Gen. David Petreaus for President in 2012.

[Zingerific]

Has he made any political statements? Do you know he's a Republican?

He undoubtedly has no love for moveon.org, but you shouldn't assume that he's a conservative just because he's a general. Look at Wes Clark.

Eisenhower, after all, was courted by both political parties before anyone knew what his politics were. Turns out he was a moderate Republican and trounced the conservative Taft at the '52 convention.

 

[cityboy-stl]

Well possibly. I don't know enough about him other than his military experience. I'd like to hear what he says about the economy and domestic policy but he seems to be an honest guy.

He is certainly better than Sarah Palin.

 

[naked gent]

Too short.

 

[Spiff]

A jeez. Not another "he served during wartime so he automatically is qualified to be president" theory.

 

[JB3]

Let's see... a possible Republican candidate? I don't think it will happen.

He juggled the books for the White House when Bush was there. He has prostate cancer. He's too closely aligned with the poisonous Bush / Cheney regime and anyone associated with those two are permanently tainted. We all knew Petraeus was going to report exactly what the White House wants him to and he did.

More than 190,000 weapons have gone missing in Iraq since lap dog Patraeus took command. Where are they?

He doesn't have an ice cube's chance in Hell to be President EVER, and it's not going to happen for the Republicans in a generation if they're still around then as a national political party. They have way too make wackos speaking for them now.

OP, weren't you the one who said Sarah Palin would be the president in 2012 and she will "win big".....

That's only a statement a coward could make. Look, he made decisions that are the reason why Iraq turned around. Decisions that you or I would have been incapable of making. Do I think he'll run for President? Absolutely not. But don't dare besmirch his integrity just because he was commanding general of the armed forces under Bush.

 

[JB3]

^ That, ladies and gentleman is a textbook case of your average Bush-hating, knuckle-dragging, neanderthal liberal. Bravo for proving what a bunch of impotent little cockroaches you are.

 

[JB3]

^ That, ladies and gentleman is a textbook case of your average Obama-hating, knuckle-dragging, neanderthal conservative. Bravo for proving what a bunch of impotent little cockroaches you are.




I'm amazed at how much you hate America, freedom, baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, Mom and the old hound dog!

God Bless America! God bless the American people for for tossing out all those Anti-American Republicans!

On topic: Petreaus has no hope for elected office, ever. Bush made sure of that.

That you Alfie? As you well know Cowboy, the mods and Admin don't take kindly to you saying that another member hates america. One would have thought that you would have learned from the Alfie debacle what not to do.

 

[jackoroe]

The "Hating America" has long been a substitute for having a point used by both sides. It's tired and shopworn, but if it's all you've got, I guess that's what you have to go with.

There's no dispute that Patreus is a hero. He's highly decorated and experienced. He advocated the "surge" in Iraq, which was demonized by the left. It did, however, work as advertised.

All of this doesn't make him a good candidate for anything. Good soldiers do not necessarily make good political leaders. US Grant, being the best example.

 

[CoolBlue71]

I think he would be great for the Republican Party. I think the Republican Party needs someone like him.…

I will not vote for a Republican candidate for the presidency.

Apologists like Droid800 can thank George W. Bush and Dick Cheney (as well as party suckups like the GOP's latest stars!) for this.

I see nothing substantial and worthy from The Party of No Substance.

Lots of the poison needs to be purged from what has turned into a cult.

 

[CoolBlue71]

All of this doesn't make him a good candidate for anything. Good soldiers do not necessarily make good political leaders. US Grant, being the best example.

2008 marked the fifth consecutive presidential election in which the candidate (from one of the two major parties) with the better war record … lost.

 

[DiamondSkin]

All of this doesn't make him a good candidate for anything. Good soldiers do not necessarily make good political leaders. US Grant, being the best example.

Agreed.

The right wing always seems to think if you were in war or you were a soldier, you're just gold for President.

The military is very different from U.S. and international politics.

 

[palemale]

Petreaus is part of the West Point cabal that graduated in the mid 1970s, along with General (Pat Tilman Cover-up) McCrystal, who want to pour massive troops into Afghanistan. Also, I agree that he is too tainted with the Bush/Cheney affiliation. So, no thank you to Petreaus for President.

 

[Wajdan]

A big joke for today. He would be as good as his party. On a related note, I guess Republicans are taking over this forum. Another poster went by saying Bush as "President Bush" although he is out of power for a year. Chance is spreading hatred in the CP&E forum. Where is JUB heading?

 

[palemale]

As for Sarah Palin, I DO wish that she is the candidate in 2012. Most people wanted her at the top of the ticket last time around. That's the only reason the McCain ticket did so well. Keep in mind he only lost by seven points, and that's largely dew to Palin. Most of the country is red, my friend, you only have these little blue dots here and there on the map. They're mostly gay and black communities.

Now for 2012 a PP ticket would be a dream ticket Petreaus/Palin. Either one of those would be a strong candidate. I would support and campaign for either one.
We need to get America back before it's too late.

Maybe you should go back and look at the exit polling data. McCain/Palin lost the following demographic groups: Jews, Catholics, Blacks, Latinos, Asians, all voters under 29, white voters under 29, gays. In the Northeast, Obama won the white vote in almost all of the states. I'm not sure, but he may have won the white vote in all of the West Coast states. May very well have won the white vote in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Iowa. McCain/Palin pretty much only won the old, white protestant vote.

 

[chance1]

Yes, Sarah Palin, would be a good choice too. But the more I look at Petreaus the more I like. But of course you're a left wing cult member, so communicating with someone like that is rather difficult. I do hope Petreaus makes a run for it.

OH Damien .....................

Petraeus is a hero - a great man - pretty sure left wing dems attacked him with ads in the NY Times that read Betray-us or something sophmoric like that

Not sure there is a connection between good military strategist and President

But who's to say he can't

as for Sarah Palin, she is poster child for "too soon"

After a newbie like Pres. Obama and the obvious problems with lack of experience I hardly think the country would elect another "deer in the headlights"

as in newbie

Pres. Obama is clearly in over his head on many matters - and i am glad he has Joe Biden beside him to provide perspective and experience, especially on foreign affairs

Following a newbie with a newbie makes very little sense politically

And while Sarah Palin may be popular with the far right, that's the extent of it

Can you imagine Tina Fey's reaction to Sarah running? OMG - it's like printing money

666

 

[Zingerific]

Another poster went by saying Bush as "President Bush" although he is out of power for a year.

I'm no protocol expert, but I believe that Presidents are entitled to the honorific after they leave office, the same as military and academic honorifics. (Like Colonel Mustard and Professor Plum )

The "Hating America" has long been a substitute for having a point used by both sides. It's tired and shopworn, but if it's all you've got, I guess that's what you have to go with.

I think it's still good for satire, though. "You voted for Adam over Kris? U hate Amurika!"

 

[DiamondSkin]

As for Sarah Palin, I DO wish that she is the candidate in 2012.

Oh, yes, please do support Palin for 2012. And while you're at it have Fred Phelps campaign for her.

Most people wanted her at the top of the ticket last time around.

Who are "most" people?

According to most polls, Sarah Palin was hugely unpopular with the moderates and those who weren't far right. Like you.

That's the only reason the McCain ticket did so well.

Sarah Palin was the reason McCain lost.

Even her own damn campaign blamed her after the election was over.

She was too far right for the country and her inept and glaringly obvious stupidity and lack of basic politics showed she didn't have the gumption to President much less a Vice President.

Keep in mind he only lost by seven points, and that's largely dew to Palin.

Palin was put on the ticket for two reasons:

A) She was a woman. McCain sought to grab the Hilary votes. This was utter stupidity since Palin was an anti-thesis of Hilary in every form and fashion.

B) She represented the far right and Religious Right. McCain wasn't popular with Evangelicals and others of the religious ilk.

Most of the country is red, my friend, you only have these little blue dots here and there on the map.

If most of the country is red...how are Democrats elected?

How was Obama elected.

You think looking at mostly red map and blue dots represents American politics?

You think most of the country is 'red' because, I don't know, Texas is a big state. And if you color it red, it takes up alot of space on the map.....

Logic Fail

Now for 2012 a PP ticket would be a dream ticket Petreaus/Palin. Either one of those would be a strong candidate. I would support and campaign for either one.
We need to get America back before it's too late.

Not going to happen.

Palin may run (she plans to anyway) but she's too far right for the country.

That's why she wasn't elected last time....

 

[DiamondSkin]

As for Sarah Palin, yes, that could be a negative. We do see what happens when we elect the person we want to have the beer with. We do want our leaders to know what they're doing once they do get in office, which is a positive for Petreaus. He did do a good job managing a war that was falling apart in Iraq.

And how would he handle domestic issues?

Healthcare?

Taxes?

Corporate finance?

Environmental issues?

You obviously think that anyone who's a war general is automatically qualified to be President....

And as for the war in Iraq?

Whose fault was that? Why are we even there?

 

[DiamondSkin]

As for Petreaus handling domestic issues, well that is a good question. We do know that he does a good job managing a team, so he just takes a good solid conservative approach to those issues and doesn't wavier or back down, I'm sure he could lead just as well lead on domestic issues the same as he does on foreign policy issues. This man is great. Someone like this, you can't go wrong.

You're an idiot.

So anyone who has a "good solid conservative approach" and "does a good job at managing a team" than he's qualified to be President?

Gee, that sounds like NFL football coach....

 

[jackoroe]

Gentlemen. I would remind everybody that personal attacks are prohibited. You may disagree with another posters point of view. You may not engage in name calling in order to do so, however.