|
"a republican" isn't going to fix much.
For example one of Obama's big errors is over spending by 2 trillion dollars per year. Dubya overspent by a couple hundred billion per year. So "a republican" did the same type of stupid, Obama is just ten times as incompetent by that measure.
In a news conference just a couple of months before running Obama said he had no relevant experience and would be incompetent. Everyone knows Dubya was an example of a republican who was also incompetent.
What we need is competence, someone wth actual relevant experience and knowledge, not "a republican", "a democrat" or "a purple guy".
Powell or Gates have some competence, but aren't running. Of those running, Huntsman or Newt are probably the most competent. Perry is a lot like Clinton when he ran - he had lots of experience running a government as governor, but he's kinda slick or slimy. Very much reminds me of Slick Willy Clinton.
Unfortunately the voters generally vote not on competence or experience, but on the ability to sound good reading a teleprompter, and on race and gender.
Do some of the specific candidates have specific proposals on what they would do to improve things? Sure they do. Some even have a track record of success to prove that their ideas actually work. None are super stars, but you can't do much worse than our last couple of presidents, so other than Palin any of them would probably be an improvement.
For actual plans and proposals, Newt's web site and writings may be the most extensive. It's too bad he never focused on being likeable. By not kissing ass and telling people what they want to hear he probably doomed his chances despite the fact that he's the most knowledgeable candidate.
|