The 4 GOP candidates for the presidency don't even qualify to run for dog-catcher. Someone

[Cal33]

expressed the opinion that the Republican Establishment doesn't like any of them. The
Establishment will let them keep on spouting their nonsense until the last minute, when it will spring a surprise candidate who is more like a human being, and hence, more acceptable to the general public.

I wonder how that could be done, though. Does the Republican Establishment have that much power?

[Drale]

1. I would not trust any of them to even handle my food at McDonalds. /nt

[northoftheborder]

2. Aren't there rules about getting a name on the ballot by certain dates? Signatures? Money?

[sharp_stick]

3. The theory, implausible as it may be

is that the Republicans will bring up a "super duper surprise candidate" at the convention and go for a brokered convention thereby inserting the super duper surprise candidate into the Presidential race and winning the day for freedom, Mom and apple pie.

It's basically a load of crap IMO. There is no way a brokered convention with an eventual winner that wasn't even part of the nomination would get elected. The base would stay home because they'd be rightly pissed off that their votes and input during the nomination were ignored. The rest of the country would laugh the new super duper surprise candidate off as a chickenshit carpet bagger.

On edit: I'm starting to think the Republican Party as a whole is ready to write this campaign off and start looking straight at the Senate for 2012 and the Presidency as a possibility, with a better crop of candidates in 2016.

[VWolf]

7. I've felt that way for a long time already n/t

[Cal33]

8. It does look as though Dems. might have a chance of winning the presidency and both

houses this time -- like in 2008. The Republicans, with their non-stop filibustering and saying
"No!" to everything proposed by Obama, have done themselves in this time, but good! How
could they have been this foolish? They behaved like they had no plain common-sense at all.

The only way for them to "win" this time is through massive vote-fraud -- the most massive
vote-fraud in history.

[immoderate]

4. Doesn't Mitt have dog-creds?

He's no friend of dogs.

--imm

[Cal33]

5. I think Mitt has the reputation of telling his audience whatever he thinks the audience

wants to hear. This includes contradicting his own earlier expressed policies. It isn't exactly a very reassuring trait to have - not even to his fans.

I wouldn't blame dogs for not trusting him, either.

[madrchsod]

6. no...they sold any shred of decency during the 90`s.

there last gasp was george the lesser bush.today`s republicans will live or die by what the teaparty wants.

[corkhead]

9. My theory is that the PTB is deliberately throwing this election

They originally wanted RMoney, but he is cratering and is unelectable, as are the rest of the clown car occupants. The Christo-Fascist-Zombie-Brigade has wanted a presidential candidate since the beginning of time 3000 years ago, so the monied PTB are going to throw them a bone and watch them get destroyed in the general.

With the wackjob wing of the party then effectively neutralized, they will be able to put up an electable corporatist with a much better chance of winning in 2016.

[Cal33]

10. Since the only interest of the Corporatists is to have power over people, and the

best way they can think of attaining that power is by soaking people out of their money
by hook and by crook, is it any wonder that they will attract to their ranks people who are like themselves -- fellow conscienceless crooks and wackjobs? No smart enough person who
knows what's going on would want to join them.

So far they have been very successful in covering up their dirty and foul ways through the
propaganda and lies that they spread in the news media, 90% of which are owned by them.
But slowly and gradually more and more Americans are becoming wise to them.

Covering up lies with more lies is getting to be a job that's becoming more and more
difficult for them to accomplish. I hope it will be too late for them in 2016.

It's critical for Democrats to be especially watchful and ready to fight against the GOP's well-known propensity for vote-fraud activities in November this time. And the GOP knows it, too.

[AlinPA]

11. It seems to me that the "Republican Establishment" are teabaggers, fundamentalist

Christians and evangelicals.

[Cal33]

14. The Teabaggers are new, but the Fundamentalists have been around for a long time.

These latter haven't always been GOP. I don't think real power resides with
these groups, although they may be fighting for it. I think the real power still
lies with the Corporatists at the moment, but who can tell how much their
intra-party fighting will split them?

[Cal33]

17. My views are as follows: I think the Teabaggers and Religious Fundamentalists are

more like tools in the eyes of the Corporatists and NeoCons, who will use them as long as they are useful, and discard them when there is nothing more to be gained from them.

[Craigtee3030]

12. AS a Dog Catcher...and I know I bark for my colleagues...

WE WOULDN'T HAVE A THING TO DO WITH ANY ONE OF THEM!

Caucus Interruptus - Part Douche! Thoughts at 3 A.M. http://thoughtsatthreeam.blogspot.com/?spref=tw

[Cal33]

15. Great for you dog-catchers!! I'm all with you.

[harrose]

13. Consider Who They Ran Last Time...

... a war criminal who admitted on national television that he bombed innocent women and children in Asia. On the Oct 12, 1997 edition of 60 Minutes, John McCain said "I am a war criminal. I bombed innocent women and children."

If the Rethugs can run a war criminal, then they'll run anyone.

[Cal33]

16. This is the first time I've read that McCain had actually admitted to having bombed

innocent women and children in Asia. May be he'll be charged with war crimes
some day -- just like Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rice.... There is no statute of limitations
for crimes involving murder, is there?