Newt

[AquaMan]

Are you talking about Huntsman?  He is the only one I have respect for and consider as a serious person.  The rest are just trying to sell books.

Yes. Curiously, he is the most conservative of the group (so far) but is hampered by low charisma and a stumbling start. His handlers may have failed him. Anyway, this is a guy who could probably do more for the party than people realize. He worked in the Obama administration, because he is capable, yet stayed true to his beliefs. He is young enough, clean enough and intelligent enough to lead. Too bad his party doesn't seem to admire those qualities.

Does he have a book out?

[we vs us]

Re: Huntsman . . . somewhere in my obsessive political reading, I came across some reportage that seemed to hint that Huntsman "wouldn't rule out" a third party run. Which surprised me but then sounded entirely reasonable.  A lot of people have suggested that a 3rd party would come from the left -- a Hillary-type who'd try to calve off some of Obama's weak support.  I think there's an equally good chance that a 3rd party would come from the right . . . to take advantage of Romney's weakness amongst the GOP but also to present someone not beholden to the GOP orthodoxies to the general public in 2012.

Come to think of it, Hunstman/Christie could be a huge 3rd party ticket. 

[Red Arrow]

  I think there's an equally good chance that a 3rd party would come from the right . . .

Or at least you are hoping so to insure an Obama win.

[Townsend]

Or at least you are hoping so to insure an Obama win.

With the existing field it's already insured.

[AquaMan]

Re: Huntsman . . . somewhere in my obsessive political reading, I came across some reportage that seemed to hint that Huntsman "wouldn't rule out" a third party run. Which surprised me but then sounded entirely reasonable.  A lot of people have suggested that a 3rd party would come from the left -- a Hillary-type who'd try to calve off some of Obama's weak support.  I think there's an equally good chance that a 3rd party would come from the right . . . to take advantage of Romney's weakness amongst the GOP but also to present someone not beholden to the GOP orthodoxies to the general public in 2012.

Come to think of it, Hunstman/Christie could be a huge 3rd party ticket. 

Huntsman/Christie would be huge. Probably the only ticket that would scare Obama. Heck, he might even welcome them!

Red, you're obsessing. Relax.

[Red Arrow]

With the existing field it's already insured.

I'll agree with likely but not insured.  At least not quite yet.

[Red Arrow]

Red, you're obsessing. Relax.

Not allowed to have any Marshall's here at work. 

[Red Arrow]

Yeah, I appreciate how they have "saved" us from a $900 billion debt in 1981, with their policies and misguided financial bungling, turning that into a $14 trillion debt just 30 years later.
I appreciate how they have turned our economy into a 'warfare' based economy, ala "1984".  Major improvement to any of those pesky little peaceful times.
I also appreciate how they have dismantled the fundamental retirement system that had evolved in this country based on defined benefit pensions.  Good times!!

If you want to go back to 1981, remember the house was controlled by the Democrats from 1955 to 1995.  The Senate was controlled by the Democrats from 1955 to 1995 except for 6 years 1981-1987.  

Edit:
Have you forgotten about the wartime economy of the 60s?
Do you remember a word "vesting" with regard to old fashioned retirement plans and the non-portability of those plans from one employer to another?

[we vs us]

Or at least you are hoping so to insure an Obama win.

Geez, chill . . . . I'm not on the partisan soapbox this AM, just trying to divine the shape of what's swirling around.  

I think no matter which side of the aisle you're on, it's obvious that 1) this isn't a standard election, 2) old ways of doing things are shifting and/or crumbling almost daily and 3) with the economy in the shitter, nothing's assured.  

EDIT:  Also, I think the space between how the GOP base votes in the primaries vs. how the independents will vote in the general is large enough to warrant a center-right third party.  But for any third party -- right or left -- the question has to be:  what's the rationale for going outside the standard two party system?  What are the existing two parties not doing that a third could achieve?  Our politics are pretty simple economics, and a third party has to fill a compelling need.  IMO, of course.

[Red Arrow]

Geez, chill . . . . I'm not on the partisan soapbox this AM,

You must have gotten up on the wrong side of the bed this AM to take my comment so much more seriously than it was intended.  I guess I should have put a smiley at the end of my post.

AquaMan must have done the same. 

[AquaMan]

Or.......maybe you're a bit defensive about two obvious non-republicans discussing the plight of your party?

That is understandable. Unavoidable, but understandable.

[RecycleMichael]

This is the republican who will run for President next year as a Libertarian. He will syphon off many, many republican voters if Romney, Newt, or Cain is the republican nominee.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_E._Johnson

He beat an incumbent democrat to become governor of New Mexico. He has a record of cutting government budgets, lowering taxes, and fighting crime. During his two terms in office, he set national records for his use of vetoes, more than the other 49 governors combined. He is also an Ironman athlete and campaigned for marijuana decriminalization.

Even though he has always been a republican, he could be the poster child for both the Libertarian and Tea parties.

He could become the Ross Perot of the new milenium.

[Red Arrow]

Or.......maybe you're a bit defensive about two obvious non-republicans discussing the plight of your party?

Not anymore than when Democrats get defensive about Republicans trashing the Democratic prospects.  You can look in the mirror too.

But.... I'm not overwhelmingly happy with any of the candidates either.  I doubt any of the leading candidates pandering to the TEA Party could win the general election no matter how much Obama's ratings tank or if he continues to fail to fix the economy.  

[AquaMan]

Really. Relax a bit. No need to do tit for tat when we're just discussing the process, not taking sides.

[heironymouspasparagus]

If you want to go back to 1981, remember the house was controlled by the Democrats from 1955 to 1995.  The Senate was controlled by the Democrats from 1955 to 1995 except for 6 years 1981-1987.  

Edit:
Have you forgotten about the wartime economy of the 60s?
Do you remember a word "vesting" with regard to old fashioned retirement plans and the non-portability of those plans from one employer to another?

Let's go back to the beginning, then.  From 1776 it took until 1981 to get all the way up to $900 billion in debt.  So basically, what the RWRE calls "tax and spend" was embraced, enhanced, and implemented in a MUCH bigger way by themselves.  Then 30 years to 14 trillion.  All of it done by "sell out" Congress and Presidents.