Who would you rather Obama faced in the General Election?

[Onlooker]

Poll question: Who would you rather Obama faced in the General Election?

Regardless of how small the soul of the Republican Party is, the fact is that both Romney and the Tea Party candidate (this week, Gingrich) are both fighting over that morsel.

The way I see it, Mitt Romney primarily represents old style Republicans -- businesspeople, old money, those of German or English descent, mainstream Protestants, people who basically do not want to rock the boat or change the status quo anymore than its already been changed, and people who have a vague distrust of people who are not like them. These are the Eisenhower and Bush I Republicans. These are the Republicans of the 1950s.

Gingrich primarily represents the Tea Party type of Republican -- those who fear Sharia law in the US, who do not trust everyone from Muslims to Mormons, who think that Obama isn't really a citizen, who label traditional democratic policies as Communist or Marxist, who distrust government, who are ready to bomb Iran, and who are genuinely afraid of people who are not like them (gays, transgendered, Muslims, blacks, Hispanics, etc.). These are the Republicans who Reagan shaped.

So the battle for the soul of the Republican Party is really just a choice between
(A) Convention
(B) Paranoia

In my view, I would much rather Romney was the nominee, even though he'd be the harder candidate for Obama to beat, because Americans have demonstrated in the past their ability to elect dangerous people like Reagan and Bush II. If Romney got elected, we'd muddle through not too much worse than we already are. If Gingrich got elected, we'd be in major wars both at home and abroad.

[Mz Pip]

1. Romney

I don't trust the mood of the electorate this time around. I can see the much of the left sitting out the election because they are disappointed with Obama.

I would like to be able to say for certainty that there is no way Newt could ever win, but the vast majority of the voters out there pay little attention to politics and I can see those people voting for Newt because he's different. Newt will get the fundies out in a way Romney can't. They aren't a huge percentage of the electorate but in a close election they would make a difference.

[Logical]

3. I 100% disagree. I want the least possible person to beat Obama, not the most because he...

might be less insane.

[Mz Pip]

9. Asd I said in my post

I not convinced that Newt can't win.

[AtomicKitten]

35. Nobody (and certainly not wishful thinking) is going to beat Pres Obama.

[joshcryer]

31. That's appalling.

But it does give me pause on my insta-vote for Newt here.

Newt will get the fundies out like no ones business, and the defeatist left will sit home and cry when they lose the country to the right wing (and say all along it was by design, etc, etc).

[ellisonz]

41. Romney is a cold fish.

;-)

[GoCubsGo]

45. I think Newt would send the defeatist left to the polls at lightening speed.

They might not be happy with President Obama, but the KNOW the damage Newt would do to this country. I can't see any sane, intelligent person staying home and letting this lunatic win, no matter how unhappy they are with President Obama. It would be cutting off the nose to spite the face.

[Frustratedlady]

2. If Newt wins the primary, I will be disappointed, as I will not be able to follow...

the debates or election results. Newt is so repulsive to me (and anyone I've talked to) that I can't stand to look at him.

He's like Rush...a pig. One with a huge head to match his ego.

[high density]

4. Unless a serious third candidate comes about to throw a wrench in there,

I say Newt. I agree Romney is obviously less bad when compared with Newt, but I am hoping that Newt has a much less chance of being elected against Obama.

In Maine we elected a completely incompetent teabagger governor last year because the 61% of the sane vote was split between an independent and the Democrat.

[wiggs]

5. Newt represents what's worst about our politics and public discourse, willing

to polarize, smear, lie, and fear-monger. He is a smarter Sean Hannity.

And while he and Romney are both one-percenters, insider power brokers, we don't need more of Newt's kind of candidate and ugliness. I hope for Romney.

[fujiyama]

24. Well said

Probably one of the most unlikable and despicable individuals to have held public office over the last fifty years. He has no integrity whatsoever.

It's telling that he's doing so well among republicans.

Romney strikes me as a very smarmy douchebag, a hopelessly ambitious but unprincipled man with only one core belief - that Mitt Romney should be president. But despite everything, I think the country could survive him as president. The problem really is he doesn't strike the sort of fear into liberals and moderates that almost everyone else in the GOP field does. I shudder to think of a Gingrich presidency, and it would make me seriously question my own interest in staying in this country (something I question all the time as it is).

[Pirate Smile]

6. I'm not as sure anymore but I'd still say Newt. I do think Romney is looking weaker and more

vulnerable in a General Election though.

[The Green Manalishi]

7. "If Romney got elected, we'd muddle through not too much worse than we already are"

Outside of his supreme court picks, if any, I agree. I think both Mitt and President Obama are consensus driven moderates at heart, as are much of the American people.

OWS gets a few things right, a few Tea Party candidates get a few things right (even a broken clock is right twice a day, as the old saying goes; at least here in California there *is* a staggering amount of government waste and cronyism, and I say that as a lifelong tree hugger and unionist), but the vast majority want both right and left to shut up and get on with the business of governing: providing the greatest good for the greatest number at the lowest cost.

[TheWraith]

11. No. Look at the Republican debates, and tell me this:

What would the Tea Party controlled House pass that Romney would threaten to veto? Romney's already tossed out his former "principles" to try and get the nomination, why would he stand strong on opposing anything else they did?

[MilesColtrane]

8. Gingrich

I'm strictly going by the numbers (which, of course, can change), but I think they bear out that most voters remember Gingrich as the fat, whiny, douchebag that he is.

Obama v. Romney - Obama +.09

Obama v. Gingrich - Obama +5.7

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html

[rhombus]

10. Romney

Gingrich, despite his many flaws, is very adept at articulating right-wing ideas. He's also a very good political organizer with deep roots in gop land. Gingrich would fire up the gop base and the media would go easy on his personal baggage. Romney would depress the conservative base, plus evangelicals would have a hard time supporting a Mormon.

Gingrich would give Obama a very tough time.

[customerserviceguy]

33. You've stated it well

Clearly, there are large numbers of Republicons who can get over the multiple marriages, especially given the fact that he's stuck with this one for awhile. They got over the idea that divorce made someone ineligible for the presidency with Reagan. Once you create one exception, you've established the principle that no "rule" is hard and fast, if you really want to find reason to ignore it.

[great white snark]

12. "If Romney got elected, we'd muddle through not too much worse than we already are."

You can't be serious

[DCBob]

22. Yeah, that line got me too.

Amazing how some on our side can be so clueless about the dangers of a Republican in the WH. So quickly they have forgetten the 8 years of the Bush/Cheney disaster.

[bigwillq]

13. Cain

:rofl:

[MineralMan]

14. If you truly think that we'd be "not much different that we are now"

with Romney, you're not paying attention. If Romney won, I can guarantee that the Republicans would also have majorities in both houses of Congress. The damage that would be done in the ensuing two years at least would be devastating.

What we need to do is work our asses off to elect a Democratic majority in Congress, both houses. If we do that, Obama will win anyhow. If we do that, at the very least we'll make some progress, if not good progress. The alternative is simply unthinkable.

I won't participate in this poll, but I will unrec it.

[DCBob]

23. +1

[Rosa Luxemburg]

15. Newt because is is so anti-people, he uses them to mop the floor

[Arkansas Granny]

16. Mitt. I expect Obama to win this election, though it will be closer than last time.

However, if he were to lose, I would rather have Romney over Gingrich.

[Douglas Carpenter]

17. Romney would have about a 50% chance of winning in November. Gingrich - less than 10% at best

Yes, Romney will have some trouble exciting the base. But actually the GOP base will have some reservations about Gingrich as well. Either way, conservatives will have to chose between a Mormon whose commitment to conservatism is questionable versus an ethically compromised - twice divorced scoundrel and philanderer. Even the likes of George Will and Peggy Noonan openly express disgust with Gingrich's ethical standards. Most independent voters - even Democrat leaning independents simply do not fine Romney very scary - most people don't. Although over all conservatives will be more fired up over Gingrich than Romney - so will the a good deal of the Democratic base. The threat of a Romney presidency will simply not ignite the Democratic base anywhere near as much as the threat of a Gingrich presidency.

[Zorra]

18. Newt. Just for the great comedy when he debates Prez

Obama.

Can you imagine? It would set the GOP back for years.
:rofl:

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[craigmatic]

20. this is a hard question because both have so many flaws. I think that Romney

has more with the chronic flip flopping, mormanism, and generally coming off as a phoney. I don't think he could unite the repigs and some southerners wouldn't vote for him. Gingrich is just a soulless asshole. He'll unite the repigs but he has so many flaws that it's hard to see where he could win outside the south and traditional republican states especially if the economy improves. Right now I'm leaning towards Gingrich just because he's less electable than romney although I think republicans would close ranks around Gingrich quicker than Romey and support him wholeheartedly.

[Politicalboi]

21. Newty is too scary

The Repukes like crazy, and Newt is it. Romney is a flip flopper, and he's a Mormon and a moran.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

25. Who would have the least support from independents

That I think will make the difference. My guess is Newt.

[ZombieHorde]

26. Mitt. Lessor of evils. nt

[Skittles]

27. agreed

[LaydeeBug]

28. I think it's going to be Huntsman. nt

[grantcart]

29. Neither have a chance. This is filler until the convention.

Last year Mitt went to SLC where he addressed the convention to support the renomination of Sen. Bennett.

He was booed off the stage.

Its not just that he hasn't had any increase in support in 4 years,

and its not that he cannot out perform McCain or Cain or Gingrich,

its that what support he has is paper thin, there is no emotional base for him.

He will lose in Iowa and his victory in NH will be written off as meaningless because its where he now lives.

With the Republicans now having proportional primaries rather than winner take all he can't outlast them either.

If he doesn't come in with 51% everyone will just hang around until the convention where they can make speeches and sell more books.

One of the Republican governors will be drafted and the Republicans will get to reboot their campaign from the begining.

They have no other choice.

[customerserviceguy]

30. Had to go with Mitt

He's a tough sell to the fundies, I seriously think they will vote for a relgious whackjob third party candidate before they will give the LDS missionaries one more talking point in peoples' doorways.

Gingrich is very, very slick, when he stops talking about himself as some sort of god, he's actually been able to persusade large numbers of brainless people. I seriously fear he could win if he keeps it all under control enough to get the nomination. I do think his creepy wife is his Achilles heel, the only question is when she will show herself as a total whackjob.

If Gingrich is lucky, it won't be until after he's inaugurated. I sure hope he's unlucky, and soon.

[Little Star]

32. Mitt. Newt is way to fundie nuts and that is way too scary. n/t

[applegrove]

34. If Newt gets the nomination he will base his campaign on scapegoating the poor and such. He will

teach much more hate. I don't think America needs more haters. I don't want to see that hate practised for another year. But it will be. And then if Newt runs a presidential campaign it will all be magnified. Another small % of Americans will become a**holes, out for only themselves and wanting to punish those less fortunate. I don't think Newt would win. I just don't want to see him stir the pot in the way he already has. I hope he quickly implodes.

[joshcryer]

43. I'd rather have a nasty campaign and big majorities in both houses than a nice campaign...

...and no majorities in both houses!

Newt would get out the liberal vote!

[dionysus]

36. " If Romney got elected, we'd muddle through not too much worse than we already are." your slip is

showing.

[AtomicKitten]

39. it is precious

[dionysus]

44. what the.. LOL...

:rofl:

[TBF]

37. Mitt - he's not as crazy as Gingrich

and the fundie Baptists won't vote for him.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ellisonz]

40. We want Mittens! We want Mittens! We want Mittens!

:)

[quaker bill]

42. Newt

because the only way to flush the tea party out of the system is for one of them to run and lose badly.