Candidate gives intense speech to be county treasurer in Ohio.
UPDATE: a surprisingly normal sounding Phil Davison appeared in a Web Redemption segment on Comedy Centrals Tosh.0
Candidate gives intense speech to be county treasurer in Ohio.
UPDATE: a surprisingly normal sounding Phil Davison appeared in a Web Redemption segment on Comedy Centrals Tosh.0
His first campaign commercial:
Appearance on Jimmy Kimmel Live:
“After reading the Constitution, it says ‘we have rights to bear arms against our government,'” Marceaux explained. “If [people] didn’t have [a gun] they couldn’t represent themselves to protect themselves against the government, so, I’ll probably fine them $10 dollars if they don’t.”
“You would fine them?” Kimmel asked.
“I would have these little investigators out in the street with no power and say ‘hey get ’em to show me your gun’ if they don’t have one, I’m gonna fine them 10 bucks,” Marceaux explained.Marceaux later illuminated his stance on capital punishment, saying that if troubled starlet Lindsay Lohan were to murder someone, “he’d have no choice” but to kill her.
Pressed by Kimmel to explain his website’s proposal to grant immunity from the law to people who voted for him, Marceaux embarked on a long-winded, bumbling explanation based on “the Supreme Court,” “the Civil Rights Act of 1856” and a “Freedmen Bureau Agent.”
Story continues below“I’m not sure I get that,” Kimmel admitted.
After a bit more floundering, Kimmel finally asked Marceaux if he’d ever consider running for governor in California if his campaign in Tennessee ended unsuccessfully.“I’ll be a governor any state as long as I can fix it,” Marceaux answered.
writes at FrumForum.com that a quick glance at the 2012 GOP contenders reveals that the overwhelming majority of these candidates would have no chance of defeating an incumbent president, much less the Obama campaign machine, in a general election.
.
Newt Gingrich: Gingrich is too old, too polarizing, and too Washington to have a fighting chance at winning the presidency.
Sarah Palin: 55% of Americans view her unfavorably. That’s pretty much game over, but even if it wasn’t, the fact that the number holds among independents (55% of them view her unfavorably and 40% of that group said they view her in a “strongly unfavorable” light) also would be a knockout. 41% of all polled view her as strongly unfavorable. In short, that means she can write off 40% of the electorate before the race even starts. Her chances of beating Barack Obama are slim.
Mitt Romney: Deemed the “frontrunner” by many, Romney would get destroyed in a general election. Flip-flop. Flip-flop. Flip-flop. The label destroyed John Kerry, and Romney’s propensity to change his mind makes Kerry’s switches look tame to the point of irrelevance. And did I mention that Obamacare looks like Romneycare on steroids? No chance.
Mike Huckabee: Christians heart Huckabee. Independents do not. Next.
Gary Johnson: Who is Gary Johnson?
Rick Santorum: Staunch social conservatives need not apply for the presidency. Santorum tried to mandate the teaching of intelligent design nationwide in 2001. Not a single Latino in America is going to vote for this guy. Neither are independents, moderate Democrats or a lot of moderate Republicans. If he is lucky and Obama does a lot of things very, very wrong between now and 2012, Santorum might… just might lose 65-35 to Obama.
Ron Paul: The man is a fringe lunatic. The answer is no.
Mike Pence: Who is Mike Pence?
Tim Pawlenty: The only candidate of the batch that I am not 100% confident would get absolutely mauled by Barack Obama in 2012. A smart, competent, seemingly likeable candidate. Relatively moderate. But he is from Minnesota and not really popular there anymore. In March, a poll of 500 Minnesotans pegged his approval at 42%. If his own voters don’t like him, it will be hard for him to beat an incumbent in a general election for the presidency.
And if you think this is meaningless because the Republican savior just hasn’t shown themselves yet, think again…
The GOP’s star is not coming. Obama became a superstar at the Democratic Convention in 2004 and by 2006 (two years before the election….), every single person that followed politics knew who Barack Obama was. We have neither a Hillary Clinton (a powerhouse presumed nominee) or a rising star who captured the nation’s attention. Paul Ryan is a darling amongst conservatives but about ten mainstream Americans have ever heard of him. Jindal was supposed to be the rising star, but he blew his “national unveiling” with an awkward response to Obama’s State of the Union.
But FrumForum commenter MaxTwain puts this analysis into context with a historical record of GOP candidates:
Let’s review the GOP fields from the past few elections. I think after you see where we’ve been and what we had running in the past you will realize just how much better the 2012 field can be.
1996: Bob Dole, Pat Buchanan, Steve Forbes, Phil Gramm, Richard Lugar, Robert Dornan, Pete Wilson, Arlen Specter, Alan Keyes
2000: George W. Bush, John McCain, Steve Forbes, Orrin Hatch, Gary Bauer, Alan Keyes, Lamar Alexander, Dan Quayle, Elizabeth Dole
2008: John McCain, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter, Ton Tancredo, Sam Brownback, Tommy Thompson, Jim Gilmore
2012: Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, John Thune, Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, Mike Pence, George Pataki, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Herman Cain, Ron Paul, Gary Johnson
If you look at our primaries in the recent past you begin to realize our field is deeper then in the past. In fact, without George W. Bush in 2000, you could argue 2012 will have the best potential field of candidates. Sure, no one is the next Reagan, and no one will have the media drooling quite like Obama did, but we have a solid list of credible candidates, far more credible then Dole or McCain were when they got the nomination.
I think the problem you are having is that for decades the GOP nomination has been a orderly process, and now, just as in 2008, we are starting to have primary campaigns that are more like Democrats, where the next in line might not be the next in line, and where someone new could emerge from the pack and upset the established order just as Carter and Obama did.
Former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge is seriously considering a run for the Senate for the GOP nomination against Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), according to Roll Call:
Former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge is considering running for the Republican Senate nomination in his home state, according to a senior Republican aide with knowledge of the situation.
National and Keystone State Republicans have been publicly and privately urging Ridge to consider a Senate bid since Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) announced earlier this week that he was switching parties and would run for re-election as a Democrat in 2010.
Specter said he switched parties because he could not win a primary against conservative former Rep. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), who is popular with the party’s base but whom many national Republicans believe cannot win the general election — especially against a 29-year incumbent who is viewed favorably and gets high marks from Democrats. Ridge’s moderate politics and national profile would make him a more viable candidate in the general election.
A former six-term House Member, Ridge is still popular in Pennsylvania, where he served as governor from 1995 to 2001. He left office to be President George W. Bush’s first secretary of Homeland Security but retired from the Cabinet in 2005 and joined the private sector.
######
Romney on strengthening the economy:
Fred Thompson lays the smackdown on Gov Huckabee:
Virgins one-liner:
Brit Hume and Mitt Romney smack Ron Paul over Iran:
Romney Says No Special Pathway:
Romney on Bringing CHANGE to Washington:
The winners & losers according to the Wa Post:
WINNERS
Mitt Romney: Many viewers were likely getting their first look at the former Massachusetts Governor and he clearly looked up to the job. Romney was engaging, optimistic and telegenic. He generally gave answers that reflected a familiarity with the big issues and used humor effectively (“Are you kidding me?” he said in response to the question of whether Bill Clinton should be back in the White House). He also managed to provide good if not great answers on his position changes on abortion over the years, and managed to subtly address the “Mormon question” by emphasizing that he is a person of faith. Some people we talked to after the debate thought Romney came across as too slick and too canned. The only time we felt that way was during his over-the-top attempt to make clear to voters he wanted Osama Bin-Laden dead.
Mike Huckabee: Plainspoken and genuine, Huckabee distinguished himself from the vast group not named McCain, Giuliani or Romney. Aside from McCain, Huckabee was the most critical about the current administration. Huckabee said he would have fired former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld before the November 2006 elections, adding:.” I certainly wouldn’t have said that we are not going to do it and then, right after the election, done so.” He also offered one of the most memorable lines of the night saying that Bush was listening too much “to a lot of folks who were civilians in suits and silk ties and not listening enough to the generals with mud and blood on their boots and medals on their chest.” The question for Huckabee is: “What’s next?” He has long been seen as a candidate with real potential in the race but hasn’t built the kind of financial and grassroots organizations to compete with the big boys. Can he now?
Questions from Viewers: Lots of people we talked to last night and this morning were upset about the format of the debate, arguing that it rewarded a slick soundbite over a substantive policy point. Maybe. But we really enjoyed the fact that the debate also featured a number of questions from “real” people. Sure a few of the questions were somewhat bizarre (Rep. Tom Tancredo got asked about organ donation). But we thought the question asking former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani to explain the difference between Sunni and Shia was revealing. The viewer question portion of the debate wasn’t perfect, but it provided a nice change of pace.
Fred Thompson: The longer Thompson can avoid these forums but keep the excitement around his candidacy high, the better. It’s very difficult to come off as the savior of the Republican party when you are on stage with 10 other guys all claiming to be able to do the same thing. By staying out of the fray for now, Thompson avoids any potential pitfalls that come with taking rapid-fire questions on national television for ninety minutes. Given where he stands in most polls, he doesn’t need to subject himself to the melee just yet.
LOSERS
Rudy Giuliani: There was just too much talk about abortion and social issues for Giuliani to come out a winner. To his credit, he didn’t back down from his pro-abortion rights stance but his response that it would be “ok” if Roe v. Wade was overturned left us wanting more. We have long wondered when and if Republican activists, who are overwhelmingly “pro life,” would begin to look beyond Giuliani’s credentials as one of the heroes of the Sept. 11 and closely examine his stance on social issues. Last night could well have signaled the start of that deeper examination, which could spell trouble for Giuliani. Giuliani’s best moments came when he was trumpeting his accomplishments as mayor of New York City and when he pledged to stay on “offense” against the terrorists, but there were just not enough of them to neutralize all of the abortion talk.
Tommy Thompson: In our preview of last night’s debate we noted that Thompson had a story to tell but wondered whether he would get to tell it. He didn’t. And it didn’t help that Thompson never seemed to get his footing in the debate. He was expansive when he should have been concise and vice versa. Need evidence? Check out this response where he tried to package the Tommy Thompson story into 60 seconds: “I’m the reliable conservative. I vetoed 1,900 things. I reduced taxes by $16.5 billion. I’m from Wisconsin, a blue state, and I won four consecutive times. I still have a very high popularity appeal.” All true but said in such a rush that anyone not listening closely would have missed it.
Osama Bin-Laden: Romney didn’t seem to leave much room for tougher talk when he pledged that Bin-Laden “is going to pay, and he will die.” But McCain one-upped the former Governor with this gem: “We will track him down. We will capture him. We will bring him to justice, and I will follow him to the gates of hell.”