Should Obama run for the Republican nomination?

by Warren - Novus Ordo Seclorum Posted 2011/06/21 19:26:17

Related Topics: Obama, Republican Party, GOP, Democrat, Barack Obama, Republican, Party, Republicans, Race, Healthy, President Barack Obama, Presidential, Candidates, Candidate, Voters, Huntsman

Read More

7 votes
Read all 10 opinions
View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Sure, why not? He is slightly to the right of Nixon and Eisenhower.	2 votes	29%
	Hell no! I've been told to think he is a Socialist.	4 votes	57%
	Maybe, but then I might actually vote Republican.	1 vote	14%

With the possible exception of Jon Huntsman, the Republican presidential field is weak on candidates who could appeal to centrist swing voters, including moderate Republicans. But there is one 2012 prospect who has a proven track record of pursuing policies that owe a great deal to the moderate Republican tradition and who could potentially shake up the race for the GOP presidential nomination: President Barack Obama.

If Obama chose to run for reelection not as a Democrat but as a moderate Republican, he could bring about two healthy transformations in the American political system. The moderate wing of the Republican Party could be restored. And the Democratic presidential nomination might be opened up to politicians from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

Add a comment above

☠Marz555☠ 2011/06/21 19:36:57

Sure, why not? He is slightly to the right of Nixon and Eisenhower.

+3
Not sure, He swings right a little too much lately.
>> See Replies

More polls by Warren - Novus Ordo Seclorum

NYYankees 2013/01/28 23:23:19

Maybe, but then I might actually vote Republican.

He would be my favorite republican ever. And definitely the most liberal.

reply
ProudProgressive 2011/06/21 21:14:47

Sure, why not? He is slightly to the right of Nixon and Eisenhower.

+2
Since there's no chance that he won't get the Democratic nomination, and since the existing Republican field demonstrates on a daily basis that even Diebold won't be able to help them in 2012, it might be interesting to see the President get the nomination of both major parties. That would even give the Republicans cover, since they could all claim they're only voting for the "white half".

reply
SneakyPete 2011/06/21 19:58:28

Hell no! I've been told to think he is a Socialist.

A s an "Ultra-Liberal" he fails to meet the standards of an conservative. He had better remain on the "Ultra-Left" side and pay off those who will vote for him throiugh his "Nanny Stae" programs.

reply
Warren ... to SneakyPete 2011/06/21 19:59:39

Were Eisenhower and Nixon ultra left liberals?

reply
ProudPr... to SneakyPete 2011/06/21 21:15:30

+1
How do you define "ultra liberal"?

reply
SneakyPete to ProudPr... 2011/06/22 16:27:41

An administration that "Tax and Spends", creates a "Nanny State" where people are lead to believe that the government is the main source of funds through expanded welfare programs, medicare medical support, and environmental programs which create a dependency, for example, on foreign oil supplers rather then drilling here ...now. these are just some examples. These and other programs just make some peole just sit back and take money fro both state and federal gency rather then going out and work. This is why, in my opinion, we have 45%+ of americans who do not pay their fair share of taxes. In fact they do not pay any.....

reply
ProudPr... to SneakyPete 2011/06/22 18:18:13

+1
Very few people in this country rely on welfare as their main source of funds. Things like unemployment insurance payments, social security, medicare, etc. are things that we PAY for our entire working lives. People who have never had a job cannot collect unemployment, for instance. To call such things "handouts" is a mischaracterization.

As for our dependence on foreign oil, drilling is clearly not the answer. If we drilled in every potential well site we had in this country we would still not be producing more than 10% of our overall oil demand. The real problem isn't a lack of crude, but a lack of refineries, and in any event, further drilling only delays the inevitable. Thirty years ago Jimmy Carter, in one of the few things he actually got right, said that we needed to focus our efforts in developing sustainable renewable energy sources. When Reagan took office that was forgotten, and the result is that now we are even MORE dependent on oil.

And it is also untrue that 45% of Americans do not pay any taxes. They may not pay INCOME taxes, but they pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, cigarette taxes, gas taxes, airfare taxes, bridge and tunnel tolls (taxes), etc., and part of the problem with that is that they actually wind up paying a much higher percentage of their disposa...

Very few people in this country rely on welfare as their main source of funds. Things like unemployment insurance payments, social security, medicare, etc. are things that we PAY for our entire working lives. People who have never had a job cannot collect unemployment, for instance. To call such things "handouts" is a mischaracterization.

As for our dependence on foreign oil, drilling is clearly not the answer. If we drilled in every potential well site we had in this country we would still not be producing more than 10% of our overall oil demand. The real problem isn't a lack of crude, but a lack of refineries, and in any event, further drilling only delays the inevitable. Thirty years ago Jimmy Carter, in one of the few things he actually got right, said that we needed to focus our efforts in developing sustainable renewable energy sources. When Reagan took office that was forgotten, and the result is that now we are even MORE dependent on oil.

And it is also untrue that 45% of Americans do not pay any taxes. They may not pay INCOME taxes, but they pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, cigarette taxes, gas taxes, airfare taxes, bridge and tunnel tolls (taxes), etc., and part of the problem with that is that they actually wind up paying a much higher percentage of their disposable income on such things. For Bill Gates, paying taxes on each gallon of gas he uses means nothing to him. But to a guy making minimum wage, those same gas taxes could be a quarter of their entire income.
(more)

reply
Warren ... to SneakyPete 2011/06/27 19:07:41 (edited)

Every administration since the founding of this country taxed and spent. That's how government operates. I'm surprised you didn't realize this.

reply
wombat 2011/06/21 19:46:55 (edited)

Hell no! I've been told to think he is a Socialist.

+1
But it would raise the brain capacity of the GOP by 100%

reply
☠Marz555☠ 2011/06/21 19:36:57

Sure, why not? He is slightly to the right of Nixon and Eisenhower.

+3
Not sure, He swings right a little too much lately.

reply