Do the Republicans have people who would make compelling candidates in the Presidential election? (Who?)
Yes. In this election John Huntsman would have had a good chance of winning the election by carrying the moderates and picking up a few Democrat voters (although he probably would never have got enough Republican voters). In many ways Rick Perry was a better candidate than Romney (in terms of who could win the election), but he screwed up in the debate and I think the US is a little wary of another Texas Republican.
If not is there a structural problem in the Republican party that means extreme views (or massive personal cash) is required to reach the position to become a candidate and it somehow weeds out the compelling candidates?
Sort of. To win the primary you need to carry either the Christian conservatives or the business wing of the Republican party. In this election the Christian conservatives vote was split many ways which left Romney.
Romney's big problem was that he didn't appeal to Republicans enough for them to vote for him. He was sort of a Republican version of John Kerry - someone they thought moderates could vote for (which was kind of, somewhat true - he wasn't 100% insane anyway), but he didn't really appeal to his own party that much.
I'll agree on Huntsman nationally, but he never stood a chance in the Republican party. He's too close to center (like pre-2008 McCain) and he didn't satisfy the minority, but influential, extreme right.
There are plenty of good Republican, slightly-right leaning legislators - senators, representatives, governors - but the party has been hijacked by the extreme right.
As much as they like to talk about being the party of Reagan, Reagan would be chastised now for working with a Democrat Congress. Reagan was good friends with Tip O'Neil (Speaker of the House, from Massachusetts, liberal) and nowadays that wouldn't sit well with the party.
My father, my father-in-law, and my mother-in-law were all Republicans. After Bush II they all voted Democrat. They'd return if there was some sanity.
Yes. In this election John Huntsman would have had a good chance of winning the election by carrying the moderates and picking up a few Democrat voters (although he probably would never have got enough Republican voters). In many ways Rick Perry was a better candidate than Romney (in terms of who could win the election), but he screwed up in the debate and I think the US is a little wary of another Texas Republican.
If not is there a structural problem in the Republican party that means extreme views (or massive personal cash) is required to reach the position to become a candidate and it somehow weeds out the compelling candidates?
Sort of. To win the primary you need to carry either the Christian conservatives or the business wing of the Republican party. In this election the Christian conservatives vote was split many ways which left Romney.
Romney's big problem was that he didn't appeal to Republicans enough for them to vote for him. He was sort of a Republican version of John Kerry - someone they thought moderates could vote for (which was kind of, somewhat true - he wasn't 100% insane anyway), but he didn't really appeal to his own party that much.