Ultimately, Dean lost to John Kerry, a bona fide war hero whose military service was his defining feature.

Who then lost due to swiftboating which promptly destroyed this defining feature.

Cylux: also, Kerry lost due to being another damn boring Democrat.

” Why Mitt Romney could make a comeback as the Republican candidate. ”

He hardly needs to make a comeback when he is currently joint favourite to win the nomination.

His main drawback with the base is that he is a Mormon and not a born again. However, being a flip-flopping type of a guy where what he believes this week might not be what he believes next week that is not an insurmountable problem. Simples, become a born again for the duration of the election. The gun-toting good ol’ boys will not notice another flip-flop.

Romney is preferable to Mr Prayer Rally Perry who will make the world pine for the harmless innocent days of W. President Obama has been utterly useless and would be facing certain defeat if the G.O.P. field did not consist of freaks and cranks.

Why oh why does the U.S. who produce such great scientists, academics and entrepreneurs produce such lamentable politicians in every era?

Perry seems to be a very anti-science candidate supporting both the teaching of creationism and is anti-climate change suggesting scientists are uncertain or have manipulated data etc.

Yet he is in support of HVP vaccines but that may be due to his campaign being partly funded by the vaccines manufacturer.

As a president I think he would be another disaster for both the common working American and for the countries image. I feel if he gets his party nomination and then gets elected the American people will just get what they deserve,

This about says it all:

Rick Perry wrote that Palestinian leaders are attempting to exploit what they perceive as a weakening of relations between Israel and the United States.

Perry, a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, wrote Sept. 16 in The Wall Street Journal that the Obama administration has reinforced this perception and caused the Palestinians to back away from peace negotiations by calling for a settlement construction freeze by Israel as a precondition for talks, as well as by acceding to the Palestinian demand for indirect negotiations through the United States.
http://www.jta.org/news/article/2011/09/18/3089435/rick-perry-cites-obama-errors-visa-vis-israel-and-the-palestinians

Well, Romney is the only candidate who could possibly be president.

I hope they pick one of the weirdos.

Karl Rove, W’s election guru who got him elected governor of Texas and then President, has described some of Perry’s policies as “toxic”:
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/07/news/la-pn-rick-perry-rove-20110907

By reports, Sarah Palin doesn’t approve of Perry either.

With all that, I guess Perry’s prospects of getting the Republican nomination this time are looking slimmer but that might suit him and put him in a stronger position to get the Republican nomination for the 2016 election if Obama is re-elected.

A week or so back some papers and The Economist were featuring articles on Britain’s “new special relationship” with emerging market countries and Hague was on about strengthening UK embassies abroad: “Britain will not ‘outsource’ parts of its foreign policy to the EU external action service, William Hague declared on Thursday as he outlined steps to boost the role of the Foreign Office.” No worries then about the consequences of that for the budget deficit.

7. Bob B

Karl Rove, W’s election guru who got him elected governor of Texas and then President, has described some of Perry’s policies as “toxic”:

Surely he described some of Perry’s comments as toxic – if he did not explain what he meant. Although it is a sad day when telling the truth is called toxic.

By reports, Sarah Palin doesn’t approve of Perry either.

Yeah but he has the Tea Party vote. Palin’s approval won’t help him and may hurt him elsewhere.

With all that, I guess Perry’s prospects of getting the Republican nomination this time are looking slimmer but that might suit him and put him in a stronger position to get the Republican nomination for the 2016 election if Obama is re-elected.

I expect it is hope speaking over experience but Romney does not have a chance. Obamacare is an albatross. Perry will win over a President who makes Carter look good.

@8: “Although it is a sad day when telling the truth is called toxic.”

By media accounts, Perry is not short of American critics, even among Republicans, so I guess there is evidently no consensus in this public debate about what exactly constitutes “the truth”.

“Perry will win over a President who makes Carter look good.”

The global economy has just been through the deepest recession since WW2 and the Obama administration has had to contend also with the House where the Republicans have had a majority since the mid-term elections in 2010 as well as all the silly nonsense from the “birthers”. It is worth recalling that in 2001 W’s administration inherited from the Clinton administration a budget in surplus.

Outsiders look on the increasingly infantile politics of America with sadness. I doubt that it is accidental that periodicals like The Economist – with more than half its circulation in America – are now writing of Britain building a “new special relationship”. Many of us would be very concerned to see a British government standing “shoulder to shoulder” with Perry as US President.

Historically, Conservative governments in Britain have been comfortable in a special relationship with Democrat presidents – as Alan Duncan has reminded us.

9. Bob B

By media accounts, Perry is not short of American critics, even among Republicans, so I guess there is evidently no consensus in this public debate about what exactly constitutes “the truth”.

The media has been carrying water for the democrats and totally in the Obama camp for years. I don’t know it matters what they say. I am sure he has some critics in the Republican party. There has long been tension between the Upper class North East Wets and the majority of Republican supporters – who tend to be poor and southern or western.

As for the truth, Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. That is not really open to debate. It just is. If it was offered privately, the proponent would be sharing a cell with Madoff.

The global economy has just been through the deepest recession since WW2 and the Obama administration has had to contend also with the House where the Republicans have had a majority since the mid-term elections in 2010 as well as all the silly nonsense from the “birthers”. It is worth recalling that in 2001 W’s administration inherited from the Clinton administration a budget in surplus.

A recession that Obama has done absolutely nothing to fix. A recession that Obama is simply deepening. A House where Obama did nothing with the time he had before the Republicans took over. A House that Obama shows no signs of wanting to work with. The birthers are utterly irrelevant. And Bush also inherited 9-11. Which was a game-changer. Not that he wasn’t fiscally incontinent.

Outsiders look on the increasingly infantile politics of America with sadness. I doubt that it is accidental that periodicals like The Economist – with more than half its circulation in America – are now writing of Britain building a “new special relationship”. Many of us would be very concerned to see a British government standing “shoulder to shoulder” with Perry as US President.

The Economist has long since been taken over by Baby Boomer Wets. Like the New Scientist really. A shame. America’s politics are not infantile. They are just incompetent. When Obama goes perhaps we will get some grown ups in the White House – as even Obama insiders admit.

And honesty would mean admitting that on LC most people are concerned about British standing shoulder to shoulder with America no matter who is in the White House.

Historically, Conservative governments in Britain have been comfortable in a special relationship with Democrat presidents – as Alan Duncan has reminded us.

Historically Britain has had a relationship with America. Not a government with another government or a ruling party with another ruling party. I don’t expect that to change no matter who is in the White House.

@10 I believe you’ve misunderstood the word ‘inherit’, Bush didn’t ‘inherit’ 9/11 it happened on his watch. Or have you fallen for the silly nonsense that “no terrorist attacks happened under Bush”.

11. Cylux

I believe you’ve misunderstood the word ‘inherit’, Bush didn’t ‘inherit’ 9/11 it happened on his watch. Or have you fallen for the silly nonsense that “no terrorist attacks happened under Bush”.

Who says no terrorist attacks happened under Bush?

9-11 was the culmination of a long process of preparation. You can’t look at just the attack. Apart from that America had been attacked by Osama beforehand. America had fired back. Bush had little to do with any of that. He simply inherited an on-going argument and struggle.

@12 Rudy Giuliani for one. He outright claimed there had been no domestic terrorist attacks under George W Bush.

Talking about inheriting, guess what Obama DIDN’T inherit from Bush. – That’s right, the dedicated search for Osama Bin Laden. He, to his own surprise, had to set that up himself upon becoming president. Paid off relatively quickly too. One might ask what motivated the previous administration to not bother looking for the man responsible for the 9/11 plot, favouring instead to swerve into Iraq.

13. Cylux

Rudy Giuliani for one. He outright claimed there had been no domestic terrorist attacks under George W Bush.

Interesting.

14. Cylux

Talking about inheriting, guess what Obama DIDN’T inherit from Bush. – That’s right, the dedicated search for Osama Bin Laden. He, to his own surprise, had to set that up himself upon becoming president.

That is a half truth that amounts to a whole lie. Goerge Bush had such a unit until 2005. He decided that it was giving too much publicity to OBL and merged it into the rest of the WoT.

Paid off relatively quickly too. One might ask what motivated the previous administration to not bother looking for the man responsible for the 9/11 plot, favouring instead to swerve into Iraq.

No it did not. This is not rocket science, it is a matter of public record. There is simply no way you can make these nonsense claims. The search for OBL was long. It started under Bush. Obama inherited it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Osama_bin_Laden

By 2002, interrogators had heard uncorroborated claims about an al-Qaeda courier with the nom de guerre Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti (sometimes referred to as Sheikh Abu Ahmed from Kuwait).[14] In 2003, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged operational chief of al-Qaeda, revealed under interrogation that he was acquainted with al-Kuwaiti but that he was not active in al-Qaeda.[16]

A 2010 wiretap of another suspect picked up a conversation with al-Kuwaiti. CIA paramilitary operatives located al-Kuwaiti in August 2010 and followed him back to bin Laden’s Abbottabad compound.[14]