Saturday Politics Thread: "Young Guns" [Y-not]

Over the past few weeks we've been looking over some of the GOP prospects for 2016, focusing on governors. Last week we reviewed Kasich, Haley, and Martinez and there seemed to be a certain amount of enthusiasm for Governor Haley. Before that, we reviewed Walker, Jindal, and Perry and found that both Perry and Walker had strong support.

Interestingly, when I polled the horde on all six of these governors, Nikki Haley dropped behind Bobby Jindal. I'm not sure if this is a reflection of people feeling they don't know Haley very well or if the dreaded "electability factor" reared its ugly head. It seems as though there's a reluctance to nominate a woman because of fears of what the media will do to her based on past experience with Palin.

I thought this week week we'd dip our toes into somewhat murkier waters and review three high-profile senators whose names have been bandied about as prospective candidates for 2016: Marco Rubio (FL), Rand Paul (KY), and Ted Cruz (TX). I think the waters here are murkier for several reasons. One, as U.S. Senators each one of these men is paid to pontificate. Let's face it, without control of the Senate, there's not a heck of a lot a Republican Senator can accomplish except to make speeches, appear on television, and make social media posts.

Second, there seems to be a strong feeling amongst a lot of likely Republican voters (who post on blogs, at least) that we should nominate a governor or possibly a businessman, but most certainly NOT a Senator or even a Representative. I should add that although I understand the arguments, I think they are being given far too much weight and, in some cases at least, I think they are being used to exclude candidates from consideration who are deemed ideologically unacceptable to people who influence elections. So when we discuss these three men, let's try to compare them to each other rather than spend a lot of time hashing out the "don't nominate a Senator" thing. I'd really like to hear more about what you think of their backgrounds, accomplishments, and ideologies today, if at all possible.

Third, all three of them (even Rand Paul who was born in 1963) are sometimes considered to be "young guns." They have not been on the national stage (or even in office, in the case of Paul) for very long, so there is going to be a tendency by all of us (self included) to project our biases and wishes onto their records. When that happens things tend to get heated.

I should add that one advantage of examining Senators' records is that they are all voting on the same measures that impact the nation. And, although they should be voting in a way consistent with their state constituents' views, they are less likely to be voting purely based on their state's interests. So it should be a more apples to apples comparison than trying to compare the records of governors to one another.

The previous two of these 2016 threads have been very productive, I think, and remarkably cordial. Let's see if we can keep up the trend!

First, a brief poll to get a sense of where the horde stands on these three:

Without further ado, here are brief biosketches of the Young Guns. I'm going to use Ballotpedia again this week because I found their summaries more concise than Wiki's. (Ellipses indicate edits for length.)

Marco Antonio Rubio (b. May 28, 1971, in Miami, FL) is a Republican member of the U.S. Senate from the state of Florida. Rubio was first elected to the Senate in 2010...
...Rubio is a member of the group of senators deemed the "Gang of Eight." This term is used to reference eight of the most influential Senators on immigration reform and includes four senators from each party.
He previously was a member of the Florida House of Representatives from 2000 to 2008.
Based on analysis of multiple outside rankings, Rubio is an average Republican member of Congress, meaning he will vote with the Republican Party on the majority of bills.
Biography
Born to a family of Cuban exiles, Rubio was raised in Miami, FL, and Las Vegas, NV... He earned his Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Florida in 1993, and his J.D. degree cum laude from the University of Miami School of Law in 1996.
Career
- Prior to 2000: City Commission for West Miami, FL.
- 2000-2008: Florida House of Representatives
- 2008-2010: Visiting Professor at Florida International University Metropolitan Center; Florida Chairman of GOPAC; Political Analyst for Univision for 2008 Cycle

Also from the Ballotpedia entry for Rubio, there's this summary of his stand on the issues. (Note: This is their take on it. I'm not sure I'd agree, but it'll be a starting point for discussion.)

Randal Howard "Rand" Paul (b. January 7, 1963, in Pittsburgh, PA) is a Republican member of the U.S. Senate from the state of Kentucky. Paul was first elected to the Senate in 2010...
...On February 12, 2014, Paul officially filed a class-action lawsuit against the Obama administration over National Security Agency data collection.
On March 6, 2013, Paul led a filibuster of President Obama's CIA Director nominee, John Brennan, that lasted 12 hours and 52 minutes - the ninth longest Senate filibuster on record. In addition to delaying the final vote on Brennan's confirmation, Paul's stated intention was to highlight his concerns about the Obama Administration's drone policies.
Based on analysis of multiple outside rankings, Paul is an average Republican member of Congress, meaning he will vote with the Republican Party on the majority of bills.
Biography
Paul was born in 1963 in Pittsburgh, PA, and grew up in Lake Jackson, TX. He attended Baylor University, although he did not receive an undergraduate degree. Paul received his M.D. from Duke University Medical School. Prior to his election to the Senate, Paul worked as an ophthalmologist in Bowling Green, Kentucky.
Paul is the son of former Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul.
Career
Below is an abbreviated outline of Paul's professional and political career:
Ophthalmologist in Bowling Green, KY
U.S. Senate, 2011-Present

Also from Ballotpedia:

Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz (b. December 22, 1970, in Calgary, Alberta) is the Republican junior U.S. Senator from Texas.He was first elected in 2012. He defeated David Dewhurst in the primary runoff on July 31, 2012...
...Cruz is one of three Latino members of the U.S. Senate.
Cruz identifies with the Tea Party. Although Cruz is considered a more moderate right of center Republican party vote, according to an analysis of multiple outside rankings, it is due to a tendency to vote against Republican-sponsored bills that are not conservative or libertarian enough...
Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, where his parents were working in the Alberta oil fields. In 1974 they returned to the Houston area.
...He earned his B.A. in Public Policy from Princeton University in 1992. He went on to receive his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1995. Cruz then worked in the following positions in the law field: Law clerk to Chief Justice of the United States William Rehnquist, associate deputy attorney general for the U.S. Department of Justice, and director of the Office of Policy Planning for the Federal Trade Commission. He is currently partner of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius Limited Liability Partnership.
Cruz served as Solicitor General of Texas from 2003-2008. In this role he was the youngest Solicitor General in the nation, as well as the longest-serving and first Hispanic Solicitor General in the state. Among his accomplishments, Cruz argued 40 oral arguments, including nine before the U.S. Supreme Court...
Cruz won election to the U.S. Senate on November 6, 2012.
Career
Below is an abbreviated outline of Cruz's academic, professional and political career:
1992: Graduated from Princeton University with B.A.
1995: Graduated from Harvard University with J.D.
1995-2003: Worked in the following positions: Law clerk to Chief Justice of the United States William Rehnquist, associate deputy attorney general for the U.S. Department of Justice and director of the Office of Policy Planning for the Federal Trade Commission.
2003-2008: Solicitor General of Texas
2013-Present: U.S. Senator from Texas

Also from Ballotpedia:

To wrap things up, let's get a sense for your top FOUR choices out of all nine potential candidates reviewed thus far:

**WHO ARE YOUR TOP FOUR PICKS? VOTE BELOW**

If the Presidential election were held tomorrow, for which GOP nominee would you be likely to vote against Hillary Clinton or the Dem nominee? (Choose FOUR)

**Updated with the poll I forgot to add:

Finally, which candidates, if any, would you be unable to bring yourself to vote for going against the Democrats' nominee for President in 2016? (If it helps you make a decision, feel free to assume that the Democrats nominate Hillary.)

If the General Election were held tomorrow, are there any of the candidates which we've discussed thus far for whom you COULD NOT vote? Indicate all below.

What would YOU do to stop this woman from becoming the next Commander-in-Chief?

Posted by: Open Blogger at 08:58 AM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Get more coffee, damnit!

Posted by: anon a mouse at September 20, 2014 08:58 AM (gXRIG)

2 "there's not a heck of a lot a Republican Senator can accomplish except to make speeches, appear on television, and make social media posts. "

You mean we can do all of that? Really? 'Cause Orange John and Karl Rove tell us to shut up 24/7

Posted by: any "R" currently in office at September 20, 2014 08:59 AM (gXRIG)

3 UGH, Sorry about that. I screwed something up. Fixing now.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 08:59 AM (zDsvJ)

4
Just a guess here, but it looks to me like folks may not be reading the key phrase regarding the second poll.

But what do I know, I'm a moron.

Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars(TM) at September 20, 2014 09:00 AM (6TXP5)

5 * looks around at empty room *

Wow. So this is what this place looks like pre hordeing...

Shiny and clean.

Posted by: anon a mouse at September 20, 2014 09:00 AM (gXRIG)

6
I'll give Cruz and Paul credit for this much vis-a-vis them now being Senators: they have executive / ownership experience in their resumes.

That is a marked contrast to Barky O'Bumbles, Spokestwat for VagISIL.

Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars(TM) at September 20, 2014 09:03 AM (6TXP5)

7 OK, I got it now. Sorry about that. There should be three polls.

Your top pick out of these three Senators.

Your top FOUR picks out of the nine people we've discussed so far.

and

The people - if ANY - for whom you could NOT vote.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:06 AM (zDsvJ)

8 Who is best to answer that 3 a.m. phone call?
Obviously not Hillary.

Posted by: Dr. Varno at September 20, 2014 09:07 AM (fIv/H)

9 Really apologize. I had this post in draft a couple of days ago, but obviously I forgot about that third poll.

All should be well now.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:07 AM (zDsvJ)

10 Great post, as usual. Better than usual.

The big fiction here is that Hillary will be the nominee. I don't know who it will be, but it won't be her.

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:08 AM (7Oo+W)

11 I just wish any of them had at least a glancing familiarity of the military. Several years ago I had suggested to my husband that there should be a "basic training" for the CIC.
Of course it might have made Obama worse

Posted by: FCF at September 20, 2014 09:08 AM (kejii)

12 I was surprised that Rand is older than the other two. He's aging well. He doesn't look older than them.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:09 AM (zDsvJ)

13 And not a damned one of them could find the time in their lives to so much as spend a weekend a month for a few years to don a uniform in at least the Coast Guard Reserves.

Except Perry.

Posted by: Oedipus at September 20, 2014 09:11 AM (Tjkt6)

14 Okay, I could vote for Cruz fairly easily. The other two? Not so much. Someone needs to 'splain somethin' about illegals to Rubio (yo, Marco baby, what is it about ILLEGAL you don't understand?), and I Will. Not. Vote. for anyone who has the RuPaul gene in him.

When you throw all of Y-not's candidates into one steaming pile, it has to be Perry. I'm still hoping for some dark-horse capital-C Conservative to come along, though, as I don't want the Poppin' Fresh or Rove wings of the Republican party to gain any more of a foothold than they already have.

In any case, it'll be an uphill battle for any decent candidate, thanks to the MFM, Choom Boy and Shrillery.

Are we boned? Why yes, we are....

Posted by: MrScribbler at September 20, 2014 09:12 AM (fi6Zh)

15 The one I struggle with out of these three is Rubio. I feel very betrayed by his amnesty stunt, but I can't decide if that's disqualifying for me (for the general). As bad as he is, and I think he's a weasel, ANY Democrat would be worse on immigration. So I think I could force myself to vote for him in the general.

I do not think I could vote for Rand. He raises too many red flags for me, especially on foreign policy, and he does not have a long enough public record for my taste.

It goes without saying that I like Cruz a lot.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:12 AM (zDsvJ)

16
I watched part of the Abortion Barbie debate, and I'm convinced that there is just no way Wendy Davis didn't have something in her ear, and off camera 'helpers' feeding her lines to repeat. Her manner of speaking was simply too disjointed, and halting.

Blah blah....pause....blah....pause....blah-blah blah....pause....blah.

Posted by: Sticky Wicket at September 20, 2014 09:12 AM (0IhFx)

17
Oh, look, Ted is an animal lover. Good.

I wish someone would say they will dial back obamacare (you know they will never get rid of that turd now).

Posted by: The Progs at September 20, 2014 09:13 AM (iQIUe)

18

Rubio is still dead to me.

Posted by: Wodeshed at September 20, 2014 09:13 AM (wCuR+)

19 >>Posted by: FCF at September 20, 2014 09:08 AM

Yeah, I wish we had some more people with military experience. So far of the nine we've covered, there's just Perry... but I might give Nikki Haley partial credit for being married to a military man.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:13 AM (zDsvJ)

20
That Django twat says she will never apologize for pulling the race card. Did they really think they could shame the into doing so?

Posted by: The Progs at September 20, 2014 09:14 AM (iQIUe)

21 Before I can get excited about Rick Perry, Bitch!, I need to see what he's like off pain meds. And nobody's going to vote for someone who regularly wears Foster Grants. It's shallow but true.

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:16 AM (3+3pu)

22 Where is the choice for "I could never vote for any of these various so-con religious freaks, government - shutter - downing grandstanding Canadians!!!###!" eleventy! ?

Posted by: Tyrone Shoelaces at September 20, 2014 09:16 AM (Q3tFF)

23 In following weeks we could maybe cover the "Establishment" candidates and then maybe try to come up with some people who have popular/base support. Maybe even try to think of folks we wish would run... Gowdy? Sessions? Any others?

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:16 AM (zDsvJ)

24 Oh and Rand is my senator, he came thru town last month and spent 5 minutes ....

Posted by: FCF at September 20, 2014 09:16 AM (kejii)

25 >>>>The big fiction here is that Hillary will be the nominee. I don't know who it will be, but it won't be her.<<<<<

Neal deGrasse Tyson, because SCIENCE!

Posted by: the guy that moves pianos for a living... at September 20, 2014 09:17 AM (dJCJQ)

26 Which is not to say I won't get excited about Rick Perry at some point

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:17 AM (3+3pu)

27 "The big fiction here is that Hillary will be the nominee"

This.

Stick a fork in her. She's done. (insert clich� here)

There's no campaign, no fundraising (to speak of), and her "base" is a, well, joke. Seriously bitchy old white women aren't sweeping anyone into office.

Posted by: anon a mouse at September 20, 2014 09:17 AM (gXRIG)

28 >>Before I can get excited about Rick Perry, Bitch!, I need to see what he's like off pain meds.

Yes. He needs to be better answering questions out of his element and at debates.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:17 AM (zDsvJ)

29 "I could never vote for any of these various so-con religious freaks, government - shutter - downing grandstanding Canadians!!!###!" eleventy"

Hey, that's my line

Posted by: dude who clicks "like" on "science stuff" on Reddit. A LOT! PREPARETOSCIENCE!!! at September 20, 2014 09:19 AM (gXRIG)

30 Yeah, I don't know that it will be Hillary, but she's a known evil, so I thought she'd be a good stand-in.

There's no way the Democrats will nominate anyone less liberal than Obama. They've gone full-retard. It will be a Diablo. It may be an unknown Diablo, but still Evil.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:19 AM (zDsvJ)

31 Hillary makes a really good living being the presumed nominee. She will suck the money out of the room for the next year and a half and then fade into the senior statesman role, stroking a fluffy cat and cackling maniacally over an expensive-looking globe, while men in matching jumpsuits and hard hats scurry around in her dormant volcano lair.

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:20 AM (3+3pu)

32 " so I thought she'd be a good stand-in"

What am I, chopped suet?

Posted by: dude who clicks at September 20, 2014 09:21 AM (gXRIG)

33 Hey, I was supposed to be #32.

Posted by: fauxahauntus at September 20, 2014 09:21 AM (gXRIG)

34
Truman! Nice to see you man.

Still on Team Perry, would settle for Walker or Cruz. Although I admit I am displeased with some of the consultants Perry has brought on recently (see the sidebar links about Steve Schmidt ICYMI).

Posted by: Conservative Crank at September 20, 2014 09:22 AM (b2cFu)

35
What would YOU do to stop this woman from becoming the next Commander-in-Chief?
Y-not

That's an unfair question. I assume the secret service and NSA monitor this site. Therefor I am not telling what I would do to that piece of trash

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, fighting the ban at September 20, 2014 09:22 AM (1FBjV)

36 Hey Cranky! Heh. Good times.

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:23 AM (3+3pu)

37 Was that one issue supposed to be - "Stay out of Iraq" - Instead of - "Stay out of Iran"?
It makes a difference.

Posted by: kraki at September 20, 2014 09:24 AM (krvsp)

38 Rubio- amnesty. Fat head.
Martinez- liberal. 5 EVs in NM.
Jindal- snore.
Paul- Paulistinian.

The rest are acceptable. They're all better than the democrat.

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:26 AM (3+3pu)

39 Shiny and clean.
Posted by: anon a mouse at September 20, 2014 09:00 AM (gXRIG)

Yah- the ~~illegal~~ undocumented Honduran maid was just in here wiping things down with a coat of lemon Pledge.

Posted by: Bill H at September 20, 2014 09:26 AM (3sZO1)

40 By the way, my prediction is it'll be Warren or Booker who get the nomination.

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:27 AM (3+3pu)

41 I think Hillary is less likely to be the nominee for 2016 than she was in 2008. I don't see any reason to think the donks will nominate a white person for president ever again. After what they've pulled off with Obama, why would they? And no, woman is not enough of a 'minority' anymore.

Posted by: mugiwara at September 20, 2014 09:29 AM (3a584)

42 That Django twat says she will never apologize for pulling the race card. Did they really think they could shame the into doing so?
Posted by: The Progs
-------------------------
The Obama plan for radicalizing the African American community is proceeding nicely.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, Specializing in post cloning at September 20, 2014 09:30 AM (/GgDU)

43 >>>And no, woman is not enough of a 'minority' anymore.

if TV commercials have taught me anything, attractive asian women are actually the majority.

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:31 AM (3+3pu)

44 All of those candidates > Voting for Mitt again > Voting for McCain again > Voting for any current (D) near-frontrunner or frontrunner.

And I really can't stand a few of those candidates...but if Hillary is the alternative?

Come on...

Posted by: akula51 at September 20, 2014 09:32 AM (R5qgD)

45 Shit, I forgot "staying home". It's somewhere around McCain, not sure if it's to the left or right.

Posted by: akula51 at September 20, 2014 09:33 AM (R5qgD)

46 And I really can't stand a few of those candidates...but if Hillary is the alternative?

Come on...
Posted by: akula51
------------------------
I would vote for the Easter Bunny first.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, Specializing in post cloning at September 20, 2014 09:34 AM (/GgDU)

47
By the way, my prediction is it'll be Warren or Booker who get the nomination.
Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:27 AM (3+3pu)

Warren is my big wild card. While I don't believe a white person will ever win on the donks side again, I'm curious to see if we've sunk so far that the MFM will play offense against anyone who dares to point out that Liz Warren ain't an injun.

Posted by: mugiwara at September 20, 2014 09:34 AM (3a584)

48 I'm gonna go rally for Dave Rosa now. Show your support by clicking the link in my sig and dropping some dough.

Be good to each other babies.

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:35 AM (3+3pu)

49 holy smokes, Bullwinkle, what a giant post for a Saturday morning. It just kept scrolling...! My bio-processor is not warmed up enough for this. But y'all with functional minds, carry on. (lurkmode)
_______
Click nic for Hillary's Turn, 36s video webwork from a few weeks back

Posted by: mindless webworker at September 20, 2014 09:36 AM (dirRl)

50 the MFM will play offense against anyone who dares to point out that Liz Warren ain't an injun.
-----------------

That statement is just more evidence of the War on Women by the Tea Party-controlled, rabid right wing.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, Specializing in post cloning at September 20, 2014 09:37 AM (/GgDU)

51 40 By the way, my prediction is it'll be Warren or Booker who get the nomination.
Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at September 20, 2014 09:27 AM (3+3pu)

I don't thin the country is ready for another inexperienced black. That leaves the guilt vote to vote Warren. Who in my opinion is worse than Hillary. Let the good times roll

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, fighting the ban at September 20, 2014 09:37 AM (KJLlE)

52 Clinton not the nominee? Who then Fauxahontas? When I saw her being run up the flag pole and a somewhat loud golf clap though serious response I knew something calculated was going on. Stupid but calculated.

The manipulation, it burns.

Posted by: Fewenuff at September 20, 2014 09:38 AM (zPNX5)

53 Posted by: Mike Hammer, Specializing in post cloning at September 20, 2014 09:34 AM (/GgDU)

Love the nic Mike

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, fighting the ban at September 20, 2014 09:39 AM (KJLlE)

54 MH - It's a science

Posted by: Mike Hammer, Specializing in post cloning at September 20, 2014 09:39 AM (/GgDU)

55 I'm ready for Hillary.

Ready for Hillary to do time.

Posted by: akula51 at September 20, 2014 09:40 AM (R5qgD)

56 I think the three most likely for the donks are Booker, Deval Patrick, or the wookie.

Posted by: mugiwara at September 20, 2014 09:41 AM (3a584)

57 I want to put a Run Hillary bumper sticker on my bug shield of my pick up. Wonder how many would catch the sarcasm?

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, fighting the ban at September 20, 2014 09:41 AM (KJLlE)

58 What about that Cumo chap in NY?

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, fighting the ban at September 20, 2014 09:42 AM (KJLlE)

59 As a proud Texican, I am glad that two of the top picks are from Texas.

I think a Perry, Cruz ticket would be great. I don't think Cruz is capable of winning. The guy's great on issues, but is frankly not good looking enough. Perry is near movie star quality (I'm thinking a James Garner manly man style), and that will tend to move the needle a bit. (And I say that handsome stuff in a completely manly and heterosexual way)

I like Walker because he fights back and will not take the bullshit that we know will be coming from the opposition. And he will make their heads explode every night on all of the media outlets.

Now my real dream ticket would be a Perry / Palin ticket. Palin as the attack polar bear, and completely dominate the media so much that folks may not even know who's running against them.

But I am worried that Perry might be hiring guys that will advise him not to fight, and we'll get another version of George Bush that's all presidential and stuff, and not willing to fight for the job. You know, like Mitt didn't.

Posted by: Mephitis at September 20, 2014 09:45 AM (GLwVs)

60 I'll worry about Perry's hires (some of which are for his legal battle, btw) when there's some sign he's turning on the base.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:48 AM (zDsvJ)

61 Rubio: Not after the amnesty shenanigans. Plus he doesn't strike me as particularly deep.

Rand: used to like him, but I think he's a slippery guy and I don't trust him. I no longer think he's sincere. Seems to have some of Dad's screwiness. I held out on believing he was crazy like his fix dad but I can do so no longer. Although I think Rand >> Nor. I do think his hair is cute.

Cruz: Sure. I just hope they haven't turned him into too much of a monster in the eyes of the LIVs.

Posted by: Chique - free MWR! at September 20, 2014 09:50 AM (r+7wo)

62 OK, what am I missing? Ted Cruz was born in Canada. Does that not mean that he is ineligible for election to President?

Posted by: Steven Mondul at September 20, 2014 09:50 AM (Qg2ml)

63 However, I will vote for any of them before Shrillary. (And I should be alb to vote then, yay!). I can never forgive Benghazi. Plus what has she ever accomplished on her own. Even riding on her hubby's coattails she hasn't done much.

Plus she's a horrible person.

Posted by: Chique - free MWR! at September 20, 2014 09:52 AM (r+7wo)

64 OK, what am I missing? Ted Cruz was born in Canada. Does that not mean that he is ineligible for election to President?
--

Children born outside the U.S. to U.S. citizens get dual citizenship, I believe. They don't lose their rights to U.S. citizenship. IIRC Cruz renounced his Canadian (dual) citizenship recently.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:54 AM (zDsvJ)

65 Damn Y-Not THAT was a lot of work. Thanks.

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 09:54 AM (0FSuD)

66 I know he has the wrong kind of experience, but Ben Carson is awfully good as a speaker and in interviews.

Posted by: Emily at September 20, 2014 09:55 AM (7Rn+/)

67 30 Yeah, I don't know that it will be Hillary, but she's a known evil, so I thought she'd be a good stand-in.

There's no way the Democrats will nominate anyone less liberal than Obama. They've gone full-retard. It will be a Diablo. It may be an unknown Diablo, but still Evil.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:19 AM (zDsvJ)

Lately, I've been thinking it'll be one of the Castro bros. from San Antonio.

They're probably corrupt as hell but-

like Obama both present well, dress nicely, speak like rich elitist white people, are maybe further left than Obama, and are almost totally unknown nationally.

The Democrats for all the low brow retardedness of their voters and politicians have very good strategic thinkers at the top. (Hey, they have a successful country to destroy, yo!)-

and I think the open borders ploy of Obama plus the upcoming Presidential amnesty will produce an unstoppable solid block of "Historic First Hispanic President" even bigger than Obama's Solid Block O' Black People-

and for the same reason.

The Republican leadership who can't even think tactically, let alone strategically, will roll over just as they have for Obama-

and in 8 more years America will be dead.

Posted by: naturalfake at September 20, 2014 09:55 AM (KBvAm)

68

oooh, love the polling

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at September 20, 2014 09:56 AM (IXrOn)

69 @64

We had a long discussion on Cruz's citizenship months ago. I thought he did not qualify, but the morons proved he did. They changed the rules by statute several years ago.

I am too lazy to look up the rule, but they convicted me, sort of, that he is OK.

Remember, McCain and Goldwater were born in territories.

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 09:57 AM (0FSuD)

70 I also like Perry, Walker and Jindal. I'm pretty open to a lot of our potential candidates.

Posted by: Chique - free MWR! at September 20, 2014 09:57 AM (r+7wo)

71 68

oooh, love the polling
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at September 20, 2014 09:56 AM (IXrOn)

Of course you love it, you naughty little minx you!

Posted by: Insomniac at September 20, 2014 09:58 AM (LAJDm)

72
I will not vote for politicians who I have to guess at what they stand for. That is pure bullshit. If they can't be up front about it, eff 'em. I understand that there is always some political juggling but nothing makes me sicker than the pretzel logic I see employed by conservatives who will argue that when candidate X says white he is really saying black.

Posted by: The Progs at September 20, 2014 09:58 AM (iQIUe)

73 If you want a man with military experience, Allen West should be considered.

Posted by: Hanoverfist at September 20, 2014 09:58 AM (ecN6u)

74 Plenty of time to debate the pros and cons of each (which is always fun), but in the main the 2016 slate is much stronger. Contrast with the dems, who have a much weaker slate.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 09:59 AM (etJIg)

75 1-Walker's shown the most chops.

2-As many reservations as I have about him, Perry.

3-Like Martinez but she may be a little squish.

Love Cruz but I think they'd Palin him if they haven't already. Plus, he's not a real good speaker.

Jindal-no

Kasich-vomit

Rand-meh

Rubio-don't trust him

Nikki-SC has been such a cra-cra place

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 09:59 AM (3XKfG)

76 No on Rubio and Paul. Rubio "looks" and "acts" like a sleazy politician, and his pandering to the LaRaza types on ILLEGAL immigration just confirmed his "dead to me" status with me. Rand Paul is Ron Paul's kid. The nut truly does not fall far from the tree.

Posted by: Truck Monkey, as Voiced by Brian Dennehy at September 20, 2014 09:59 AM (jucos)

77 This is a short article about Cruz's eligibility from CNN. (Link in nick)

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/13/opinion/chin-cruz-president/index.html

I don't think this author is particularly friendly to the GOP, btw, and this is not the most scholarly article, but it was handy.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 09:59 AM (zDsvJ)

78 Rubio has moved from "hell NO" to "if I have to dammit"

Paul from "yeah, I could do that" to "I don't know about this guy...maybe he just hides the crazy better than his dad"

The only sure-fire "no's" are Bush (God help us) or Christie (Double God help us)

Bush/Christie no wouldn't change if they were running against Satan himself

Posted by: FITP at September 20, 2014 09:59 AM (z5+Uu)

79 my father sent me this... heh
A cup of coffee and a chuckle this morning.

Working people frequently ask retired people what they do to make their days interesting. Well, for example, the other day, wife Debra and I went into town and visited a shop.

When we came out, there was a cop writing out a parking ticket. We went up to him and I said, 'Come on, man, how about giving a senior citizen a break?' He ignored us and continued writing the ticket. I called him an a--hole. He glared at me and started writing another ticket for having worn-out tires. So Debra called him a sh-- head. He finished the second ticket and put it on the windshield with the first. Then he started writing
more tickets. This went on for about 20 minutes. The more we abused him, the more tickets he wrote.

Just then our bus arrived, and we got on it and went home. We always look for cars with "OBAMA 2012" stickers. We try to have a little fun each day now that we're retired.

It's important at our age.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at September 20, 2014 09:59 AM (IXrOn)

80 Scott Walker is in a tough spot to be reelected. I don't think we could have Scott Walker as GOP nominee if he loses his election.

Posted by: Carol at September 20, 2014 10:00 AM (sj3Ax)

81 Ready for Hillary

To go into exile.

Posted by: Chique - free MWR! at September 20, 2014 10:00 AM (r+7wo)

82 Chique - free MWR!

What happen to MWR? Stuck in the barrel or did the banhammer hit?

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:01 AM (0FSuD)

83 81 Ready for Hillary

To go into exile.
Posted by: Chique - free MWR! at September 20, 2014 10:00 AM (r+7wo)

From your keyboard to God's ears.

Posted by: Insomniac at September 20, 2014 10:01 AM (LAJDm)

84 Posted by: naturalfake at September 20, 2014 09:55 AM (KBvAm)

-----well it would make sense on the hate America side of the ballot. Follow a Barak HUSEIN Obama with a CASTRO. Pretty much in your face brazen hutzpah.

Posted by: Chilling the most at September 20, 2014 10:01 AM (gxtMZ)

85 82 Chique - free MWR!

What happen to MWR? Stuck in the barrel or did the banhammer hit?
Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:01 AM (0FSuD)

Port 1080.

Posted by: Insomniac at September 20, 2014 10:02 AM (LAJDm)

86 And, although they should be voting in a way consistent with their state constituents' views, they are less likely to be voting purely based on their state's interests.

They should? When did this start?

I haven't seen one congrescritter vote for anything I want or even consider important in decades, even my own Dondi.

All I hear is bullshit and all I see is my country in rapid, engineered, calculated decline.

We are so terribly fucked...

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit at September 20, 2014 10:02 AM (0HooB)

87 Palin/West
Until someone comes up with a ticket that;

Loves America and freedom more
Would be as fearless going after corruption
Would cause our enemies to crap their pants and our allies to say "Finally" as well

That's my choice.
Will listen to alternatives

Posted by: teej at September 20, 2014 10:02 AM (H2/m3)

88 >>Plus, he's not a real good speaker.

That's interesting. Are you basing that on speeches or tv appearances or what? Because one thing that impressed me greatly was the way he bitch-slapped that Old Guard GOP Senator (whose name I've forgotten, but who was trying to act like Cruz didn't know the rules of the Senate) during the shutdown. He really verbally manhandled him. And that was supposed to be one of the Smart senior Republicans.

I think Rubio is over-rated as a speaker. I saw his speech at the Reagan library and it was pretty meh, imho, even tho folks were raving about it at the time.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:02 AM (zDsvJ)

89 @79

Thank sounds like a good plan. Cops in my town would probably arrest me and leave the car.

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:03 AM (0FSuD)

90 "What happen to MWR?"

Yeah?

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:04 AM (3XKfG)

91 I think a poll on 'Electability' might be interesting. Which is to say, "Without regard for your personal feelings about the potential candidate, who do you think would be most likely to defeat Hillary". Separate polls for Warren, and etc.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, Specializing in post cloning at September 20, 2014 10:04 AM (/GgDU)

92 Oh....

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:04 AM (3XKfG)

93
British Jewish leftys crack me up. They have muslim rape gangs who go unabated for a decade and soldiers getting their heads sawed off in their streets, but they are obsessed with Spencer/Geller. It would be funny but for the fact it is darwinism in action.

http://goo.gl/0HuAH7

sweasel told a story about how the french prisoners on death row got dotted lines tattoed on their necks with the words: cut here. I think these people might as well have the same.

Posted by: The Progs at September 20, 2014 10:05 AM (iQIUe)

94 I gotta say, I am becoming very keen on Nikki Haley. Seems to me she has many of the upsides of Walker, with the added bonus of being telegenic, business-minded, and married to a career military man.

As far as I know, she's never pissed off either the Base or the GOPe.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:05 AM (zDsvJ)

95 Scott Walker is in a tough spot to be reelected. I
don't think we could have Scott Walker as GOP nominee if he loses his
election.
Posted by: Carol at September 20, 2014 10:00 AM (sj3Ax)

Walker is my #1 because he's proven he can handle the Left's full-on assault. But I agree he needs to win again this year.

Posted by: mugiwara at September 20, 2014 10:05 AM (3a584)

96 We aren't voting ourselves out of this mess.
Get to prepping.

Posted by: richard_gozinya at September 20, 2014 10:06 AM (7J7Fx)

97 And Huntsman.....he is a permanent "no" too.

Fuck that dude.

Posted by: FITP at September 20, 2014 10:07 AM (z5+Uu)

98 I think a poll on 'Electability' might be interesting. Which is to say,
"Without regard for your personal feelings about the potential
candidate, who do you think would be most likely to defeat Hillary".
---

I can do that a bit later in the "series," but I really hate factoring in electability into primary voting. I'd like to run through the list of potential candidates first before we game out the general.

We might need to wait until after the coming elections given that several of these folks are up for re-election.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:07 AM (zDsvJ)

99 well it would make sense on the hate America side of the ballot. Follow a Barak HUSEIN Obama with a CASTRO. Pretty much in your face brazen hutzpah.

Posted by: Chilling the most at September 20, 2014 10:01 AM (gxtMZ)

Most definitely.

I'm sure there was many a covert orgasm in progtard land when they voted for a Hussein so soon after 911.

How often do you get to show contempt that deep toward someone in such a socially accepted manner?

Posted by: naturalfake at September 20, 2014 10:08 AM (KBvAm)

100 94
I gotta say, I am becoming very keen on Nikki Haley. Seems to me she has
many of the upsides of Walker, with the added bonus of being telegenic,
business-minded, and married to a career military man.

As far as I know, she's never pissed off either the Base or the GOPe.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:05 AM (zDsvJ

That and she has BIG Tits.

She has pissed off some of the legislature. Her approval rating is OK, nothing to write home about, BUT she does like to party.

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:08 AM (0FSuD)

101 I think Rubio is over-rated as a speaker. I saw his speech at the Reagan library and it was pretty meh, imho, even tho folks were raving about it at the time.

-----

In general, I think being a good speaker is somewhat overrated. It is a great skill to have and those who have it can use it effectively. Bush was widely considered a bad speaker (which I thought was way too overstated), but it didn't stop him. Obama is considered a good speaker (not in these parts, but in general) and it hasn't really helped him.

Most of the potential nominees stated above are good speakers, some better than others.

I suppose speaking skills goes into the pool of factors that help of each of us decide who to choose, but for me it is a small factor. For the most part, if you are running for the Presidential nomination, you are probably a decent speaker.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:08 AM (GJMmh)

102 I think a poll on 'Electability' might be interesting. Which is to say, "Without regard for your personal feelings about the potential candidate, who do you think would be most likely to defeat Hillary". Separate polls for Warren, and etc.

-----

All of them. I'd like to understand why people think HRC is so electable. She won't even win her own party's election.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:09 AM (GJMmh)

103 "We aren't voting ourselves out of this mess."

Agree.

Not to be a downer, but, we need a whole lot more to change (and fast) than our elected pols. It's not going to happen.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:09 AM (3XKfG)

104 She has pissed off some of the legislature. Her approval rating is OK, nothing to write home about, BUT she does like to party.
---

Well, state legislators strike me as people whose egos generally out-size their utility. YMMV. But on the national level, I've never heard a knock against her.

IIRC she's expected to win re-election handily.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:10 AM (zDsvJ)

105 Did not know Haley was married to a career military man. That counts for a lot in my book.

Posted by: Oedipus at September 20, 2014 10:10 AM (EXsvS)

106 " BUT she does like to party."

Really? Got her digits by any chance?

Posted by: Sen. Bob Menendez at September 20, 2014 10:11 AM (3XKfG)

107 Plus what has she ever accomplished on her own. Even riding on her hubby's coattails she hasn't done much.

Plus she's a horrible person.
Posted by: Chique
---------------------

There is *nothing* with which she has ever been associated that was not tainted by her touch. Nothing. And the list is very long.

Moreover, she has a zero record of achievement..., not that the LIV's are concerned about that.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, Specializing in post cloning at September 20, 2014 10:11 AM (/GgDU)

108 If you want a man with military experience, Allen West should be considered.
Posted by: Hanoverfist at September 20, 2014 09:58 AM (ecN6u)

I like West a lot, and I'm a bit surprised his name isn't bandied about more in the "who should run against [insert Dem devil here]?".

Posted by: jwpaine at September 20, 2014 10:11 AM (68O4K)

109 Cruz is absolutely eligible. No reason to keep having this discussion. Personally, I don't think Cruz necessarily wants the nomination (not at this point).

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:12 AM (GJMmh)

110 Thanks so much Y-not for all the work. Well done!

Posted by: Tanaya Oreilly at September 20, 2014 10:12 AM (2UXA/)

111 I will not vote for politicians who I have to guess at what they stand for. That is pure bullshit. If they can't be up front about it, eff 'em.

The mailbox here at Casa Backwardio is being routinely filled with candidate mailers with the election coming up soon. I keep them around so I can find their web sites for research.

As a registered Republican, all I get is their candidates mail and I'm starting to notice some similarities: virtually none of them even mention the economy, or getting rid of OCare or securing the border or relying on the Constitution as the basis for their actions should they be elected.

I. Don't. Get. It.

Is there not one politician willing to stand up for what I believe in anymore? Am I that far from the mainstream of America these days? If so, then what's the point in even voting? Why waste my time voting for someone who just turn around and stab me in the back politically?

I don't like feeling like this, a stranger in my own country. I felt that way before I divorced the Daughter of Satan.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit at September 20, 2014 10:13 AM (0HooB)

112 Did not know Haley was married to a career military man. That counts for a lot in my book.
Posted by: Oedipus
---------------------

Me too. But, consider this about Kay Hagan..., one of Obama's biggest puppets:

Senator Hagan's father-in-law was a two-star Marine general, her father and brother both served in the Navy, and her husband, Chip, a Navy Vietnam veteran.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, Specializing in post cloning at September 20, 2014 10:14 AM (/GgDU)

113 Well DC seems to be on a Not-Bush kick.

France has joined TFG in his Not-Bush, Not-War on the Not-Islamic Not-State in Iraq. While Hagel, McConnell and the rest of the GOPe bring the accordian to Not-Iraq.

So we got that going for us.

Not...

Posted by: DaveA at September 20, 2014 10:14 AM (DL2i+)

114 "not that the LIV's are concerned about that."

No, they're not. They've heard the name. The media will pump her. They remember Bill.

Too many of the voting public have proven they are mindless dupes willing to lap up the media swill and go with the meme. I don't trust, nor like, them very much.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:15 AM (3XKfG)

115 I wouldn't vote for Marco Rubio if you tied him to a kite and flew him in a thunderstorm.

Cruz/Perry any day, the others? Meh, better than that commie bitch.

Posted by: Gmac-Pondering something involving rope and a tree. at September 20, 2014 10:15 AM (baiNQ)

116 I will say of the Govenors, right now, my preference is Walker/Jindal/Perry. I don't know enough about Haley but will look into her more. The others I have no interest in.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:17 AM (GJMmh)

117 Perry/Cruz. And Perry damn sure better work on his 'presence'.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, Specializing in post cloning at September 20, 2014 10:17 AM (/GgDU)

118 If you want a man with military experience, Allen West should be considered.

Posted by: Hanoverfist at September 20, 2014 09:58 AM (ecN6u)

I like West a lot, and I'm a bit surprised his name isn't bandied
about more in the "who should run against [insert Dem devil here]?".

--

Yeah, I will definitely do a post or two on people like West, Palin, and maybe Carson. Folks the Base likes but who are not necessarily positioned to make a run.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:18 AM (zDsvJ)

119 Pretty shitty you didn't give me the chance to forcefully reject JEB! in that last poll.

Posted by: Mr. Dave at September 20, 2014 10:19 AM (Wa1o7)

120 LOL Gmac!

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:20 AM (zDsvJ)

121 I want a politician to stand up and say that we are at war with radical islam.... because they are at war with us.... and by extension we are at war with the moderate islamics as well because they, in their silence, tacitly approve of what their bretheren are doing.
I want a politician to stand up to special interest and the free shit crowd. I want him/her to firmly state that before a federal dollar can be given to someone that it must first be taken from someone else.
For starters..........

Posted by: Truck Monkey, as Voiced by Brian Dennehy at September 20, 2014 10:20 AM (jucos)

122

* oink, oink, oink *

Posted by: Pigs, taunting Ricardo at September 20, 2014 10:20 AM (/GgDU)

123 And Perry damn sure better work on his 'presence'.

----

I don't think that was necessarily the issue. Regardless, I'm somewhat impressed with how Perry has improved and remade his image. We'll see if it lasts, but I think he has made himself look much more serious and speak with more of a "statesmanlike" authority. Sometimes he falls back into the Perry of old. But he definitely received some good advice on that front.

Again, we'll see if it lasts or makes any difference.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:20 AM (GJMmh)

124 IIRC she's expected to win re-election handily.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:10 AM (zDsvJ)

Haley's opponent is a hack that has run three times and lost. She has no competition. The demo in SC are ridiculous. Remember they nominate Green for US Senate?

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:20 AM (0FSuD)

125 I would rather vote for my breakfast cereal than that scrunt. and I mean that in a nice way.

Posted by: goatexchange at September 20, 2014 10:21 AM (8cmiI)

126 As far as Hagan's husband is concerned, I believe he got drafted and had to go to Veitnam. That is not exactly a plus. He had NO choice.

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:22 AM (0FSuD)

127 Got her digits by any chance?

Posted by: Sen. Bob Menendez at September 20, 2014 10:11 AM (3XKfG)

Way too old. Hell.....she menstruates.

Posted by: Bob's host in the Dominican Republic at September 20, 2014 10:22 AM (Zu3d9)

128 The Daughter of Satan. *cleans coffee of kindle *

Posted by: Tanaya Oreilly at September 20, 2014 10:22 AM (2UXA/)

129 "* oink, oink, oink *"

hehehehehe......

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:22 AM (3XKfG)

130 >>Pretty shitty you didn't give me the chance to forcefully reject JEB! in that last poll.

Sooooon.

I think next week I'll do Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, and... Whoops! I'm not sure who for the third. (Hat tip: Rick Perry)

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:22 AM (zDsvJ)

131 The one I struggle with out of these three is Rubio. I feel very betrayed by his amnesty stunt, but I can't decide if that's disqualifying for me (for the general). As bad as he is, and I think he's a weasel, ANY Democrat would be worse on immigration. So I think I could force myself to vote for him in the general.

I do not think I could vote for Rand. He raises too many red flags for me, especially on foreign policy, and he does not have a long enough public record for my taste.

It goes without saying that I like Cruz a lot.

-----

Amnesty is the disqualifying factor for many, which is fine. For me it is Obamacare, so I voted for Kaisch in your poll.

Rand may have some issues, but he would be radically different, and maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:23 AM (GJMmh)

132 As far as Hagan's husband is concerned, I believe he got drafted and had to go to Veitnam. That is not exactly a plus. He had NO choice.
Posted by: Nip
-------------

I do not think that he was drafted into the Navy. Whether that is so or not, it does not sully his record, and I will stand by that, whatever I think of his wife.

Posted by: Pigs, taunting Ricardo at September 20, 2014 10:24 AM (/GgDU)

133 Good discussion Y-Not - well done.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:24 AM (GJMmh)

134 Mike Hammer,
Perry/Cruz works for me.
What about old rule of not having both from same state?

Isn't VP supposed to attract voters from a state GOP nominee would need votes?

Posted by: Carol at September 20, 2014 10:24 AM (sj3Ax)

135 Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:22 AM (zDsvJ)

Take a look at who Perry just hired (I think it's in the sidebar).

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 20, 2014 10:25 AM (Zu3d9)

136 Old crabby ladies are going to fight over Warren vs Hillary in the primaries, but from the liberal latte land where I live, Warren has the clear advantage. Why? Hillary is seen as too conservative. And I'm not kidding.

The left is done pretending, they are going full left from here on out. And they will sweep up lots of LIV with another "historic first" - either the Fauxcahauntas or the Castro Bros from Texas.

Watch the women's magazines to see who they do stories about - that should start soon enough.

Posted by: WhyMe at September 20, 2014 10:25 AM (l9mF2)

137 Not to be a downer, but, we need a whole lot more to change (and fast) than our elected pols. It's not going to happen.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:09 AM (3XKfG)

---------------------

I also agree. But we have to start somewhere, and I'd like to have a strong horse in DC that'll have our backs.

Posted by: Soona at September 20, 2014 10:25 AM (QKQgJ)

138 Ricardo,
Did you comment on pictures I sent?

Posted by: Carol at September 20, 2014 10:26 AM (sj3Ax)

139 MH, I hear you on Hagan, but she has so many other disqualifiers she's not even comparable. Sadly, she will continue to be my senator, I'm afraid.

Posted by: Oedipus at September 20, 2014 10:26 AM (EXsvS)

140 Nice roses, Carol.

"Tatooed Daughter" threw me though. Never heard before.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:27 AM (3XKfG)

141 I was reading Allah's post on Condi, and it raises an interesting point, particularly since the liberal media seems to be in love with the idea of her as NFL Commish. I think it is hogwash, they just want Goodell gone, and needed someone to push as a replacement, but whatever.

Certainly, Dick Morris would love it if she ran.

In some respects, I think she would make a fine VP choice. But I don't know for who. The top of the ticket would have to be solid on the socon front, and could not be tied to closely to Bush.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:28 AM (GJMmh)

142 Perry/Cruz works for me.
What about old rule of not having both from same state?

Isn't VP supposed to attract voters from a state GOP nominee would need votes?
Posted by: Carol
----------------------------------

A good point. And it speaks to perhaps the most important aspect of this, i.e., who (or rather, what ticket) is actually electable. I hate that with a passion, but it is the harsh reality.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, specializing in multi-posting at September 20, 2014 10:28 AM (/GgDU)

143 My neighbor's cat is a despicable thing. Craps in my flower beds, leaves muddy footprints on the hood of my car. Yet, I'd vote and campaign for that son of a tuna eatin' fur ball over any Democrat out there. They're all socialists buying votes with my tax dollars. And when they run out of tax dollars to buy votes with, they scheme to buy them with amnesty and promises of citizenship. Democrats of this day and age are akin to what sticks to the bottom of my boot after a trip through the chicken coop.

Posted by: fairweatherbill at September 20, 2014 10:29 AM (cT78V)

144 You can like or dislike Marco Rubio, but one thing's undeniable: That guys give great head.

Posted by: Chuck Schumer at September 20, 2014 10:29 AM (1pjpl)

145 >>Take a look at who Perry just hired (I think it's in the sidebar).

I am not falling into that trap after I had to vote for Mitt "Nice Guy" Romney whose head dude was the odious John Sununu and whose entire circle consisted of people I was told were totes awesome conservatives but wound up being steaming turds of crap (Flake, Ayotte, McDonnell).

Perry hired sharks for his legal defense.

I heard he hired Barbour, too. That's more troubling to me, but I am going to wait to see if there's any sign Perry is becoming a base-basher. So far, I see none.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:29 AM (zDsvJ)

146 @121

And I want a candidate who understands how capitalism should work and will point out how unnecessary over-regulation is killing us. And who will reverse that.

I want a candidate who will call out the MFM and make them look like the idiots they are at every opportunity (which wouldn't be difficult).

I want a candidate who understands that the further we've been dragged away from the Founders and their Principles, the less freedom we have until we're told what type of light bulb we can buy. And who is willing to reverse that.

I want a candidate who's willing to strip the citizenship of domestic enemies like Little Billy Ayers and deport them. All of them.

I want a candidate who'll start cleaning out Gitmo on a monthly basis, preferably on PPV, of the illegal enemy combatants collected there. I also want a candidate who'll warn the ME that any strike on us will result in a far larger strike on them within 48 hours.

I want a candidate who will nominate SCOTUS justices based on their direct understanding of the Constitution as it's written.

I guess I may as well send this list to Santa for all the good it'll do, but a Boy can dream.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit at September 20, 2014 10:30 AM (0HooB)

147 I will say of the Govenors, right now, my preference is
Walker/Jindal/Perry. I don't know enough about Haley but will look into
her more.

If you don't think about electability, or maybe if you do, the best ticket would be Jindal/Haley. True, Jindal is not an exciting figure, but you'd have the ethnic and female boxes checked simultaneously. The ta-tas factor mentioned earlier would be a wild card.

The Dems, those paragons of sensitivity, would start with the 7-11 jokes, but we know that already and can be prepared with suitable outrage. Nonetheless, the ticket would be an exotic one, and there is a significant fraction of the electorate, especially but not exclusively on the Dem side, who would not vote for it.

Rubio is NOT a good speaker. I've never heard a speech of his that inspired me, and that was with all the buildup he received in certain **ahem** quarters. Amnesty has killed his potential for national office, and should.

If we consider only Senators, I've been pretty impressed with Mike Lee (UT).

Posted by: pep at September 20, 2014 10:30 AM (4nR9/)

148 Ricardo
Tattooed Daughter is a new mini introduced this year. I don't care for orange & there wasn't a picture on website, owner talked to me about it & said I'd like it & he was right.

Posted by: Carol at September 20, 2014 10:31 AM (sj3Ax)

149 " Yet, I'd vote and campaign for that son of a tuna eatin' fur ball over any Democrat out there."

He got a website?

He just might beat out Ham Sandwich for the GOP nod.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:31 AM (3XKfG)

150 Ah. It's good to have a concrete way of kowing I'm among like minded individuals.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at September 20, 2014 10:31 AM (EkJwy)

151 I do not think that he was drafted into the Navy.
Whether that is so or not, it does not sully his record, and I will
stand by that, whatever I think of his wife.

Posted by: Pigs, taunting Ricardo at September 20, 2014 10:24 AM (/GgDU)

Having grown up with a draft card and about his same age, Navy service was something you volunteered for if you knew you were going to be drafted.
The thought was that not many Navy guys got shot on a ship or in port, unlike the Army and Marine guys in the trenches.

Just saying, they are total hypocrites. They are one of the richest couple in the Senate.

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:31 AM (0FSuD)

152 I agree about Condi, SH. She could be a nice VP under a governor for the top slot given that none of them really have foreign policy experience. (Perry is the closest given the nature of Texas and him having at least some military experience.)

I'm sure Condi is more liberal than I am, but her intellect and gravitas appeal to me.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:32 AM (zDsvJ)

153 Perry/Cruz works for me

----

Obviously not likely for lots of reason, but I don't see any reason to want Cruz/Rubio/Paul or any young senator in the VP slot. It is a waste to remove them from a place of influence into a weak position. An old senator who could step in - sure.

This is why I like a Perry, Condi, Mitt for VP. If Perry can't win the nom, he has no where else to go. Same for Mitt/Condi (and I'm sure others).

Cruz can be much better help as Senator.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:32 AM (GJMmh)

154 MH, I hear you on Hagan, but she has so many other disqualifiers she's not even comparable. Sadly, she will continue to be my senator, I'm afraid.
Posted by: Oedipus
-------------------------------

Well, my point was that a vicarious relationship with the military does mean very much, though there is a knee-jerk positive reaction. If I knew nothing else about Hagan (as the LIV do not), and her family ties to the military were touted, then I would be favorably impressed.

I *do* know about her, of course, and would not vote for her as Dog Catcher.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, specializing in multi-posting at September 20, 2014 10:32 AM (/GgDU)

155 It'll be me and West against Deval Patrick and Keith Ellison.

And we'll narrowly win, thanks to Oprah taking 30% as an independent.

Posted by: Dr. Ben Carson at September 20, 2014 10:32 AM (lRTwR)

156 "I felt that way before I divorced the Daughter of Satan."

You were married to Hillary Clinton?

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at September 20, 2014 10:33 AM (glk59)

157 I bring a lot to the table as a VP nominee. I'm a healer.

Posted by: Thad Cockring at September 20, 2014 10:34 AM (1pjpl)

158 Haley's opponent is a hack that has run three times
and lost. She has no competition. The demo in SC are ridiculous.
Remember they nominate Green for US Senate?

Posted by: Nip Sip

The SC GOP also elected Miss Lindsey. I don't know what to conclude from that.

Posted by: pep at September 20, 2014 10:35 AM (4nR9/)

159 That's more troubling to me, but I am going to wait to see if there's any sign Perry is becoming a base-basher. So far, I see none.

----

Perry is not what I would consider a movement conservative. But there has really been only one leading politician in the past 10 years who has moved to the right on just about every issue. And that is Perry. Call it pandering, call it playing to his state, but he has done it where others have not. It should count for something.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:35 AM (GJMmh)

160 Tattooed Daughter

Posted by: Carol at September 20, 2014 10:31 AM (sj3Ax)

Carol, can you e-mail me a photo?

nynjmeet at optimum dot net

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 20, 2014 10:35 AM (Zu3d9)

161 130
>>Pretty shitty you didn't give me the chance to forcefully reject JEB! in that last poll.

Sooooon.

I think next week I'll do Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, and... Whoops! I'm not sure who for the third. (Hat tip: Rick Perry)

Posted by: Y-not

Yep, you definitely need a "not if they were on fire and I had just finished two six packs" thread.

Posted by: pep at September 20, 2014 10:36 AM (4nR9/)

162 154
MH, I hear you on Hagan, but she has so many other disqualifiers she's
not even comparable. Sadly, she will continue to be my senator, I'm
afraid.

Posted by: Oedipus

I think not, unless some of our butt hurt friends vote for the libertarian candidate. That is my only fear.

The democrats polling obviously shows that the Blacks have no interest in voting. Thus the planted story in the Raleigh and Charlotte papers pitching the Blacks to vote.

Basically the story was a free ad for the Democrat party.

They are busing down the entire Congressional Black Caucus to go to Black Churches this weekend.

The Ferguson thing was a gift to them, but it has faded into thin air.

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:36 AM (0FSuD)

163 "Tattooed Daughter is a new mini"

Pretty, though.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:37 AM (3XKfG)

164 Just saying, they are total hypocrites.

Posted by: Nip
-----------------------------

Beyond all question. I would dismiss her husband from my list desirable acquaintances because of her, without ever meeting the chap.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, specializing in multi-posting at September 20, 2014 10:37 AM (/GgDU)

165 The SC GOP also elected Miss Lindsey. I don't know what to conclude from that.

Posted by: pep at September 20, 2014 10:35 AM (4nR9/)

No one wants to step up and try to raise the money to fight him.
That and there must be a lot of closet ghey Republicans in SC?

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:38 AM (0FSuD)

166 You were married to Hillary Clinton?

Nope, but I'm convinced the two are related that way.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit at September 20, 2014 10:38 AM (0HooB)

167 "The SC GOP also elected Miss Lindsey. I don't know what to conclude from that."

That's what I mean. I don't know what to make of much coming out of SC. Weird place of late.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:38 AM (3XKfG)

168 Condi Rice is bright, attractive, educated, experienced and often wrong.

She's also pro-choice, which rules her out for me.

Posted by: toby928(C) at September 20, 2014 10:38 AM (rwI+c)

169 OT - but I really liked Laura Ingram's corner piece yesterday on the GOP and this election cycle. She summed it up well for me.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:39 AM (GJMmh)

170 167
"The SC GOP also elected Miss Lindsey. I don't know what to conclude from that."

That's what I mean. I don't know what to make of much coming out of SC. Weird place of late.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill

Preach it, brother.

Posted by: A. Lincoln at September 20, 2014 10:39 AM (4nR9/)

171 I really think we need to have a person who's been a Governor as a Presidential candidate. I think it's much better preparation for being President.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at September 20, 2014 10:40 AM (glk59)

172 Beyond all question. I would dismiss her husband
from my list desirable acquaintances because of her, without ever
meeting the chap.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, specializing in multi-posting at September 20, 2014 10:37 AM (/GgDU)

Will, sadly I must admit, her son was a fraternity brother of my son at Duke.
Typical limousine liberals out to "save" you from yourself.

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:41 AM (0FSuD)

173 "Preach it, brother."

Heh.

History. I knows some of it.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:42 AM (3XKfG)

174 Condi Rice is bright, attractive, educated, experienced and often wrong.

She's also pro-choice, which rules her out for me

-----

Agree on all those things. Which is why I said she would only work as VP choice on a ticket where the top was solid with socons. If that were the case, being pro-choice wouldn't be disqualifying to me because she would only be the VP.

But it is a knock against her. Of course, if she were pro-life, she probably would not be the left's choice for NFL commish.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:42 AM (GJMmh)

175 "Jindal-no

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 09:59 AM (3XKfG) "

Why the Jindal H8 ?

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at September 20, 2014 10:43 AM (PD6iL)

176 Cruz is absolutely eligible. No reason to keep having this discussion. Personally, I don't think Cruz necessarily wants the nomination (not at this point).

Categorically untrue, but a great example of why we lose. Here we are, over 2 years out from the election, and you feel the need to attack the one candidate who is truly conservative because of a phrase (natural born citizen) that has never been legally defined. Personally, I'd like it if it had been, and if that definition was what I suspect you want it to be-born in the US to US parents- but Obama, who is indisputably president, doesn't meet it, nor did McCain, nor did Goldwater, and Chester A Authur was most likely born in Quebec. That ship has sailed and to limit our side, especially of the one guy who IS conservative, because of it is monumentally stupid.

Let the circular firing squad begin.

Posted by: Weirddave at September 20, 2014 10:44 AM (9422s)

177 See, this is why you shouldn't start on a thread, then go do some chores, then come back. I was so sure "tattooed daughter" with a "new mini" was NavyCopJoe.

With a shotgun.

Posted by: Stringer Davis at September 20, 2014 10:46 AM (xq1UY)

178 "Why the Jindal H8 ?"

No hate. Like the guy.

Just no.......sizzle. No energy. The guy is 100% right on so many things but he doesn't fire anyone up in the process. I'd love him to prove me otherwise.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:46 AM (3XKfG)

179 Categorically untrue, but a great example of why we lose. Here we are, over 2 years out from the election, and you feel the need to attack the one candidate who is truly conservative because of a phrase (natural born citizen) that has never been legally defined. Personally, I'd like it if it had been, and if that definition was what I suspect you want it to be-born in the US to US parents- but Obama, who is indisputably president, doesn't meet it, nor did McCain, nor did Goldwater, and Chester A Authur was most likely born in Quebec. That ship has sailed and to limit our side, especially of the one guy who IS conservative, because of it is monumentally stupid.

Let the circular firing squad begin.

-----

I think you misread my post. I said he was absolutely eligible.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:46 AM (GJMmh)

180 Nood thread with content by CBD.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:46 AM (zDsvJ)

181 Categorically untrue, but a great example of why we lose. Here we are,
over 2 years out from the election, and you feel the need to attack the
one candidate who is truly conservative because of a phrase (natural
born citizen) that has never been legally defined.
---
WeirdDave needs MOAR coffee!

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 10:48 AM (zDsvJ)

182 I really think we need to have a person who's been a Governor as a Presidential candidate. I think it's much better preparation for being President.

Not to fuss too much, but I think all we need is someone who can unite the disaffected, formerly "Silent Majority" of the country that shows up in the polls, but whom our illustrious leaders routinely ignore.

I'd start by at least mentioning the economy, since that's one area where almost everyone is suffering today. I've only heard Cruz utter the word, "growth".

Rush got going the other day wondering the same things I've been wondering for a while, namely why Pubbies aren't even addressing the messes we're in.

Again, I. Don't. Get. It. If they won't even talk about what's wrong as a result of the grand experiment with Marxism under this administration and offer up with some concrete solutions for getting us back on track, I really don't know what to say or do.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit at September 20, 2014 10:48 AM (0HooB)

183 "I think you misread my post."

Yeah, think you two were in agreement.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at September 20, 2014 10:48 AM (3XKfG)

184 Too many ran against Graham in the primary. They should have all gotten together & decided who had the best chance to beat him.

Posted by: Carol at September 20, 2014 10:49 AM (sj3Ax)

185 Oh this should be a fun day. UNC-CH has finally agreed to play East Carolina at ECU.

Line has it ECU is going to kick UNC's ass. Please God, let it be by 50 points.

I'll settle for 24.

Posted by: Nip Sip at September 20, 2014 10:49 AM (0FSuD)

186 Weirddave - I never attacked Cruz. I said he was eligible. I have been and am a big fan of his. But I don't think he necessarily wants the nomination this cycle (just a personal belief). And I really do not want his talents wasted in a VP slot (not that I'm too worried about that). I want him in the Senate where he can do the most good for the country and conservatism.

But to repeat, he is eligible. I think it is a silly discussion. He was born a citizen to a citizen. That's it. End of discussion.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:51 AM (GJMmh)

187 I really think we need to have a person who's been a Governor as a Presidential candidate. I think it's much better preparation for being President.
Posted by: Fenelon
--------------------

And therein lies the conundrum. The media have stirred up a witch's brew of image vs. substance, with media-presented image being the dominant ingredient.

What does it gain a candidate to be the better qualified candidate, if he lose the election? See: Romney

Posted by: Mike Hammer, specializing in multi-posting at September 20, 2014 10:51 AM (/GgDU)

188 And therein lies the conundrum. The media have stirred up a witch's brew of image vs. substance, with media-presented image being the dominant ingredient.

What does it gain a candidate to be the better qualified candidate, if he lose the election? See: Romney

----

I think it means you should probably have the support of your base if you expect to win. See McCain, Romney, HRC.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 10:53 AM (GJMmh)

189 117
Perry/Cruz. And Perry damn sure better work on his 'presence'.

There is that quirk in the Constitution that prevents electors in a state from voting for 2 candidates from the same state. So if it was Perry/Cruz, they could vote for the Pres, but not the VP. In a close race, given Texas' size (38 EC votes last time), that could allow the Dem to have the most VP votes

Posted by: duke at September 20, 2014 10:53 AM (enhDu)

190 "143 My neighbor's cat is a despicable thing. Craps in my flower beds, leaves muddy footprints on the hood of my car. Yet, I'd vote and campaign for that son of a tuna eatin' fur ball over any Democrat out there. They're all socialists buying votes with my tax dollars. And when they run out of tax dollars to buy votes with, they scheme to buy them with amnesty and promises of citizenship. Democrats of this day and age are akin to what sticks to the bottom of my boot after a trip through the chicken coop.

Posted by: fairweatherbill at September 20, 2014 10:29 AM (cT78V) "

Put citrus peels or even whole oranges or lemons in your flower bed and let them decompose. For some reason cats don't like this and will go crap somewhere else. It's better than sitting there and spraying them with Siracha hot sauce which they also don't like but it takes up way too much of your time.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at September 20, 2014 10:56 AM (PD6iL)

191 Backwards Boy,
I had Rush on & then had to turn off because I had a few important phone calls on house phone. My best friend called cell several times to ask if I heard Rush but I couldn't answer.
I have Rush 24/7 & listened to it that night.

Rush never criticizes republicans, if he has, that's the first time I've heard him do so.

Posted by: Carol at September 20, 2014 10:56 AM (sj3Ax)

192 Well, they're going to stir up a witches brew for whomever is selected. I will never vote for a Democratic candidate again, but the kinds of decisions and choices that a Governor has to make are more suited to being President. I would gladly vote for Ted Cruz, but I think he needs more seasoning in politics. He's clearly a harder worker than Obama was as a Senator, but if he runs in 2016 the Democrats will trot out "Not enough experience" against him. It doesn't matter that Obama didn't have enough. They don't have to be consistent as long as it benefits Democrats.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at September 20, 2014 10:56 AM (glk59)

193 Allen West. Draft him and and I'm all in....

Posted by: Jenk at September 20, 2014 10:56 AM (f/Mmr)

194 Backwards Boy-

I was just taking it as a given that we have someone who unites the silent majority, but that being a given (I don't know that it will be ) I would choose a Governor over a Senator.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at September 20, 2014 10:59 AM (glk59)

195 I think you misread my post. I said he was absolutely eligible.

Hey, I was only 180 degrees off.

You're right, I did and I apologize.

Posted by: Weirddave at September 20, 2014 11:00 AM (9422s)

196 Not to fuss too much, but I think all we need is someone who can unite
the disaffected, formerly "Silent Majority" of the country that shows up
in the polls, but whom our illustrious leaders routinely ignore.
---

^THIS.

I really think that is the most important quality, but it's very difficult to measure or predict... and the People Who Know Things aren't keen to lose their cushy jobs as consultants so they don't want that type of person to emerge.

I have to say I've been taken aback by the attacks on Cruz.

As I mentioned a few days ago, Ted Cruz is the smarter, more accomplished version of the GOPe's golden-haired boy, Marco Rubio. But they can't control him so they must destroy him.

How you can take a guy like Cruz with his credentials and try to paint him as some sort of nutter is beyond me. And WHY you would want to do that if you say you are a Republican is really beyond me.

Posted by: Y-not at September 20, 2014 11:01 AM (zDsvJ)

197 There is that quirk in the Constitution that prevents electors in a state from voting for 2 candidates from the same state. So if it was Perry/Cruz, they could vote for the Pres, but not the VP. In a close race, given Texas' size (38 EC votes last time), that could allow the Dem to have the most VP votes

I'm pretty sure they changed that in about 1800.

Posted by: Weirddave at September 20, 2014 11:02 AM (9422s)

198 As I mentioned a few days ago, Ted Cruz is the smarter, more accomplished version of the GOPe's golden-haired boy, Marco Rubio.

Not for long.

Posted by: Mario's combover at September 20, 2014 11:08 AM (4nR9/)

199 How you can take a guy like Cruz with his credentials and try to paint him as some sort of nutter is beyond me.

----

Wanting to reign in spending and willing to shut down 10% of the government (i.e., the non-essential services) to do so is sadly considered nutty to the GOP establishment and the press (including the conservative press).

I'm not sure it matches up with reality. But here we are.

Posted by: SH at September 20, 2014 11:09 AM (GJMmh)

200 Lost my earlier comment --

Right now the Senators are needed in the Legislature desperately and I do not want to lose any of them. Whoever mentioned Condi Rice for VP earlier was a genius. Foreign policy gravitas, able to represent the President without making stupid errors, and in like Flynn with the GOPe.

Posted by: Mustbequantum at September 20, 2014 11:37 AM (MIKMs)

201 My first pick is Cruz and am pleased with the Perry rebound. But if he wins re-election, the logic of a Walker candidacy would seem inexorable.

As for Romney '16, what about this scenario: VP if Cruz is nominated? Hw would pacify the "moderates" and almost surely offer more gravitas than that Houson mayor whose name you can't recall.

Posted by: NCC at September 20, 2014 12:56 PM (svwAc)

202 Houston mayor. Sorry.

Posted by: NCC at September 20, 2014 12:57 PM (svwAc)

203 I agree with @200. I want Ted Cruz in the Senate, specifically in Harry Reid's job. Get a good business manager or governor in the top job. Someone with a backbone, fiscal restraint, a capitalist, one someone who honors and respects the military, and someone who knows what Barry has done to the DOJ, and will n fire all the Commies hired by Holder. Palin comes to mind, or Perry, but he should have put troops on the border years ago image instead of getting in state tuition for illegals.

Posted by: MathMom at September 20, 2014 02:27 PM (hnU78)

204 I like Cruz a lot, but I don't believe he could carry the country. I agree with people who want him to stay in the senate as an attack dog.

While I like Rubio personally, he's just plain awful at framing discussion. As a FL senator he doesn't have a lot of leeway to be an outspoken conservative, but he could have done much, MUCH better at using his politically necessary squish/compromise role to frame the issues publicly in a better manner for us.

I like Rand in spite of his mercurial qualities. I think he's with us on most of the big domestic policy issues, and that matters more to me than his foreign policy positioning. I also think he has a much broader appeal than Cruz, and having seen what happened with Romney, this really does seem to me to be important, esp. against the Dem PR machine in the Obama era.

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at September 20, 2014 03:09 PM (Y5I9o)

205 Nikki Haley really isn't that great. She's "pro-business" but it's more of a Chamber of Commerce kind of "pro-business" than the laissez-faire free market Hayek/Mises ideal. Instead of getting government out of the picture, she just wants to use government positively to lure big business with tax breaks and cronyism. It's better than the anti-business Marxist Left, but only marginally. It's not that far off from what Obama is doing with Goldman Sachs and friends.

Posted by: rfichoke at September 20, 2014 04:06 PM (vLCft)

206 Did someone actually say up thread that Cruz was NOT a good speaker?! Are you kidding me??

Posted by: Waingro at September 20, 2014 06:18 PM (r3xH2)

207 Let's remember that the President doesn't lead the country, he leads one third of the federal government. It's a mistake to get so fixated on the presidency that we overlook the need for having good people in the House and Senate, and keeping them there.

The best argument for running governors for president, aside from executive experience, is that it keeps us from stripping 'the best' from the Congress and, not incidentally, devaluing that institution.

Posted by: PersonFromPorlock at September 21, 2014 08:54 AM (Mjn+V)

208 Its gotta be Paul. Anybody who doesn't like him (because he's a "nut" like his dad or for other obvious illogical and unintelligent reasons) needs to vote for Hillary.

Posted by: Patrick Henry, the 2nd at September 25, 2014 11:40 AM (tV1ou)

209 Kind of strange that this poll has two inelgible candidates, the natural-born Canadian Rafael Cruz, and the natural Indian, Piyush Jindal. Is this an anti-American website or something? Why all the shilling for another foreign dictator? Isn't Obama bad enough?

Posted by: Constitutionalist at September 30, 2014 01:57 PM (6RKH1)

Processing 0.02, elapsed 0.0311 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0128 seconds, 217 records returned.
Page size 140 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.