None of the above.  Each of them do not represent the wants and needs of the american people as a whole.  Not one of them.  And each of them have been tied to any number of scandals over the years.  Or shot down regulation of wall street or banks in general.  Sarah Palin was under investigation for accepting gifts for votes when she was Alaskan governor ($30,000 dollar deck on her home for mineral rights inside alaskan wilderness preserves), so there is no way in HELL i'd vote for her for any nomination.

No

It was easy sex

[]

"Well McCain was supposed to be our 'middle' while the extremely hard left guy got elected."

America doesn't know any hard left. Defenatly not in one of the two major parties.

Obama knows nothing about political strategy. He has made countless mistakes on matters concerning his power and public image, and only seems to be ever accommodating to the elite. I think he is a tragic story of a naive, arm chair scholar who sought change and got pwned by the realities of power. He is now effectively, if not unwillingly, a lapdog of the elite. I don't think he really is a socialist, but economic freedom is dwindling day by day. Between a conniving politician concerned with appeasing his short-sighted big-business masters, and a naive idealist in the same position as Obama, the results are the same. If you are not strong and uncompromising enough to control the elite, you will end up serving them. America needs a strong, ruthless, and Machiavellian ruler. Someone not afraid to confront and present demands to the elite.

Sadly, the soils of our Republic are fast becoming a wasteland from the drought of private interests and big government, and the only way for freedom and prosperity to grow again is for the blood of tyrants to fertilize it.

Sarah has all ethics charges proved to be crap. The issue was anyone could file (I believe daffy duck filed as well, true story) and that the Government had to treat any allegations seriously and do full investigations, and not the Governors office, not the Government, but the person who was the Governor had to pay their own legal fees.

Additionally it is a situation where filers with no truth and with an intent to destroy the personal wealth of the Governor would face no punishment for doing so.

It's like telling me I can file claim after claim on Obama, the Justice Department must grant a hearing on each, and the President has to pay from his personal money for my lawyer, his lawyer and all money the government spent on the case period. Which is why Sarah retired.

[]

[]

I don't call "corruption" "private interests."

to vilify her, sure, but she's not a real Presidential contender.  Being President is about managing factions.  She doesn't have one and isn't building one.  Yes she has strong support from 'the base" but she is wasting it acting as Ambassador of the RINOs to Conservatives.  She is defending very weak candidates against real conservatives.

[]

If the Democrat candidate is not Obama in 2012, the Democrats have it.

The Republican Party is dead set on running AGAINST Obama.  They want no part of a commitment to a positive agenda.  They are the anti-Obama party.  If you hate Obama, then vote Republican!  don't ask what that means.

But as a few Congressional races showed this past week, if the Democrat says "yeah I don't like the socialist agenda but I'm not one of those Republican yahoos" then they can beat a Republican.

If the Democrats put up a presidential candidate against Obama then he can kick GOP butt.  Just like McCain was totally set to run against Hillary Clinton but never figured how to beat a Democrat who agreed with McCain that "Business as usual" was lousy. 

And even if it is Obama and the GOP wins in 2012 in 2016 NotObama will win it for the Democrats.
If the Democrats can find enough lefties who like Obama are willing to be one-term presidents for the sake of the Revolution, the Democrats can lock it in for a generation.

Newt has no chance. He changed to a libtard.