Why I think John Thune is the GOP's best chance in 2012 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 24, 2024, 04:17:19 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  Why I think John Thune is the GOP's best chance in 2012 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why I think John Thune is the GOP's best chance in 2012  (Read 9714 times)
hcallega
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.10, S: -3.90

« on: July 18, 2010, 02:37:14 PM »

This thread is pretty indicative of how clueless the Republicans are. If they really think nominating George W. Bush III is their "best chance", Obama might as well just go on vacation for Campaign 2012.
George W. Bush's political views are somewhat in line with Republican voters. The ideal candidate you have, which is much more libertarian, has little to no chance. I doubt even a moderate will be able to win. In 2012, Republicans will try as hard as possible to get a conservative candidate nominated.

John Thune is even more out-of-touch with Americans than John McCain was. He doesn't appeal to conservatives, he doesn't appeal to liberals, he doesn't appeal to moderates, he doesn't appeal to libertarians, he doesn't appeal to the tea parties.

In fact, a guy who voted for TARP is liable to incite a third-party tea party challenge. And remember, this won't be like 2008 again: the tea parties have infiltrated the GOP itself in many places.

 The only people who seem to support Thune are those in his strange and unwarranted personality cult.

Right because a libertarian would definitely be a better option for the GOP
lolololololololololololololololoolololololol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Logged
hcallega
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.10, S: -3.90

« Reply #1 on: July 18, 2010, 03:15:38 PM »

I think Thune will come across likable to the American people, and doesn't have the baggage that other candidates have. However, he has a major flaw - South Dakota is not a major air hub. That could prevent him from winning the nomination over Gingrich, who has Atlanta, and Romney, who has Boston.

Can someone please explain this air-hub theory to me?

Apparently it's easier to campaign if there is an air hub near you because you have easier access to flying. Pbrower can explain it better. After all, he came up with it.

It's logistics, and it can explain why it is not advantageous to be from a state that doesn't have a big air hub. Since about 1960 all strong campaigns have been done by air, and even if the candidate has a private jet, not everyone in the campaign can so travel. Such staff get stuck with commercial travel.

The air hubs closest to South Dakota are Minneapolis, Kansas City, and Denver -- and that's where some critical campaign staff will need to go through to get to places like Indianapolis, Cleveland, Richmond, Charlotte, Orlando, and Albuquerque.  At that Obama has an obvious advantage with staff located in greater Chicago, which has O'Hare International Airport. Airline transfers are always tricky, and if campaign staff must get to such a location as Charlottesville, Virginia from Sioux Falls, South Dakota one must make transfers in Minneapolis and Washington.

John Thune had better locate his campaign somewhere other than South Dakota. Like Chicago.

It was incredibly severe with Sarah Palin.

Why do you continue to embarrass yourself with this hypothesis of yours which has long-been debunked? Even ardent Democratic hacks find your "air hub theory" ridiculous.

Why do you continue to embarrass yourself by advocating for radical candidates and ideologies?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 11 queries.