There really are no good GOP candidates
14:15 on 6 January 2012
There really is no good choice for a GOP Presidential candidate to run against Obama. If there was one, I probably would vote for him or her. In fact, the GOP resembles the Year 2000 Democratic Party, which also had no real leaders. Currently, the GOP looks like a group of clowns.
Mitt Romney is a slick guy who gets income from Bains, a company where he was a top dog and he receives a retirement package. In addition, as so many people in business, Romney stepped on a lot of people to rise up to the Executive level. When he lost the election against Ted Kennedy, he still made his fortune elsewhere and there may have been a conflict of interest there, as well as when he left his position as Governor of Massachusetts.
Newt Gingrich shows a history of conflict in politics. Even former President George H.W. Bush wouldn't support the former House Speaker and that says a lot. Gingrich's style of provocative politics is not what the American people need in Washington. Gingrich also presents a trust issue, which is present in several areas of his life and experiences.
Rick Santorum tries too hard to present his blue collar image, as though to say, "Hey, I'm just one of the guys..." type of political ploy. In truth, after Santorum lost his reelection bid for Senator in Pennsylvania he became a business consultant and made a small fortune, which may have had conflict of interest overtones.
Ron Paul has many issues as a GOP candidate. First of all, he is not a Republican but a true bonafied Libertarian, which has always hindered him from getting the GOP support he needs to make a difference. As if that were not enough, his stance on issues pushes away many American groupings, e.g., he is a pro-life constituent / anti-abortionist which may lose many women voters. His "leave government completely out of all issues" may be over the top for many voters, especially when there is a trust issue with Wall Street and the corporate sector. Currently, he is having some problems with the resurfacing of his so-called "racist newsletters" that will not go over big with a variety of minority populations. His isolationist foreign policy may be somewhat antiquated for voters.
Jon Huntsman represents an enigma from Utah, who professes to be a conservative, but many of his views appear moderate to liberal. He is not a viable candidate for the conservative GOP. Would a candidate suddenly spring forth from a consistent 1 to 2 percent of the votes to dominate as the most viable candidate? It is very doubtful, if not impossible.
As for Rick Perry.... what can I say that I have not said before in many of my writings... In my own opinion, Perry may be the worst Governor the state of Texas ever had. Perry has single-handedly hurt Texans and their families on many levels while ensuring that his interest special interest contributors get whatever they need instead of working for the community good. Instead of recognizing that everyone benefits from a stronger Texas economy, most Texans are having a hard time paying their daily living costs. Perry and his legislators have ensured that less oversight and deregulation encourage higher costs to consumers. Homeowners pay the some of the highest property taxes in the nation; they also pay the 2nd highest home insurance costs in the U.S. (after Florida). Now that Perry has made a fool of himself on the national level, it is only a matter of time before Texans vote for some other gubernatorial candidate, but that will have to be in 2015 when Perry's term expires.
There are no significant, honest and capable leader candidates in the GOP and most certainly, there is no one in the GOP at this time who could offer a real challenge to President Barack Obama in November. Hopefully, American voters are sick of all the GOP hype and will give Obama another chance to put in a better effort. He remains the best candidate even though he has failed in his leadership role and did not follow through on his many promises to the American people.