Poll
Question:
From the ten declared, I narrowed down 5 that stand a chance, pick your candidate
Option 1: Ted Cruz
votes: 17
Option 2: Rick Perry
votes: 1
Option 3: Marco Rubio
votes: 3
Option 4: Carly Fiorina
votes: 2
Option 5: Rand Paul
votes: 0
Honestly, does anyone really think Grahamasty has a prayer? :biggrin:
Republicans
Declared
Ben Carson
Ted Cruz
Carly Fiorina
Lindsey Graham
Mike Huckabee
George Pataki
Rand Paul
Rick Perry
Marco Rubio
Rick Santorum
Is there a reason no one is voting?
I only had 5 spaces to work with, and to be quite honest, these are the only real viable candidates out of a total of ten.
I am happy with Ted Cruz right now. It's very early in the game yet. The MSM is not yet in full panic attack.
Quote from: Solar on June 13, 2015, 11:42:03 AM
Is there a reason no one is voting?
I only had 5 spaces to work with, and to be quite honest, these are the only real viable candidates out of a total of ten.
If I was restricted to that list I would still be stuck between 2 candidates. Cruz and Perry, but in all practicality we all know Walker is going to run and I would make it a top 3. :popcorn:
Is it who we want to win or who we think has the best chance?
Still too early in the process.
Quote from: Solar on June 13, 2015, 11:42:03 AM
Is there a reason no one is voting?
I only had 5 spaces to work with, and to be quite honest, these are the only real viable candidates out of a total of ten.
Just saw it. It is early, but come on, this is the big one.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on June 13, 2015, 01:08:12 PM
Is it who we want to win or who we think has the best chance?
Yes.
Quote from: quiller on June 13, 2015, 01:37:11 PM
Still too early in the process.
No it's not. Look at every election in the last 30 years. Because we stayed undecided, the GOP forced their guy down our throats.
I say it's time to get behind at least two, maybe three. But it's time to start eliminating the riffraff.
Quote from: redbeard on June 13, 2015, 12:41:40 PM
If I was restricted to that list I would still be stuck between 2 candidates. Cruz and Perry, but in all practicality we all know Walker is going to run and I would make it a top 3. :popcorn:
I won't be voting for Paul. Haven't decided which one of the remaining four, as I keep going back and forth. I've already changed my mine a few times. Right now I'm trending Carly, but she wasn't on my radar last week, and may not be next week.
Quote from: Solar on June 13, 2015, 11:42:03 AM
Is there a reason no one is voting?
I only had 5 spaces to work with, and to be quite honest, these are the only real viable candidates out of a total of ten.
I would have said Cruz until that event in the Congress today and still haven't ruled out Walker. Just still too early I guess but if we wait until all of them look "honest", we'll be waiting a while longer. Grahamnesty may as well stay home. :ohmy:
Quote from: Solar on June 13, 2015, 02:13:49 PM
No it's not. Look at every election in the last 30 years. Because we stayed undecided, the GOP forced their guy down our throats.
I say it's time to get behind at least two, maybe three. But it's time to start eliminating the riffraff.
I could make a good case for each of the 3 I listed! Each are good conservatives and each have their own distinct advantage!
Quote from: redbeard on June 13, 2015, 02:29:43 PM
I could make a good case for each of the 3 I listed! Each are good conservatives and each have their own distinct advantage!
Even with Ted's inexplicable stance on this bill, he is still the most consistently conservative in the pack.
Perry might get Texas but I honestly think he does not have the pizzazz and charisma needed to win. IMHO, he comes across phony! Sorry to all of you Perry lovers. He is just not strong in a number of critical aspects. He is definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer! : /
Walker has more charisma and likability than Perry, but Wisconsin is NOT one of the "must have" States. Obviously Texas, Florida and Ohio are critical States. But residence does not necessarily eliminate a candidate. It just makes them more desirable. I doubt that Carly could carry California! Kentucky and New Jersey are inconsequential in the overall scheme of things.
Quote from: kroz on June 13, 2015, 03:46:12 PM
Even with Ted's inexplicable stance on this bill, he is still the most consistently conservative in the pack.
Perry might get Texas but I honestly think he does not have the pizzazz and charisma needed to win. IMHO, he comes across phony! Sorry to all of you Perry lovers. He is just not strong in a number of critical aspects. He is definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer! : /
Walker has more charisma and likability than Perry, but Wisconsin is NOT one of the "must have" States. Obviously Texas, Florida and Ohio are critical States. But residence does not necessarily eliminate a candidate. It just makes them more desirable. I doubt that Carly could carry California! Kentucky and New Jersey are inconsequential in the overall scheme of things.
The key to the general election is Florida and Ohio! As much as I like Cruz He could have real problems in Florida where the key to the state is the Independents in the I-4 Corridor. Florida has gone to Obama but split the tickets voting in many local conservatives in the same election cycle. Perry is a lot better Known down here then Ted Cruz and is well respected for his stances on boarder security that is well known!
Walker is a strong candidate throughout the Midwest and may have an edge winning Ohio. He could also bring the 10 electoral votes from his blue state that hasn't gone republican in the last 25 years. Listening to his speech's in my opinion he has a better then even shot at connecting with the Florida electorate.
All 3 of these guys are great and by far are better they any in the rest of the pack! Perry, though not a great speaker, has been a powerful leader as governor of Texas and has a serious record to run on!
Quote from: redbeard on June 13, 2015, 05:49:41 PM
The key to the general election is Florida and Ohio! As much as I like Cruz He could have real problems in Florida where the key to the state is the Independents in the I-4 Corridor. Florida has gone to Obama but split the tickets voting in many local conservatives in the same election cycle. Perry is a lot better Known down here then Ted Cruz and is well respected for his stances on boarder security that is well known!
Walker is a strong candidate throughout the Midwest and may have an edge winning Ohio. He could also bring the 10 electoral votes from his blue state that hasn't gone republican in the last 25 years. Listening to his speech's in my opinion he has a better then even shot at connecting with the Florida electorate.
All 3 of these guys are great and by far are better they any in the rest of the pack! Perry, though not a great speaker, has been a powerful leader as governor of Texas and has a serious record to run on!
I appreciate your perspective on the Florida electorate. I am surprised that Cruz's cuban ethnicity would not draw a lot of Florida's cuban community.
As a Texan I have repeatedly posted of my dislike for Perry's Governorship. I believe he has done what would put feathers in his own political cap first and foremost. And he buckled to the insurance companies and allowed them to increase our homeowner's insurance premiums 250-300%. I suppose they rewarded him handsomely with campaign contributions! : /
And he has spent a huge amount of money to incentivize companies to move to Texas. Toyota is moving their headquarters to my little neighborhood as well as several other large corporations. Obama has committed our Texas tax dollars to pay for their move and all of their management employees' move! They are also receiving a long list of perks at our expense! aarrgghh!!! :angry:
Quote from: kroz on June 13, 2015, 06:29:57 PM
I appreciate your perspective on the Florida electorate. I am surprised that Cruz's cuban ethnicity would not draw a lot of Florida's cuban community.
As a Texan I have repeatedly posted of my dislike for Perry's Governorship. I believe he has done what would put feathers in his own political cap first and foremost. And he buckled to the insurance companies and allowed them to increase our homeowner's insurance premiums 250-300%. I suppose they rewarded him handsomely with campaign contributions! : /
And he has spent a huge amount of money to incentivize companies to move to Texas. Toyota is moving their headquarters to my little neighborhood as well as several other large corporations. Obama has committed our Texas tax dollars to pay for their move and all of their management employees' move! They are also receiving a long list of perks at our expense! aarrgghh!!! :angry:
The Cubans in south Florida tend to vote republican and almost even out the lib vote from south Florida. Northern Florida trends to the republican side. Central Florida bounces back and forth as the Independents in that area can't seem to make up their mind what they are!! If Hillary picks off Florida or Ohio whoever we have running against her will have a near imposable job getting the required electoral votes. There will be other states in play but These are the real battle ground states. Between the 2 Ohio may be the hardest!
Quote from: redbeard on June 13, 2015, 07:15:59 PM
The Cubans in south Florida tend to vote republican and almost even out the lib vote from south Florida. Northern Florida trends to the republican side. Central Florida bounces back and forth as the Independents in that area can't seem to make up their mind what they are!! If Hillary picks off Florida or Ohio whoever we have running against her will have a near imposable job getting the required electoral votes. There will be other states in play but These are the real battle ground states. Between the 2 Ohio may be the hardest!
I think Cruz's style will be more influential in Ohio than some of the other candidates. Bush won Ohio because we finally convinced the Amish to vote!!! They are very conservative and would love Cruz!
It's Cruz, as the mirrored reflection in the pool de-undulates into focus...
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia-cache-ak0.pinimg.com%2F736x%2F8e%2F52%2F13%2F8e5213cc739e02bbc94f279c01e6071b.jpg&hash=09524a1b9bb4b9da0ebe27913a807444e3677284)
Well I'm not one to poop at parties (aside from that one time we don't talk about)
So...
Cruz is my pick. However Rubio and Walker have the best chance. Walker has great name recognition and a tremendous record that includes defeating unions. I see Rubio as a weird candidate. He's considered a solid Conservative yet has serious RINO issues and could easily get all the GOP money and effort. Plus he might get the Latino vote though I am skeptical about that.
Cruz like all conservatives has an uphill battle however he's a real policy wonk (think Paul Ryan) and knows the constitution. He also does not not make dumb mistakes (so far). He stays on message (rare for GOP candidates) So the hill isn't as steep as it is in most elections.
Now I will probably ruffle some feathers but I really like Carly Fiorina. She has run an incredibly disciplined campaign. Every GOP candidate can learn from what she is doing. President? Probably not. VP? An excellent choice politically.
And discuss!
Quote from: taxed on June 13, 2015, 09:23:50 PM
Party pooper...
Truly? I get one LEGAL vote.
ONE.
I hate wasting such a precious resource.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on June 13, 2015, 10:13:55 PM
VP? An excellent choice politically.
And discuss!
I wouldn't want to see her in a traditionally-reduced VP-role as ribboncutter and ceremonial 'explainer'. If its Fiorina/Cruz or Cruz/Fiorina, I'd like to see a Cheney
esque relevancy-component at work.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on June 13, 2015, 10:13:55 PM
Well I'm not one to poop at parties (aside from that one time we don't talk about)
So...
Cruz is my pick. However Rubio and Walker have the best chance. Walker has great name recognition and a tremendous record that includes defeating unions. I see Rubio as a weird candidate. He's considered a solid Conservative yet has serious RINO issues and could easily get all the GOP money and effort. Plus he might get the Latino vote though I am skeptical about that.
Cruz like all conservatives has an uphill battle however he's a real policy wonk (think Paul Ryan) and knows the constitution. He also does not not make dumb mistakes (so far). He stays on message (rare for GOP candidates) So the hill isn't as steep as it is in most elections.
Now I will probably ruffle some feathers but I really like Carly Fiorina. She has run an incredibly disciplined campaign. Every GOP candidate can learn from what she is doing. President? Probably not. VP? An excellent choice politically.
And discuss!
You're just too smart, Boo!!!
Carly has definitely evolved a lot during this campaign and is getting her wings. I think she is studying a LOT and is really solid on the issues. When she appeared recently on the Bret Baier program and was on his panel, she even wowed George Will...... which isn't easy to do. She was quick and pre-programmed to fire off complex answers to all of the questions. I can attest to the fact that she was NOT that good a year ago when I first met her and heard her speak. I was actually in a small group with her..... and she was poised and did a good job.... but nothing like she is now! She has definitely done her homework better than most of the candidates. :thumbsup:
Now, as to Rubio...... his biggest draw is his personal appearance (young and handsome) and charisma. Those are dangerous combinations if you are wrong on the issues!! :scared:
I agree with your assessment of Walker. His biggest asset is his victory over the unions. That is huge with many conservatives. But he is prone to big gaffes..... always a potential killer........ and I honestly see him as one of the dimmest minds in the race.... :sad:
I went with Perry, over Cruz as (unless the Governor is a total and complete RINO) I'll always go with some one with executive experience over a Senator or Representative. There are two completely different skill sets involved here.
I think Perry/Fiorina would be a hell of a ticket!
And, when they win, a presidency strong enough to rival Renaldous Mangus!
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 14, 2015, 06:43:50 AM
I went with Perry, over Cruz as (unless the Governor is a total and complete RINO) I'll always go with some one with executive experience over a Senator or Representative. There are two completely different skill sets involved here.
I think Perry/Fiorina would be a hell of a ticket!
And, when they win, a presidency strong enough to rival Renaldous Mangus!
I guess we need to start A Perry thread as well and shine some light on that polished turd of a former Dim as well.
Rick Perry supported Hillary Clinton's Health Care Bill in 1993http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/09/when-rick-perry-praised-hillarycare/244456/
Perry hired the GOP establishment lobbyist Henry Barbour.http://mississippiconservativedaily.com/2015/03/02/rick-perry-hires-another-barbour-for-presidential-campaign/
Or look up this one, his support for illegal immigration by providing in-state tuition to children of illegal aliens.
His refusal to call the illegals, instead refers to them as undocumented, or the real issue that will kill his RINO ass in the debates, the a fence along the border, the one he refuses to support.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2011/09/04/perry-repeats-opposition-to-us-mexico-border-fence/
Quote from: Solar on June 14, 2015, 07:04:14 AM
I guess we need to start A Perry thread as well and shine some light on that polished turd of a former Dim as well.
Rick Perry supported Hillary Clinton's Health Care Bill in 1993
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/09/when-rick-perry-praised-hillarycare/244456/
Perry hired the GOP establishment lobbyist Henry Barbour.
http://mississippiconservativedaily.com/2015/03/02/rick-perry-hires-another-barbour-for-presidential-campaign/
Or look up this one, his support for illegal immigration by providing in-state tuition to children of illegal aliens.
His refusal to call the illegals, instead refers to them as undocumented, or the real issue that will kill his RINO ass in the debates, the a fence along the border, the one he refuses to support.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2011/09/04/perry-repeats-opposition-to-us-mexico-border-fence/
I based my pick on the choices available.
Only two have executive experience (something that might come in handy as the Chief Executive Officer of the U.S.) Only one of those two has serious political experience.
I like both Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, but would rather see either of them as Senate Majority leader than as POTUS. Even if either Paul or Cruz did get elected President, you can be damned sure that their replacements in the Senate would not be half the Senator either one of them are - and we have far too many weak-kneed Republicans in the Senate as it is!
The same pretty much goes for Rubio.
So that leaves (from this list) Perry and Fiorina - the two I picked. I put Perry in the top slot because he has more political experience than Fiorina.
If you want a better pick from me, give me a better list to chose from!
If we win the presidency, but water down (or possibly lose) the Senate, we are no better off than we are now - perhaps worse!
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 14, 2015, 09:24:42 AM
I based my pick on the choices available.
Only two have executive experience (something that might come in handy as the Chief Executive Officer of the U.S.) Only one of those two has serious political experience.
I like both Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, but would rather see either of them as Senate Majority leader than as POTUS. Even if either Paul or Cruz did get elected President, you can be damned sure that their replacements in the Senate would not be half the Senator either one of them are - and we have far too many weak-kneed Republicans in the Senate as it is!
The same pretty much goes for Rubio.
So that leaves (from this list) Perry and Fiorina - the two I picked. I put Perry in the top slot because he has more political experience than Fiorina.
If you want a better pick from me, give me a better list to chose from!
If we win the presidency, but water down (or possibly lose) the Senate, we are no better off than we are now - perhaps worse!
Yeah, Dole, Bush, McCon, and finally Miten, and look where that got us.
Point is, there is absolutely no reason to settle for a RINO when we can elect a real Conservative.
Quote from: Solar on June 14, 2015, 10:16:34 AM
Yeah, Dole, Bush, McCon, and finally Miten, and look where that got us.
Point is, there is absolutely no reason to settle for a RINO when we can elect a real Conservative.
Well, put a governor (or former governor) who passes the TEA "sniff" test and I'll vote for him/her!
In case you hadn't noticed we only have a 4 seat majority in the Senate. If we lose one (or God forbid two) of those seats to a Senate who becomes President, Vice President, or both, our "majority" becomes razor thin.
And don't think they will be replaced by Tea Party types! The RINO establishment will all but see that whoever needs replacing will be replaced by an Establishment type political hack!
If we put a Senator in the White House, we stand a good chance of winning the battle but losing the war!
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 14, 2015, 10:48:05 AM
Well, put a governor (or former governor) who passes the TEA "sniff" test and I'll vote for him/her!
In case you hadn't noticed we only have a 4 seat majority in the Senate. If we lose one (or God forbid two) of those seats to a Senate who becomes President, Vice President, or both, our "majority" becomes razor thin.
And don't think they will be replaced by Tea Party types! The RINO establishment will all but see that whoever needs replacing will be replaced by an Establishment type political hack!
If we put a Senator in the White House, we stand a good chance of winning the battle but losing the war!
So in your mind, 2010 and 2014 were just flukes and that was the end of TEA success in kicking out the scum?
None of the above, I like Walker.
Darth, why is "executive experience" the end all for you?
Jimmy Carter had executive experience!!
ANY person of integrity and honor can surround themselves with experts as advisors. There are far more important criteria for a candidate than "executive experience"! :ohmy:
First and foremost, we need a keen mind with the ability to articulate issues and convince audiences of his/her ability to make wise comprehensive decisions that keep our Country safe and prosper our economy. It also requires someone with the ability and willingness to shine light into dark places where the democrats are concerned. We must have a fighter.
There are many effective executives in this Country, but that does not mean they deserve our vote for President. Executive experience is highly overrated.... IMHO!
Quote from: kroz on June 14, 2015, 11:44:48 AM
Darth, why is "executive experience" the end all for you?
Jimmy Carter had executive experience!!
ANY person of integrity and honor can surround themselves with experts as advisors. There are far more important criteria for a candidate than "executive experience"! :ohmy:
First and foremost, we need a keen mind with the ability to articulate issues and convince audiences of his/her ability to make wise comprehensive decisions that keep our Country safe and prosper our economy. It also requires someone with the ability and willingness to shine light into dark places where the democrats are concerned. We must have a fighter.
There are many effective executives in this Country, but that does not mean they deserve our vote for President. Executive experience is highly overrated.... IMHO!
Here is a list of Senators who became president...
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.senate.gov%2Fartandhistory%2Fhistory%2Fcommon%2Fbriefing%2Fsenators_became_president.htm&hash=310d856d79b8dfc250eb04c85f5417cd34a260f1)
With few exceptions this is also a list of the most ineffective, forgettable and/or corrupt presidents ever to occupy the White House. The ones on this list who run contrary to that almost universally had some king of executive/leadership experience outside of the Senate - usually in the military.
Even JFK is not an exception! The defining moment of his presidency was him getting shot dead in Dallas TX! Most historians I've read have concluded that, if he had not been assassinated, Kennedy would have gone down in history as a rather lackluster president.
Carter had executive experience, but he was (IS) a Left Wing nut job! I'll readily concede that we don't need (another) Left Wing nut job even
with executive experience.
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 14, 2015, 12:08:21 PM
Here is a list of Senators who became president...
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.senate.gov%2Fartandhistory%2Fhistory%2Fcommon%2Fbriefing%2Fsenators_became_president.htm&hash=310d856d79b8dfc250eb04c85f5417cd34a260f1)
With few exceptions this is also a list of the most ineffective, forgettable and/or corrupt presidents ever to occupy the White House. The ones on this list who run contrary to that almost universally had some king of executive/leadership experience outside of the Senate - usually in the military.
Even JFK is not an exception! The defining moment of his presidency was him getting shot dead in Dallas TX! Most historians I've read have concluded that, if he had not been assassinated, Kennedy would have gone down in history as a rather lackluster president.
Carter had executive experience, but he was (IS) a Left Wing nut job! I'll readily concede that we don't need (another) Left Wing nut job even with executive experience.
Wish I could read your list. I just get a tiny empty square! :ohmy:
His list is @
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/senators_became_president.htm
Quote from: Solar on June 13, 2015, 11:42:03 AM
Is there a reason no one is voting?
I only had 5 spaces to work with, and to be quite honest, these are the only real viable candidates out of a total of ten.
I didn't vote solar because there are two on that list I could "live" with as President. In fact now that I think about it, I could "live with" anyone of those you listed. See I am living with POSD "post Obama stress disorder" so anyone is fine with me, so long as it's not a liberal, or liberal in disguise. :smile:
Quote from: walkstall on June 14, 2015, 12:28:16 PM
His list is @
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/senators_became_president.htm
Thanks, Walks! I must have clicked the wrong clicky thingie! :blush:
Quote from: kroz on June 14, 2015, 11:44:48 AM
Darth, why is "executive experience" the end all for you?
Jimmy Carter had executive experience!!
ANY person of integrity and honor can surround themselves with experts as advisors. There are far more important criteria for a candidate than "executive experience"! :ohmy:
First and foremost, we need a keen mind with the ability to articulate issues and convince audiences of his/her ability to make wise comprehensive decisions that keep our Country safe and prosper our economy. It also requires someone with the ability and willingness to shine light into dark places where the democrats are concerned. We must have a fighter.
There are many effective executives in this Country, but that does not mean they deserve our vote for President. Executive experience is highly overrated.... IMHO!
The problem with electing legislators into the executive branch is they have this tendency to mistake which branch they are in. Obama's repeated "I cannot wait for congress to act" is a prime example.
The role of executive and legislator are distinctively different (which is why I oppose any motions to get rid of the electoral college in favor of a popular election of the president. POTUS is NOT a representational position!). Being different, it is better to look for executive experience when looking to fill an executive position.
And while I would not turn down a decent conservative just because his experience is limited to the legislative branch, I would far rather see a conservative who knows first hand the executive side of the political process.
(BTW: using a far leftist, clueless idealogue as a reason to NOT use executive experience as a desired trait didn't give much support to your position. Carter's short falls in the presidency had nothing to do with his executive experience, and everything to do with the socialist agenda he was promoting.)
Quote from: zewazir on June 14, 2015, 02:40:45 PM
The problem with electing legislators into the executive branch is they have this tendency to mistake which branch they are in. Obama's repeated "I cannot wait for congress to act" is a prime example.
The role of executive and legislator are distinctively different (which is why I oppose any motions to get rid of the electoral college in favor of a popular election of the president. POTUS is NOT a representational position!). Being different, it is better to look for executive experience when looking to fill an executive position.
And while I would not turn down a decent conservative just because his experience is limited to the legislative branch, I would far rather see a conservative who knows first hand the executive side of the political process.
(BTW: using a far leftist, clueless idealogue as a reason to NOT use executive experience as a desired trait didn't give much support to your position. Carter's short falls in the presidency had nothing to do with his executive experience, and everything to do with the socialist agenda he was promoting.)
My use of Carter was not intended to be a reason to not elect an executive. It was merely meant to show that it was not particularly relevant to his Presidency. As it is not relevant to most Presidencies. POTUS is a unique position that is structured in such a way that the primary talent needed is mental prowess and guts.
Quote from: kroz on June 14, 2015, 11:44:48 AM
Darth, why is "executive experience" the end all for you?
Jimmy Carter had executive experience!!
ANY person of integrity and honor can surround themselves with experts as advisors. There are far more important criteria for a candidate than "executive experience"! :ohmy:
First and foremost, we need a keen mind with the ability to articulate issues and convince audiences of his/her ability to make wise comprehensive decisions that keep our Country safe and prosper our economy. It also requires someone with the ability and willingness to shine light into dark places where the democrats are concerned. We must have a fighter.
There are many effective executives in this Country, but that does not mean they deserve our vote for President. Executive experience is highly overrated.... IMHO!
For no other reason than a justification for personal prejudice.
That's like going through the list of previous Presidents and claiming that all dark haired people of European ancestry make lousy Presidents.
I've seen that same silly excuse made dozens of times and it really is a ridiculous excuse.
We're Conservatives, we're supposed to be smarter than silly superstition and prejudice, but some aren't....
Quote from: Solar on June 15, 2015, 05:27:40 AM
For no other reason than a justification for personal prejudice.
That's like going through the list of previous Presidents and claiming that all dark haired people of European ancestry make lousy Presidents.
I've seen that same silly excuse made dozens of times and it really is a ridiculous excuse.
We're Conservatives, we're supposed to be smarter than silly superstition and prejudice, but some aren't....
It is not superstition nor is it prejudice.
It's the difference between having an cardiovascular surgeon with years of practical experience performing your triple bypass surgery versus an inexperienced academician who only teaches coronary anatomy doing it.
It's skill sets!
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 15, 2015, 08:17:26 AM
It is not superstition nor is it prejudice.
It's the difference between having an cardiovascular surgeon with years of practical experience performing your triple bypass surgery versus an inexperienced academician who only teaches coronary anatomy doing it.
It's skill sets!
And Cruz' experience proves you wrong.
Quote from: Solar on June 14, 2015, 07:04:14 AM
I guess we need to start A Perry thread as well and shine some light on that polished turd of a former Dim as well.
Rick Perry supported Hillary Clinton's Health Care Bill in 1993
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/09/when-rick-perry-praised-hillarycare/244456/
Perry hired the GOP establishment lobbyist Henry Barbour.
http://mississippiconservativedaily.com/2015/03/02/rick-perry-hires-another-barbour-for-presidential-campaign/
Or look up this one, his support for illegal immigration by providing in-state tuition to children of illegal aliens.
His refusal to call the illegals, instead refers to them as undocumented, or the real issue that will kill his RINO ass in the debates, the a fence along the border, the one he refuses to support.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2011/09/04/perry-repeats-opposition-to-us-mexico-border-fence/
You go Solar!
Quote from: keyboarder on June 15, 2015, 12:31:02 PM
You go Solar!
Yeah, we need to pop the balloons, or bubbles these people have created to exist in.
Too many look at Texas and claim it's all good and Perry deserves the credit.
Problem is, it's not all good and much of the damage that's been inflicted upon Texas is directly related to his lib policies.
Quote from: Solar on June 15, 2015, 01:43:01 PM
Yeah, we need to pop the balloons, or bubbles these people have created to exist in.
Too many look at Texas and claim it's all good and Perry deserves the credit.
Problem is, it's not all good and much of the damage that's been inflicted upon Texas is directly related to his lib policies.
I couldn't agree more!!!! :thumbsup:
Quote from: kroz on June 15, 2015, 01:48:06 PM
I couldn't agree more!!!! :thumbsup:
Yep....
It's no different than Obozo claiming credit for our oil exports leading the world, were a result of his
wonderful policies stranglehold on drilling.
Libs always take credit for the groundwork of Conservatives, and Texas is a perfect example of the American spirit in spite, not some damned RINO.
Ted still has my undivided support. Carly is interesting.....but perhaps only as VP?
Veddy interestinge.
From everything that is coming to light about most of the names on this list, I would have to go for Cruz. But, I would not ever see Cruz naming any one of the others as his running mate. I guess that would be his biggest problem to start with. I can see Walker as his running mate with careful considerations. One thing's for sure, Walker isn't afraid of the big boys either.
Quote from: keyboarder on June 16, 2015, 03:24:16 AM
From everything that is coming to light about most of the names on this list, I would have to go for Cruz. But, I would not ever see Cruz naming any one of the others as his running mate. I guess that would be his biggest problem to start with. I can see Walker as his running mate with careful considerations. One thing's for sure, Walker isn't afraid of the big boys either.
A nominee usually wants a strong and vibrant campaigner as his veep. That is his #1 responsibility..... get them both elected. Of course, home turf of the veep is also a strong consideration if he/she can carry a needed State.
But in this day and age, gender has also become a strong consideration because of the female voters who are convinced that only a woman could represent their interests. :glare:
With Hillary on the democrat ticket, gender becomes even more important to the GOP ticket.
For that reason I could see Carly being a strong consideration for Cruz. She is unlikely to deliver California but she is a strong campaigner and vicious against Hillary! Carly would make Hillary's job much more difficult.
The Donald appears to be getting into the race today. He says he needs no money for his campaign. He is self funded and claims 8 or 9 billion in assets. I'm afraid he will muddy the waters. His negativity if high among voters.
Quote from: kroz on June 16, 2015, 04:33:49 AM
A nominee usually wants a strong and vibrant campaigner as his veep. That is his #1 responsibility..... get them both elected. Of course, home turf of the veep is also a strong consideration if he/she can carry a needed State.
But in this day and age, gender has also become a strong consideration because of the female voters who are convinced that only a woman could represent their interests. :glare:
With Hillary on the democrat ticket, gender becomes even more important to the GOP ticket.
For that reason I could see Carly being a strong consideration for Cruz. She is unlikely to deliver California but she is a strong campaigner and vicious against Hillary! Carly would make Hillary's job much more difficult.
The Donald appears to be getting into the race today. He says he needs no money for his campaign. He is self funded and claims 8 or 9 billion in assets. I'm afraid he will muddy the waters. His negativity if high among voters.
Trump won't last long, but he is not afraid of being critical of democrats. Also, he has "star" value so the MSM will cover him which is good.
Quote from: keyboarder on June 16, 2015, 03:24:16 AM
From everything that is coming to light about most of the names on this list, I would have to go for Cruz. But, I would not ever see Cruz naming any one of the others as his running mate. I guess that would be his biggest problem to start with. I can see Walker as his running mate with careful considerations. One thing's for sure, Walker isn't afraid of the big boys either.
I agree. I know it's a long shot, but a Ted Cruz Alan West ticket would be a dream ticket, two candidates the RINO GOP have not only rejected, but fought with on an ideological basis. .....
For those that have ever heard West speak? Libs heads actually do explode.
Quote from: supsalemgr on June 16, 2015, 05:09:42 AM
Trump won't last long, but he is not afraid of being critical of democrats. Also, he has "star" value so the MSM will cover him which is good.
At worst he's a court jester, and at best he's the king's fool, the lunatic allowed to spout great truths without fear of losing his head. The Donald's hair is the smartest part of his act.
Quote from: quiller on June 16, 2015, 05:30:18 AM
At worst he's a court jester, and at best he's the king's fool, the lunatic allowed to spout great truths without fear of losing his head. The Donald's hair is the smartest part of his act.
Trump has a way of dominating any given situation. Much like Bill Clinton he sucks all the oxygen out of the room because he demands the spotlight..... and always seems to get it. He is a larger than life caricature of the excesses of capitalism. I honestly don't think he is smart enough to win the race! It is his ego that drives him!
Quote from: kroz on June 16, 2015, 06:40:58 AM
Trump has a way of dominating any given situation. Much like Bill Clinton he sucks all the oxygen out of the room because he demands the spotlight..... and always seems to get it. He is a larger than life caricature of the excesses of capitalism. I honestly don't think he is smart enough to win the race! It is his ego that drives him!
Well, if it's ego that helped him pile up that many BILLIONS in personal fortune, then that larger-than-OUR-lives part is absolutely true. Limousines and penthouses and exotic trophy wives (or exes) and suits costing more than our cars --- all fine. He's entitled.
Charisma and relentless self-publicizing creates this very caricature; it's part of being a celebrity because you're a celebrity (for example, Kardashians). With hair from a sci-fi film and chutzpa to fuel a fleet of galaxy cruisers --- if he wants a shot at the ring, then let him.
He wants to spend himself poor, I can't think of a faster way to strip him clean than to let him get into American politics.
Quote from: kroz on June 16, 2015, 04:33:49 AM
A nominee usually wants a strong and vibrant campaigner as his veep. That is his #1 responsibility..... get them both elected. Of course, home turf of the veep is also a strong consideration if he/she can carry a needed State.
But in this day and age, gender has also become a strong consideration because of the female voters who are convinced that only a woman could represent their interests. :glare:
With Hillary on the democrat ticket, gender becomes even more important to the GOP ticket.
For that reason I could see Carly being a strong consideration for Cruz. She is unlikely to deliver California but she is a strong campaigner and vicious against Hillary! Carly would make Hillary's job much more difficult.
The Donald appears to be getting into the race today. He says he needs no money for his campaign. He is self funded and claims 8 or 9 billion in assets. I'm afraid he will muddy the waters. His negativity if high among voters.
Gender only matters if you are a leftie running for ANYTHING. If you are conservative, you take one heck of a beating. Look what happened to Sara Palin and I do consider her to be a strong conservative voice. I already see a parallel between the two in that their business lives were in somewhat of a bind. Sara gave up her governorship and that was looked down on and Carly was in some sort of controversy about her business (don't remember exactly what without looking it up). All I'm saying here is that this is all it takes for those leftist animals to feast upon. If they don't do a good enough job of destroying a female conservative candidate, the folks on SNL and all of the talk shows will do the rest. Public opinion is the strong force and a great deal of that force is made up of women, thus making the voting highly unpredictable.
What do most women consider as the high points of their consideration of a woman running for president? What qualities or traits should she possess?
Alot of folks here don't remember when Mamie Eisenhower was first lady but just to acquaint you a little about how women are perceived in Washington, the most memorable thing about her that I can remember is her ugly hair. She was just one ugly woman. Elanor Roosevelt was another one that would peel paint off the walls. I was too young to know much about Elanor but Mamie was first lady when I was in elementary school. My folks were democrats then and I can remember that no one they conversed with had a good opinion about either of these ladies. My folks became Rep with the Eisenhower administration but that didn't mean that they idolized the first lady, Mamie. I think Sara got about the roughest deal trying to be veep, unfairly so as she was definitely victimized by the left.
Quote from: keyboarder on June 16, 2015, 11:49:03 PM
Gender only matters if you are a leftie running for ANYTHING. If you are conservative, you take one heck of a beating. Look what happened to Sara Palin and I do consider her to be a strong conservative voice. I already see a parallel between the two in that their business lives were in somewhat of a bind. Sara gave up her governorship and that was looked down on and Carly was in some sort of controversy about her business (don't remember exactly what without looking it up). All I'm saying here is that this is all it takes for those leftist animals to feast upon. If they don't do a good enough job of destroying a female conservative candidate, the folks on SNL and all of the talk shows will do the rest. Public opinion is the strong force and a great deal of that force is made up of women, thus making the voting highly unpredictable.
What do most women consider as the high points of their consideration of a woman running for president? What qualities or traits should she possess?
Alot of folks here don't remember when Mamie Eisenhower was first lady but just to acquaint you a little about how women are perceived in Washington, the most memorable thing about her that I can remember is her ugly hair. She was just one ugly woman. Elanor Roosevelt was another one that would peel paint off the walls. I was too young to know much about Elanor but Mamie was first lady when I was in elementary school. My folks were democrats then and I can remember that no one they conversed with had a good opinion about either of these ladies. My folks became Rep with the Eisenhower administration but that didn't mean that they idolized the first lady, Mamie. I think Sara got about the roughest deal trying to be veep, unfairly so as she was definitely victimized by the left.
Thank for bringing back the memories, key.
Funny, but the only thing I remember about Mamie is a photo of her sitting in bed wearing a bed jacket and being served her breakfast in bed. As a kid I thought that was like being a Queen. Otherwise Mamie was occasionally seen but almost never heard. Ike kept her tucked away in the Drawing Room.... probably because she was a potential liability. But back then, women generally were not outspoken in public.... it was deemed unladylike.
Fast forward to today...... women are a real force to be considered in the political arena.
Quote from: kroz on June 17, 2015, 04:36:22 AM
Thank for bringing back the memories, key.
Funny, but the only thing I remember about Mamie is a photo of her sitting in bed wearing a bed jacket and being served her breakfast in bed. As a kid I thought that was like being a Queen. Otherwise Mamie was occasionally seen but almost never heard. Ike kept her tucked away in the Drawing Room.... probably because she was a potential liability. But back then, women generally were not outspoken in public.... it was deemed unladylike.
Fast forward to today...... women are a real force to be considered in the political arena.
Mamie was harmless. Jackie Kennedy however glamorized the whole thing and from there it got way out of hand. Moochelle reportedly has the largest staff ever for "First Lady duties," as huge a fraud as her husband's incumbency. Clearly, these two need to swap jobs. Hussein's more a woman than the Wookie.
Quote from: quiller on June 17, 2015, 05:00:07 AM
Mamie was harmless. Jackie Kennedy however glamorized the whole thing and from there it got way out of hand. Moochelle reportedly has the largest staff ever for "First Lady duties," as huge a fraud as her husband's incumbency. Clearly, these two need to swap jobs. Hussein's more a woman than the Wookie.
Now that you mention it, Jackie was much more Queenlike than Mamie!
She did change the dynamics because she was so incredibly young when Jack was elected! And she was raised to "play the part" of nobility! Her Mom or grandmother was fixated with being linked to European nobility.... even creating fraudulent family connections.
Quote from: kroz on June 17, 2015, 05:18:26 AM
Now that you mention it, Jackie was much more Queenlike than Mamie!
She did change the dynamics because she was so incredibly young when Jack was elected! And she was raised to "play the part" of nobility! Her Mom or grandmother was fixated with being linked to European nobility.... even creating fraudulent family connections.
"The rich are not like you and me," I once read, and my brushes with the truly wealthy have mercifully been few and brief. I can't imagine being that surrounded by supplicants yet so isolated from the real world, where your driver packs heat and you yourself wear a ballistics jacket when you're out on a public street.
Michelle Robinson was and remains someone scrambling above her abilities, someone cashing in on global travel simply because she can --- and also because that gets her away from the same White House she has repeatedly said is a prison (or the like). First Ladies---prisoners? Her reportedly abrasive behavior to all political people and almost everyone else around her makes her travel expenses ALMOST forgivable until you see costs above $100,000 for a single week-end. THAT is paying through the nose for a little peace and quiet!
But then she opens her mouth.
Telling and then forcing American parents what to feed their children has indelibly soured her among parents in my area. She's a poisonous idiot preaching absolute balderdash.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Csgbqfqbttrbbqdtxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fgfkbsrqfkxwgqbrtkbk%2F1%2F1595431%2F10202269%2F03obamanever_been_proud300x226-vi.jpg&hash=815f3b6c274691bffd688cba812b8eadfc6a1348)
Quote from: quiller on June 17, 2015, 05:34:43 AM
"The rich are not like you and me," I once read, and my brushes with the truly wealthy have mercifully been few and brief. I can't imagine being that surrounded by supplicants yet so isolated from the real world, where your driver packs heat and you yourself wear a ballistics jacket when you're out on a public street.
Michelle Robinson was and remains someone scrambling above her abilities, someone cashing in on global travel simply because she can --- and also because that gets her away from the same White House she has repeatedly said is a prison (or the like). First Ladies---prisoners? Her reportedly abrasive behavior to all political people and almost everyone else around her makes her travel expenses ALMOST forgivable until you see costs above $100,000 for a single week-end. THAT is paying through the nose for a little peace and quiet!
But then she opens her mouth.
Telling and then forcing American parents what to feed their children has indelibly soured her among parents in my area. She's a poisonous idiot preaching absolute balderdash.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Csgbqfqbttrbbqdtxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fgfkbsrqfkxwgqbrtkbk%2F1%2F1595431%2F10202269%2F03obamanever_been_proud300x226-vi.jpg&hash=815f3b6c274691bffd688cba812b8eadfc6a1348)
Spot on.
1980: "Help! They won't let us in the White House!"
2015: "Help! They won't let me out of the White House!"
These people can see a rainbow and turn it into a travesty.
Quote from: quiller on June 17, 2015, 05:34:43 AM
But then she opens her mouth.
I prefer my-own quote;
" I have never been proud of Michelle Obama... " slight microphone-echo " And I'm still not. "But a few words about Claudia Johnson... who allowed her husband to publicly 'name' her
Lady Bird. Democrats never had a feasible defense for that affront against feminism.
Quote from: keyboarder on June 16, 2015, 11:49:03 PMWhat do most women consider as the high points of their consideration of a woman running for president? What qualities or traits should she possess?
Being straight forward, honest and have a backbone. The main element in any candidate, or relationship, would be trust. You could trust that she could make the tough decisions, and would lead.
I don't see Hillary in any of the above.
Quote from: Solar on June 13, 2015, 11:05:43 AM
Honestly, does anyone really think Grahamasty has a prayer? :biggrin:
Solar, Grahamnesty's role is to fracture the base to the advantage of Jeb. The establishment fix is in for Jeb. What they don't realize is the absolute dislike for him with the base. Well, maybe they do know this, and what we've been witnessing with the Republican party has actually been a swing to the left for the last few years, at least within the old establishment. Witness the attack ads they run against Tea Party candidates.
Quote from: ObozoMustGo on June 18, 2015, 07:34:17 AM
Solar, Grahamnesty's role is to fracture the base to the advantage of Jeb. The establishment fix is in for Jeb. What they don't realize is the absolute dislike for him with the base. Well, maybe they do know this, and what we've been witnessing with the Republican party has actually been a swing to the left for the last few years, at least within the old establishment. Witness the attack ads they run against Tea Party candidates.
That does not ring true to me. Graham is more LIKE Jeb and potentially splits Jeb's votes. That is good for the conservative candidates. They have improved odds.
Quote from: kit saginaw on June 17, 2015, 08:58:46 PM
I prefer my-own quote;
" I have never been proud of Michelle Obama... " slight microphone-echo " And I'm still not. "
But a few words about Claudia Johnson... who allowed her husband to publicly 'name' her Lady Bird. Democrats never had a feasible defense for that affront against feminism.
I'd completely forgotten her, or those TV and other Texas companies she suddenly acquired to keep Lyndon B. clean for office. Mea culpa: I was watching the daughters, knowing in my heart I might have my way with them but I would then grow up and marry somebody Republican. I'm working on that growing up part.
Quote from: kroz on June 18, 2015, 07:47:55 AM
That does not ring true to me. Graham is more LIKE Jeb and potentially splits Jeb's votes. That is good for the conservative candidates. They have improved odds.
Kroz... I get that up front, or at this stage of the game. But over time, the only real message LG has is national defense which gives him the opportunity to raise that issue and draw a contrast with the more libertarian oriented candidates like Cruz and Paul, and the non-national candidates like Fiorina and the govs. Plus, it allows him to carry that water on this issue rather than Jeb Bush, who in doing so, would only rekindle negative images associated with GWB. In short, I think LG's job here is take the defense issue and fracture the conservative candidates. IMHO... I could be wrong.
Quote from: kroz on June 18, 2015, 07:47:55 AM
That does not ring true to me. Graham is more LIKE Jeb and potentially splits Jeb's votes. That is good for the conservative candidates. They have improved odds.
You absolutely correct. Graham will be lucky to finish third in his home state of SC. Bye Bye.
Quote from: kroz on June 18, 2015, 07:47:55 AM
That does not ring true to me. Graham is more LIKE Jeb and potentially splits Jeb's votes. That is good for the conservative candidates. They have improved odds.
Kroz... one other point on this... Jeb is classic Repub establishment. LG is classic Repub establishment. The difference between them is their money and the political machine. Jeb clearly has those 2 covered, while LG has none of it. Clearly, the establishment wants Jeb. Why else would they want another establishment guy unless there was some other longer term purpose that they perceive as strategic advantage?
Quote from: ObozoMustGo on June 18, 2015, 08:17:33 AM
Kroz... one other point on this... Jeb is classic Repub establishment. LG is classic Repub establishment. The difference between them is their money and the political machine. Jeb clearly has those 2 covered, while LG has none of it. Clearly, the establishment wants Jeb. Why else would they want another establishment guy unless there was some other longer term purpose that they perceive as strategic advantage?
If that is what they were wanting, they could have picked far better candidates. There are some military Generals of note who are fresh out of a job...... because of Obama!
No, I think Graham is on his own ego trip that is so outlandish that he believes he can soar the stratisphere purely on his handsome credentials..... sans money! :ohmy:
Quote from: ObozoMustGo on June 18, 2015, 07:34:17 AM
Solar, Grahamnesty's role is to fracture the base to the advantage of Jeb. The establishment fix is in for Jeb. What they don't realize is the absolute dislike for him with the base. Well, maybe they do know this, and what we've been witnessing with the Republican party has actually been a swing to the left for the last few years, at least within the old establishment. Witness the attack ads they run against Tea Party candidates.
This would have been true a few years back, but now? And no, they've been leftists long before Reagan (an anomaly) was elected, the people are only just now realizing just how left they truly are.
An internal TPNN poll has interesting results. It is not what you would expect.
Ben Carson 21%
Ted Cruz 16%
Rick Perry 16%
Trump 11%
Rand Paul 9%
Rubio 8%
Fiorina 8%
Huckabee 4%
Santorum 3%
Jeb Bush 2%
Kasich 2%
Lindsay Graham 1%
Quote from: redbeard on June 13, 2015, 12:41:40 PM
If I was restricted to that list I would still be stuck between 2 candidates. Cruz and Perry, but in all practicality we all know Walker is going to run and I would make it a top 3. :popcorn:
I'm surprised Walker isn't listed in the top 5. Cruz is my only choice, but I don't think America is conservative enough for him. "We've" become a more socially libertarian country. Cruz is a complete Conservative. That scares too many (they've been brainwashed by the MSM)
Okay, let's say that Cruz wins the primary and the presidency.
With Boehner (still) as Speaker of the House and Mitch McConnell as Senate Majority leader, will we really have gained that much? I mean, other than Hilary is not president?
A president can't sign a bill that doesn't make it to his desk and the Democrats have shown that they (unlike the Republicans) are masters of delaying and/or killing any bill that doesn't fit their agenda even when they are the minority party. The same goes for Cabinet and Supreme Court nominees as well as Federal judicial appointments.
And Boehner is just the weasel to let them get away with it; Mitchell is no better (and perhaps worse) than Boehner.
Cruz needs to be Senate Majority leader and Boehner needs to be voted out of office even if it means giving his seat to a Democrat!
Just my $0.02 worth.
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 20, 2015, 03:35:00 PM
Okay, let's say that Cruz wins the primary and the presidency.
With Boehner (still) as Speaker of the House and Mitch McConnell as Senate Majority leader, will we really have gained that much? I mean, other than Hilary is not president?
A president can't sign a bill that doesn't make it to his desk and the Democrats have shown that they (unlike the Republicans) are masters of delaying and/or killing any bill that doesn't fit their agenda even when they are the minority party. The same goes for Cabinet and Supreme Court nominees as well as Federal judicial appointments.
And Boehner is just the weasel to let them get away with it; Mitchell is no better (and perhaps worse) than Boehner.
Cruz needs to be Senate Majority leader and Boehner needs to be voted out of office even if it means giving his seat to a Democrat!
Just my $0.02 worth.
Regardless of who is elected, Boehner must be unseated in the next Congress! I'm not sure that McConnell can be unseated. But Boehner can and should be.
I kept warning you guys how important it was to remove those two in 2014. ANY old Republican isn't always the best strategy. Removing either or both of those two would have sent a clear message to the Repub Establishment. Their victory over Tea Party opponents only emboldened them. You have one more chance with the House leadership in 2016. DON'T BLOW IT AGAIN.
Quote from: carlb on June 20, 2015, 03:25:02 PM
I'm surprised Walker isn't listed in the top 5. Cruz is my only choice, but I don't think America is conservative enough for him. "We've" become a more socially libertarian country. Cruz is a complete Conservative. That scares too many (they've been brainwashed by the MSM)
Walker's name was not even in the poll. That was weird!
Quote from: kroz on June 20, 2015, 03:21:48 PM
An internal TPNN poll has interesting results. It is not what you would expect.
Ben Carson 21%
Ted Cruz 16%
Rick Perry 16%
Trump 11%
Rand Paul 9%
Rubio 8%
Fiorina 8%
Huckabee 4%
Santorum 3%
Jeb Bush 2%
Kasich 2%
Lindsay Graham 1%
Link?
Cruz...wins, and is it any wonder?
Look at the graphic on this site.
https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates
Quote from: Solar on June 20, 2015, 05:54:04 PM
Cruz...wins, and is it any wonder?
Look at the graphic on this site.
https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates
ALL green except one yellow. He's WAY ahead of anybody else. I always knew I was a good judge of character. :biggrin:
Paul & Rubio aren't too far behind, but they're still second best in the Conservative world
Quote from: carlb on June 20, 2015, 06:02:08 PM
ALL green except one yellow. He's WAY ahead of anybody else. I always knew I was a good judge of character. :biggrin:
Paul & Rubio aren't too far behind, but they're still second best in the Conservative world
In truth, 2nd place to Cruz, is way at the back of the pack.
There is no better Conservative running.
Quote from: carlb on June 20, 2015, 06:02:08 PM
ALL green except one yellow. He's WAY ahead of anybody else. I always knew I was a good judge of character. :biggrin:
Paul & Rubio aren't too far behind, but they're still second best in the Conservative world
And the yellow is mixed, not bad...
Quote from: Solar on June 20, 2015, 05:54:04 PM
Cruz...wins, and is it any wonder?
Look at the graphic on this site.
https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates
Yours, like mine, did not include Walker! I wonder why.
Quote from: kroz on June 21, 2015, 04:59:00 AM
Yours, like mine, did not include Walker! I wonder why.
Because he had yet to declare? Not really sure.
Quote from: Solar on June 21, 2015, 05:11:44 AM
Because he had yet to declare? Not really sure.
Maybe that is it. That did not occur to me. hhmmm..... :rolleyes:
Though he was 'former'... governor... Wisconsin's Tommy Thompson announced his Presidential Candidacy on April 2nd, 2007... then withdrew on August 12, 2007.
Reason: He finished 6th in Iowa straw-poll.
It's hard laying that template onto Walker... who hasn't announced yet.
Thompson's in-State favorability reached 75% on June 19th, 2007... and his support ranked 13% Nationally.
http://race42016.com/2007/06/19/poll-watch-university-of-wisconsin-badger-poll-gop-wisconsin-net-favorability-ratings/
As of Friday, Walker's favorability in-State has dropped to 41%.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-walker-poll-20150416-story.html
My conclusion is that Walker shouldn't declare this year, but should finish serving his gubernatorial-term. Then declare his candidacy when his popularity receives the typical 'bounce' upward in the polls, which retired figures tend to enjoy.
Quote from: kit saginaw on June 21, 2015, 06:25:10 AM
Though he was 'former'... governor... Wisconsin's Tommy Thompson announced his Presidential Candidacy on April 2nd, 2007... then withdrew on August 12, 2007.
Reason: He finished 6th in Iowa straw-poll.
It's hard laying that template onto Walker... who hasn't announced yet.
Thompson's in-State favorability reached 75% on June 19th, 2007... and his support ranked 13% Nationally.
http://race42016.com/2007/06/19/poll-watch-university-of-wisconsin-badger-poll-gop-wisconsin-net-favorability-ratings/
As of Friday, Walker's favorability in-State has dropped to 41%.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-walker-poll-20150416-story.html
My conclusion is that Walker shouldn't declare this year, but should finish serving his gubernatorial-term. Then declare his candidacy when his popularity receives the typical 'bounce' upward in the polls, which retired figures tend to enjoy.
I agree, he has a lot of damage control yet to deal with, especially where he comes off as a flip flopper.
Quote from: Solar on June 21, 2015, 07:17:42 AM
I agree, he has a lot of damage control yet to deal with, especially where he comes off as a flip flopper.
That may be true but I don't expect Walker to walk away at this point. He is knee deep into this race and has a significant following and war chest. Americans for Prosperity will be pushing him all the way!!
Quote from: kroz on June 21, 2015, 10:20:04 AM
That may be true but I don't expect Walker to walk away at this point. He is knee deep into this race and has a significant following and war chest. Americans for Prosperity will be pushing him all the way!!
Maybe. I think he is waiting to see if Cruz falters, because I know they've all done the math, it would cost a lot more than they have to beat him.
Walker, if smart will wait and throw his support to Cruz if he can make a deal for Veep.
Quote from: Solar on June 21, 2015, 10:42:05 AM
Maybe. I think he is waiting to see if Cruz falters, because I know they've all done the math, it would cost a lot more than they have to beat him.
Walker, if smart will wait and throw his support to Cruz if he can make a deal for Veep.
That would be a perfect arrangement!!
Fr.om what I am hearing and reading it seems Fiorina is surprising a lot of folks. I would like to see her stick around for awhile.
Quote from: kroz on June 21, 2015, 10:55:48 AM
That would be a perfect arrangement!!
One I too could live with.
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 15, 2015, 08:17:26 AM
It is not superstition nor is it prejudice.
It's the difference between having an cardiovascular surgeon with years of practical experience performing your triple bypass surgery versus an inexperienced academician who only teaches coronary anatomy doing it.
It's skill sets!
A CEO can do lots morre than a President who is bound by Constitutional constraints. Executive exp, while it can be a good thing, is not the end all be all.
Nor should it be why we vote for someone. What should determine that is their political ideology. And in particular, whether they have a true and deep understanding of what our Constitution, says, and means. A POTUS who obey's, and upholds the highest law of the land, is far more important to me, than someone who was a CEO at one time. Even IF they did a good job as a CEO.
Jindal is expected to get in this afternoon. I like him.
Quote from: Dori on June 24, 2015, 09:30:46 AM
Jindal is expected to get in this afternoon. I like him.
The
efficiency and
smartness are there, but the camera-presence doesn't transfer over to a Presidential-campaign. Some people just need an acting-coach to learn how project their personality. Picture him hosting the
O'Reilly Factor (like Kasich has)...
I know Jindal has fortitudinal-leadership skills, by his winning the Louisiana governorship and by his handling of the BP oilspill fiasco. But he doesn't
fill a room with a sense of theatre... As with Rubio, their 'Republican Responses To The State Of The Union Speech' appearances were disasterously void of charisma.
Quote from: kit saginaw on June 24, 2015, 11:59:57 PM
The efficiency and smartness are there, but the camera-presence doesn't transfer over to a Presidential-campaign. Some people just need an acting-coach to learn how project their personality. Picture him hosting the O'Reilly Factor (like Kasich has)...
I know Jindal has fortitudinal-leadership skills, by his winning the Louisiana governorship and by his handling of the BP oilspill fiasco. But he doesn't fill a room with a sense of theatre... As with Rubio, their 'Republican Responses To The State Of The Union Speech' appearances were disasterously void of charisma.
You are right about that, kit!
Te Western Conservative Convention just took place and they did their traditional straw poll.
Here are the results:
Ben Carson-224
Carly Fiorina-201
Scott Walker-192
Ted Cruz-100
Rand Paul-34
Marco Rubio-24
Rick Perry-20
Rick Santorum-16
Donald Trump-15
Mike Huckabee-13
Bobby Jindal-9
Bill Armstrong-6
Jeb Bush-4
John Kasich-4
Chris Christie-3
Lindsay Graham-3
Mitt Romney-3
George Pataki-0
Total-871
http://www.ccu.edu/centennial/2015/06/ben-carson-wins-wcs15-straw-poll-second-year-in-a-row/
I don't think Ted spoke at this convention which explains his fourth place finish. I attended this Convention a few years back and they do a very good job. It really is conservative...... not republican!
Why Ben Carson? He'd make an excellent Surgeon General, but just because he's black and leans Conservative doesn't make him qualified. There are a lot of reasons why he's not. There's no reason, at a time like this to settle for someone who's not a warrior willing to fight Obama's bureaucratic army of Leftists.
Quote from: Solar on June 21, 2015, 10:42:05 AM
Maybe. I think he is waiting to see if Cruz falters, because I know they've all done the math, it would cost a lot more than they have to beat him.
Walker, if smart will wait and throw his support to Cruz if he can make a deal for Veep.
Maybe that has been the plan all along. Let's hope so. I think it would be the favorite match unless either of them turn rino on us.
Quote from: kroz on June 28, 2015, 12:50:07 PM
Te Western Conservative Convention just took place and they did their traditional straw poll.
Here are the results:
Ben Carson-224
Carly Fiorina-201
Scott Walker-192
Ted Cruz-100
Rand Paul-34
Marco Rubio-24
Rick Perry-20
Rick Santorum-16
Donald Trump-15
Mike Huckabee-13
Bobby Jindal-9
Bill Armstrong-6
Jeb Bush-4
John Kasich-4
Chris Christie-3
Lindsay Graham-3
Mitt Romney-3
George Pataki-0
Total-871
http://www.ccu.edu/centennial/2015/06/ben-carson-wins-wcs15-straw-poll-second-year-in-a-row/
I don't think Ted spoke at this convention which explains his fourth place finish. I attended this Convention a few years back and they do a very good job. It really is conservative...... not republican!
It shows that the conventioners are well informed, more-so by seeing whom they
weren't flocking to... Barbara Bush's kid.
Carson's
Carson. He's never been near the bottom of any poll I've seen.
Quote from: kroz on June 28, 2015, 12:50:07 PM
Te Western Conservative Convention just took place and they did their traditional straw poll.
Here are the results:
Ben Carson-224
Carly Fiorina-201
Scott Walker-192
Ted Cruz-100
Rand Paul-34
Marco Rubio-24
Rick Perry-20
Rick Santorum-16
Donald Trump-15
Mike Huckabee-13
Bobby Jindal-9
Bill Armstrong-6
Jeb Bush-4
John Kasich-4
Chris Christie-3
Lindsay Graham-3
Mitt Romney-3
George Pataki-0
Total-871
http://www.ccu.edu/centennial/2015/06/ben-carson-wins-wcs15-straw-poll-second-year-in-a-row/
I don't think Ted spoke at this convention which explains his fourth place finish. I attended this Convention a few years back and they do a very good job. It really is conservative...... not republican!
I could see a Walker/Cruz ticket - and just watch the Liberal heads explode!
:laugh:
Quote from: kroz on June 28, 2015, 12:50:07 PM
Te Western Conservative Convention just took place and they did their traditional straw poll.
Here are the results:
Ben Carson-224
Carly Fiorina-201
Scott Walker-192
Ted Cruz-100
Rand Paul-34
Marco Rubio-24
Rick Perry-20
Rick Santorum-16
Donald Trump-15
Mike Huckabee-13
Bobby Jindal-9
Bill Armstrong-6
Jeb Bush-4
John Kasich-4
Chris Christie-3
Lindsay Graham-3
Mitt Romney-3
George Pataki-0
Total-871
http://www.ccu.edu/centennial/2015/06/ben-carson-wins-wcs15-straw-poll-second-year-in-a-row/
I don't think Ted spoke at this convention which explains his fourth place finish. I attended this Convention a few years back and they do a very good job. It really is conservative...... not republican!
I'm guessing serious bias in this poll, considering "Centennial Institute is Colorado
Christian University's think tank, mobilizing ideas on faith, family, and freedom to strengthen America's future"
Quote from: Solar on July 02, 2015, 10:51:33 AM
I'm guessing serious bias in this poll, considering "Centennial Institute is Colorado Christian University's think tank, mobilizing ideas on faith, family, and freedom to strengthen America's future"
If anything, a Christian bias would produce totally different results than this. What bias are you thinking of?
Christians tend to like Cruz more than Fiorina.... or even Walker and Carson. Cruz is the most overtly Christian in the pack. But I don't think he attended the conference which put him at a disadvantage with those who have never heard him in person.
The biggest surprise to me was Carly's second place.... even above Walker!! She may be a Christian but that is NOT her strong suit in this race. She admits that spiritually was not very important to her until she got breast cancer. (foxhole faith) That was her wake-up call. She still isn't vocal about her faith unless she is in a Christian audience. Cruz is much more open about his Christian faith. Therefore I see no overt bias here.
Quote from: kroz on July 02, 2015, 01:04:16 PM
If anything, a Christian bias would produce totally different results than this. What bias are you thinking of?
Christians tend to like Cruz more than Fiorina.... or even Walker and Carson. Cruz is the most overtly Christian in the pack. But I don't think he attended the conference which put him at a disadvantage with those who have never heard him in person.
The biggest surprise to me was Carly's second place.... even above Walker!! She may be a Christian but that is NOT her strong suit in this race. She admits that spiritually was not very important to her until she got breast cancer. (foxhole faith) That was her wake-up call. She still isn't vocal about her faith unless she is in a Christian audience. Cruz is much more open about his Christian faith. Therefore I see no overt bias here.
Most of what people remember about Carson, was his speech at the prayer breakfast and his strong Christian beliefs. Beyond that, they appear to know nothing about his lack of core beliefs or understanding of our Bill of Rights.
So yeah, that would appear in the form of ignorant bias.
The Fiorina aspect speaks even more about their ignorance on the candidates running, so this brings a youth movement into the equation.
Without stats, I'd venture a guess this was a very young audience to poll from.
Quote from: Solar on July 02, 2015, 01:30:37 PM
Most of what people remember about Carson, was his speech at the prayer breakfast and his strong Christian beliefs. Beyond that, they appear to know nothing about his lack of core beliefs or understanding of our Bill of Rights.
So yeah, that would appear in the form of ignorant bias.
The Fiorina aspect speaks even more about their ignorance on the candidates running, so this brings a youth movement into the equation.
Without stats, I'd venture a guess this was a very young audience to poll from.
You may be right. But it wasn't a youth group when I attended a couple of years ago.. It was mostly mature Christians from Colorado's biggest churches. Most were close to my age. There were obviously some from the Christian University but not as many as you would expect. They couldn't afford it or didn't have the time unless that was their area of study in school. They had a lot of student workers because they were paid positions!
It is true that many conservatives do not know the negatives on all of these candidates. They DO identify Carson with the prayer breakfast..... but he is an excellent speaker and quite persuasive!
Quote from: kroz on July 02, 2015, 01:36:59 PM
You may be right. But it wasn't a youth group when I attended a couple of years ago.. It was mostly mature Christians from Colorado's biggest churches. Most were close to my age. There were obviously some from the Christian University but not as many as you would expect. They couldn't afford it or didn't have the time unless that was their area of study in school. They had a lot of student workers because they were paid positions!
It is true that many conservatives do not know the negatives on all of these candidates. They DO identify Carson with the prayer breakfast..... but he is an excellent speaker and quite persuasive!
Yep, and sadly that makes our work that much harder in trying to break the spell of a guy with absolutely no leadership experience whatsoever.
Cruz.... :biggrin:
Quote from: kroz on July 02, 2015, 01:04:16 PM
If anything, a Christian bias would produce totally different results than this. What bias are you thinking of?
Christians tend to like Cruz more than Fiorina.... or even Walker and Carson. Cruz is the most overtly Christian in the pack. But I don't think he attended the conference which put him at a disadvantage with those who have never heard him in person.
The biggest surprise to me was Carly's second place.... even above Walker!! She may be a Christian but that is NOT her strong suit in this race. She admits that spiritually was not very important to her until she got breast cancer. (foxhole faith) That was her wake-up call. She still isn't vocal about her faith unless she is in a Christian audience. Cruz is much more open about his Christian faith. Therefore I see no overt bias here.
Scott Walker is an evangelist Christian. His Father a Preacher! He never denies his faith, in fact he runs on it!
Poll numbers are meaningless this early in the game. They ALWAYS swing widely before the first primary.
Here is my own personal rating of the R candidates, based on their personal character, and positions on the issues:
(Not on "electability" which is just a BS term the ruling clique uses to fool people into voting for RINOs.)
In rank order, they are:
Would be a good President:
CRUZ good debater.
TRUMP tough fighter.
PAUL strong advocate of freedom.
JINDAL good Governor.
WALKER tough fighter.
SANTORUM good values.
Good, but with some reservations:
CARSON good except on gun control.
HUCKABEE good for Fair Tax, but might compromise with Dems in other areas.
FIORINA was member of McCain's posse. I question her sincerity.
RUBIO might be an Establishment mole.
PERRY conservatives in Texas feel betrayed by him.
Might as well be a Democrat:
PATAKI repudiated Trump's statement on illegal aliens.
CHRISTIE New Jersey's credit rating is plummeting.
BUSH no more! plus, STILL pushing Common Core.
KASICH repeatedly betrays conservatives in Ohio.
GRAHAM Grahamnesty.
Well it looks like Cruz is winning the poll :lol: I like Cruz he's the only one that has said something that actually made sense, and stayed within the confines of our Constitution after the obozodontcare ruling and the gay marriage rulings. Instead of running round being a hypocritical, farcical, conveyor of doom and gloom. He suggested instead, that the Congress amend the Constitution so justices are elected, just like the President and the Congress. It's a good suggestion, and one that I hope people will really think about and consider seriously.
That said I don't have much hope that anyone will though. Unless he is elected President. So yeah I think I could vote for Cruz.
Quote from: daidalos on July 02, 2015, 02:57:43 PM
Well it looks like Cruz is winning the poll :lol: I like Cruz he's the only one that has said something that actually made sense, and stayed within the confines of our Constitution after the obozodontcare ruling and the gay marriage rulings. Instead of running round being a hypocritical, farcical, conveyor of doom and gloom. He suggested instead, that the Congress amend the Constitution so justices are elected, just like the President and the Congress. It's a good suggestion, and one that I hope people will really think about and consider seriously.
That said I don't have much hope that anyone will though. Unless he is elected President. So yeah I think I could vote for Cruz.
That's never gonna happen and I don't agree with it anyway. Congress has other options. They just lack the backbone. Mark Levin and others have talked about this.
Quote from: Solar on July 02, 2015, 01:55:31 PM
Yep, and sadly that makes our work that much harder in trying to break the spell of a guy with absolutely no leadership experience whatsoever.
Cruz.... :biggrin:
Which means we should ignore anyone who has only been in the Senate and/or has no experience outside of political office. BTW, at what point did we start to believe that our politics should only be for professional politicians. People who have done nothing in their life but run for public office.
Quote from: mdgiles on July 02, 2015, 03:26:39 PM
Which means we should ignore anyone who has only been in the Senate and/or has no experience outside of political office. BTW, at what point did we start to believe that our politics should only be for professional politicians. People who have done nothing in their life but run for public office.
I'm not talking about political experience and you damn well know it, assuming you actually read my post..
The guy has absolutely no experience beyond a hospital.
I want someone like Cruz, a man that has a firm grasp of our Constitution, a man with core values, not some wish washy doctor that doesn't even understand the 2nd, just one part of the Bill of Rights.