Can we have a do over?

I can't stand it.

Every major Republican nominee sucks.

Let me repeat.

Every major Republican nominee sucks.

Giuliani is a gun-grabbing, cross-dressing, abortion-supporting, gay rights supporting, adulterer. He was good after 9/11 though.

Romney is a flip-flopping, see-sawing (thanks Pupster!), planned-parenthood supporting, Reagan-distancing (see his debate against Ted Kennedy) plastic phony. He probably would have lost re-election to a 2nd term in Massachusetts, but he did resue the Winter (who f'n cares?) Olympics.

Huckabee is a flim-flamming, snake oil selling, Bible-exploiting, Identity-politicing, Huey Long wanna-be. Those are the nice things I can say about him.

Thompson is an un-inspiring, occasionally conscious, Campaign Finance Supporting, Master of Nothing but the 30 second YouTube spot. His wife seems nice, though. And when he wakes up, he issues pretty decent policy papers between naps.

McCain is a media whoring, gang of 14-ing, illegal immigrant coddling, global warming believing, Republican-mavericking, Rino. He was right on the surge though.

Paul is a John Birching, conspiracy theorizing, gold bugging, Nazi money enabling, truther. I have nothing nice to say about Paul.

Hunter seems like a good, Conservative, solid public servant, and a decent man. Which probably explains why he's at about 2%. There seems to be an inverse corrolary between your decency and your poll standing in modern politics.

So, I'm not going to endorse any of these losers. Period.

An endorsement should mean something. It should mean you stand behind an individual. That you share their values, their beliefs, their vision. Otherwise it's empty of meaning.

It's a sell out, in other words. An endorsement out of "pragmatism" is hardly an endorsement at all. It's the "fair weather friend" of endorsements. Here one day, and gone the next.

Does that mean I won't hold my nose and vote for one of these clowns against the Dems?

Nah, I probably will.

But I won't want to (ED note: I meant to say "except for possibly Hunter, who I like" but failed to originally). And that's sad.

What I do want (and maybe Santa will bring it to me for Christmas) is a do over.

I want a brokered convention. Where someone not currently under consideration comes out of the pack and replaces all these clowns.

Sen. Jim DeMint maybe? Sen. Jon Kyl? Gov. Haley Barbour?

I could get excited about those guys. Give any of 'em the federal matching funds after the convention and turn them loose against an overexposed Hillary or Obama in a 3 month race and I'd like my chances.

So, go ahead Iowa. Let Huckabee win your caucus.

New Hampshire? Let the Dems and "Independents" crossover to tip the scales for McCain.

South Carolina? I dare you to go for Fred!

Michigan? You owe it to Mitt. His dad was Governor.

Florida? Giuliani still leads. Hizzoner could use some delegates too.

Disperse the delegates far and wide! Let's tie this convention in knots!

What say you, folks? If you could have a do over who would you draft for the spots on the ticket?

Let's play fantasy election! It's like fantasy football, only for morons.

UPDATE: Over in the Haloscan comments, I get slammed for having the "courage to not make a decision."

Actually, were I to endorse somebody, it would be Hunter. His campaign seems to be running on nothing more than fumes, though, and I doubt he'll even be around when it comes time for my primary ballot to be cast. So I did make a decision, although one that will likely be moot when my turn comes.

With him gone, can I honestly say that I look forward to voting for any of these guys? No. I think the remaining candidates all suck. And I probably won't give any of them a primary vote. Call it my right as a voter to decide "none of the above." I probably will vote for whoever emerges as the eventual nominee, as I agree that the alternatives offered by that other party are still much worse.

Unless it's McCain. You have your "non-starters" and I have mine.

posted by Jack M. at 06:13 PM

| Access Comments