New Stanek poll: From the current crop of Republican presidential candidates, who would you vote for?
I have a new poll question up:
From the current crop of Republican presidential candidates, which one would you vote for?
Vote on the lower right side of the home page.
Regarding the last poll, a majority of you, 54.5%, are pro-death penalty, at least for Osama bin Laden…
Click on the map to enlarge to find your own brightly colored flag, although only the most recent 500 votes will show…
As always, make comments to either the previous or current poll here, not on the Vizu website.
Jun.18, 2011 11:10 am |
Polls |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I could consider Romney.
Romney? What about Santorum? ;)
None of them are even remotely qualified or competent, with at least half of them being sideshow oddities at best, but of that current crowd, Romney would probably be the least embarrassing to have as president.
I think you mean “current crap” rather than crop. These guys are all major duds.
Y’all over here at the Stanek blog must be really excited for another 4 years of President Obama, right?
Of the current crop, I’d be willing to consider Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain and Ron Paul. I’d be willing to vote for Gary Johnson only if he won the GOP nomination.
The presidency is half figurehead, half chief executive. The majority of voters gambled on someone with absolutely no executive experience, who has accomplished something almost unique: instead of steering us out of the recession most presidents inherit, he has mired us even deeper in the mud of that “ditch” he likes to talk about.
Cain is the anti-Obama as far as real-world experience, but unfortunately lacks the political expertise to be conversant on foreign policy.
Santorum needs a vice-presidency to lift him into real contention.
Romney and Pawlentey would be the typical choices. and I would be satisfied with either one.
But Michele Bachmann has emerged as an intriguing possibility. Members of congress have been even rarer winners than generals. But so were Senators until recently.
She has business and political experience. But more importantly she has the right philosophy to guide the nation out of these economic doldrums. She has the “pizazz” that so many disengaged voters require. And she will not be at war with business.
I like both Herman Cain and Michele Bachman. It will be closer to the primary and caucus before I decide which one of them to vote for.
Newt Gingrich is not going to be in the running.
The only one who really grosses me out is Ron Paul. If he gets the nomination (God, please forbid it), I will vote for a write-in candidate (probably Sarah Palin).
Ron Paul. All the way. It’ll be the first year that I’m allowed to legally vote, and if he makes it through the primaries he will have my vote all the way.
A bit disturbing, Jill, that you used the term “assassination” in your previous poll. An assassination is, in my understanding, by definition something done outside of any recognized claim to legitimacy. In other words, an assassination is a form of murder.
So, as I see things, if it was truly an assassination, it was a murder. Period. But, this is a complex thing to try to get a handle on regarding the circumstances of bin Laden’s death. If he was not personally armed at the time, this does not necessarily and automatically mean it was an assassination. It depends on what category he was in in relationship to the United States.
In a time of war, targeting the commanding general of our enemy in his secret bunker, even with no weapon on his person at the time, would be justified in the situation of a just war. Could we bomb the hideout of an enemy general knowing he was inside? It seems to me, yes. In such a scenario the bomb would not have been unleashed because the general had been pointing his loaded pistol at some American. It would be the legitimate elimination of an enemy commander in a time of war.
However, could we send in special forces to a hotel room to kill a drug smuggler in the night? No. That would be assassination.
Whether bin Laden’s death was a justified response in wartime against an enemy commander, or an act of assassination of a private individual, depends on what category the leader of a deadly terrorist group is in. Was he, as a terrorist group leader (a group that has declared war on the United States and has in fact killed U.S. citizens and is actively trying to continue to do the same), in the same category as a commander of an enemy army during an active war? Or, is he in the category of a dangerous private citizen with money and guns and influence among radical Muslims?
If he can be truly considered a commander of an opposing enemy force engaged in an ongoing war against the U.S., I don’t think it would matter whether he had a gun in his hands. It would not be assassination (just as it wouldn’t be for the enemy army general in his bunker). But, if he was not truly in this category, but only a dangerous criminal, then it would be assassination if the SEALs had not been genuinely acting in what they thought was necessary self defense. A drug dealer apprehended by police who points his gun at them is done no injustice if the police shoot him in response. But, this same drug dealer, if cooperative and not with any weapons, cooperates, has a right not to be killed and to due process in the justice system.
Was bin Laden’s status truly analogous in a significant way to a commanding officer of an enemy military force? I don’t know. But this is the most relevant question. Whether or not he had a gun in his hands only becomes relevant, I think, if he was not in this category.
For the primary, I would consider Pawlenty, Bachman, or Santorum. Perhaps Perry if he gets in the race. Of this group, the pundits seem to think only Pawlenty is truly electable (and perhaps Perry if he gets in). I don’t know if this is true, but if so, I would have no problem supporting him from what I have seen. However, just in terms of personal presence and speaking style, I find Bachman very impressive. But I don’t know if she is truly electable.
Michele Bachmann impresses me. She’s pro-life, is open-minded enough to allow Intelligent Design taught in schools, and is conservative to the core. Rick Santorum is my next pick. Unfortunately Mitt Romney’s views on global warming, RomneyCare, and his reluctance to sign the SBA pro-life pledge raises just enough doubt in my mind to not put him in the top three or four of the current crop of potential candidates.
I have absolutely zero respect for Bachmann. From living in her state for years and following her, she’s either:
– Clinically crazy
– A liar
– a fear monger
I believe she’s the worst type of politician out there – one who makes up their own version of the truth, and yells about it to scare people. My only hope is that she hangs in the race long enough so that she has to give up her house seat
“Michele Bachmann impresses me. She’s pro-life, is open-minded enough to allow Intelligent Design taught in schools, and is conservative to the core.”
What about alchemy? Or phrenology? Or spontaneous generation? Is she open-minded enough to allow those things to be taught in schools?
Ron Paul. He’s for small government. He’s been consistently conservative and consistently pro-life.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXZpuIXEzWk&feature=share
I couldn’t in good conscience vote for a sixth-generation Mormon. Would you want someone running our country who is that deep in a cult? According to Wikepedia, “During his years in business, Romney tithed by giving millions of dollars to the LDS Church.” Romney “was at the forefront of a movement to bring near-universal health insurance coverage to the state” of Massachusetts while governor. “On April 12, 2006, Romney signed the resulting Massachusetts health reform law, which requires nearly all Massachusetts residents to buy health insurance coverage or face escalating tax penalties such as the loss of their personal income tax exemption.” I think I’ll pass on Mr. Romney.
Not that I’d ever vote republican, but out of this lot, if I had to it would be Romney. Bachmann is just crazy. But I hope she wins the republican nomination. Palin won’t run, that’d mean a whole lot more actual work for a whole lot less money.
“is open-minded enough to allow Intelligent Design taught in schools” – in religious studies or maybe in philosophy. But never in science. It just isn’t.
“Would you want someone running our country who is that deep in a cult?” – ROFLMBO
Only a person of integrity earns my vote for any elective office, including dog catcher.
With the exceptions of Myth Romney and Newt Gingrich, the remainder upon this list will do. Unfortunately, I’m beginning to question Congressman Michelle Bachmann’s ability to make good decisions with her choice of campaign manager.
GW – OK you have my interest – pardon my ignorance, but who is MB’s campaign manager and why does it concern you?
Louis Farrakhan says, “We voted for our brother Barack, a beautiful human being with a sweet heart, and now he’s an assassin. They turned him into them.”
====================================================================
Louis, baby,
The ‘mother ship’ is hailing you on all known frequencies.
‘She’ wants want to beam you up for some one on one face time.
Your ‘extra-terrestialness’ is showing.
The script has changed and you must have missed the latest revision.