to launch any attack on. We want our candidate to have all the votes in hand long before they get a glove on him.

Sanford seems good across the board on this...probably flakes conversion is good for vp, johnson war on drugs issue would turn off to many republicans, ventura probably to socially liberal...and the 911 thing someone just reminded me of could split the party also...

So Sanford makes political sense across the board..but someone offline should find out about that bilderberg thing on what is the story from him

[NYgs23]

Jeff Flake would really cut down the government spending. I visited his opponent's website and she really went after him...to the point that she almost made me change my mind about Flake

From her (rather shrill and crudely populistic) website:

[JEFF FLAKE] WAS 1 OF ONLY 2 WHO VOTED AGAINST THE Paul D. Wellstone Muscular Dystrophy Community Assistance, Research, and Education Amendments of 2008 WHICH WAS TO FUND RESEARCH INTO THESE DEVASTATING DISEASES

HE WAS 1 OF ONLY 2 PEOPLE WHO VOTED AGAINST THE UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008 - BECAUSE HE DOESN'T CARE IF WILD LANDS BURN, EVEN IF THEY THREATEN HOMES AND PEOPLE

DEMONSTRATED HIS DISDAIN FOR WOMEN BY VOTING AGAINST[....]THE BREAST CANCER PATIENT PROTECTION ACT OF 2007 (1 OF 2)

I wonder who the other one was?

[scandinaviany3]

Sanford. Flake supports amnesty.

Ok no on flakes then for vp...no amnesty..we are going to have to fix a lot of messes and push back on things for 4 years on this area..we dont need another obama

[scandinaviany3]

A lot of people missing the point. It is unlikely that a Republican will win the Presidency in 2012. What is important, is having someone who will run late and deep like Ron Paul, carries a 100% honest message, and has some stage presence.

Find people to support locally. Get behind 2010 liberty candidates. You don't need the Presidency if you control the base.

mccain was a looser from the beginning....

"mccain knew nothing about the economy" was the message reshaped from his own words against him.

63% polling number one issue to 10% everything else...he didnt have a chance

If Sanford was there from what i read...he had lots of executive experience, the good looks, the full resume...it would have been a glorious battle...not sure who would have won..maybe another gore/bush final...

But no way of predicting who will win in 2012.

What will happen in the next 4 years and especially just before the election will guide the choices.

If obama doesnt save the world he will be deflated.

[Sarge]

Flake would get the Western Vote. Get him to change his stance on Amnesty. Otherwise, Flake is on the right track. If not VP, I want Jeff to go after McCain or Kyle. I think Jeff would pick up a ton of votes out of CA. running for VP.

Sanford would get the South vote.

[klamath]

Flake by far has the best speaking ability. Even though sanford is a governor and Flake is representitive I have heard far more of Flake in the main stream media than sanford. I think he has far more national name recognition the Sanford. He is known as the number one budget fighter besides Paul.

Take a look at the presence in this youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0N2ftp4SkQ

[klamath]

Rep John duncan TN 85% RP rating.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrLp03JIQhs

[Alawn]

Sanford can go to hell

[steph3n]

Sanford can go to hell

so can you and everyone else......

[Alawn]

so can you and everyone else......

sorry but he has completely sold out and can never be trusted again. I will not ever vote for him after he went to builderberg.

[Alawn]

Would you support a Mark Sanford or Jeff Flake in 2012?

Not my ideal choices but guys I think that could actually win.

I like Gary Johnson, Judge Andrew Napolitano and Ed Thompson also.... but do they really have a chance?


Why wouldn't Johnson have just as much of a chance? He was a two term Governor.