E
estesbob
Guest
A state insurance exchange set up under the provisions of the affordable care act
- Status
I
ishii
Guest
I like him too. RCP has him ahead by only 1.8%. The left knows how important it is to defeat him: if he loses then it will be much less likely for any GOP governor to take on the entrenched unions and leftism in the blue/purple states. If he wins, perhaps we can expect more courage on the part of other governors of states to take on the unions and out of control spending (even some Democrat governors? Its okay to dream, right? ). Also, a re-election would make him a more viable candidate for president.
Ishii
S
saintjohnxxiii
Guest
Excellent qualifiers FollowChrist. Listening to Ishii whom I respect greatly on this issue, I think if Walker wins reelection he makes a good Candidate plus I think to help get #3 and #4 I think Rand Paul should be the VP as his moderate Libertarian (compared to his Dad) can help with independents.
I don’t like Ryan because after the Election he came out in favor of Gay adoption while opposing Gay marriage. Cruz, isn’t good as well because he seems more of an idealogue and I think the Republicans need someone who is politically smart. Trying to defund ACA at the House level may seem good but since Democrats control the Senate it was never going to go anywhere.
I
ishii
Guest
I don’t see how the addition of Cruz pulls # 4 at all. So a Perry/Cruz ticket would lose, imo. I truly think that we need to try to not nominate a white, southern, evangelical religious right type of ticket if at all possible. Not a big fan of Huckabee. I admire Perry more than ever due to his pro-life efforts in Texas. But his performance in 2012 still makes it hard to think he’s got what it takes. I did like Paul, but some of his recent statements have me wondering about his commitment to social conservatism. Also, I am not convinced of his gravitas, or perhaps the perception of his gravitas.
Ishii
P
Path_Finder
Guest
I greatly respect very much Estevao’s and RC Cheek’s posts, I could vote for Cruz. I’ve already made a point of this. What is important is unity. That was a problem in 2012 apparently and unfortunately.
P
Path_Finder
Guest
Someone said you can’t have officially, 2 persons from the same state on the ticket and that is fine, that would be a Perry/Cruz ticket. We’ll see how it goes with Rick, unfortunately, he is being victimized a bit with some dirty politics.
Rand’s getting to be all over the place, Mr. please everyone. I really like Rand but I think he’s trying to spread himself out to wide.
I think some candidates will shake out. I remember the last time around with the debates. wouldn’t count anyone out.
P
powerofk
Guest
It’s actually in the Constitution. Before the 12th amendment was passed, electors had to choose 2 candidates for Prez, but could only choose one Presidential candidate from their own state. The Veep was the Prez candidate who came in 2nd. The 12th amendment gave an explicit vote for Veep, but electors still can only choose one candidate from their home state. Though the Prez candidate and Veep candidate could both be from the same state, the electors in their home state can only vote for one of the two.
Oddly enough, if Florida’s vote had been disputed in Congress in 2000, Bush would have still become Prez due to more state delegations in the House being majority-GOP (each state gets one vote), but since the Senate was split 50-50 with Al Gore being the tiebreak, Joe Lieberman would have been Veep.
Honestly, though, if the Dems choose Hillary and the GOPers choose Cruz or Rand Paul, I’ll probably vote 3rd party again.
R
RGCheek
Guest
It would be Perry or Huckabee that would pull number 4, not Cruz. Cruz would pull the TPM folks and economic and social conservatives.
I think that is a very important part of the conservative coalition and without someone on the ticket that comes from said background a Republican loses for President.
Why? I am not a big fan, but I like him in combo with others more. After more thought I also like a Santorum/Cruz-Paul ticket quite a bit as well, though Santorum has no executive experience, if I recall correctly.
Perry prefers consensus to conflict but he can do conflict just as well. He is the avatar of salesmanship in politics.
Not sure that facet is as impactful in national elections as it is in state and local elections.
I
Indigo_Cardinal
Guest
My two cents…
After all the birther nonsense with Obama (born in Hawaii, accused of having been born in Kenya), nominating Cruz (who was definitely born in Canada) could end up causing problems for the GOP. It’d be very hard to argue a case for Cruz that wouldn’t apply to Obama–both had American mothers and forgein-born fathers, neither of the fathers were U.S. Citizens at the time of the child’s birth (Obama’s father died when Obama was young, Cruz’s father didn’t become a U.S. Citizen until 2005.)
Picking Cruz would be handing a weapon over to any opponents. It might not be true (I personally have no problems accepting both men as being U.S. Citizens qualified to run regardless of where they were born, by virtue of their mothers), but all the nonsense Obama went through with being accused of having been born in Kenya and therefore, not really eligible could end up boomeranging back on Cruz if he gets the nomination and giving him a fight right from the beginning–especially again, as Obama was able to show he was born in the U.S. (and there’s still people arguing this), and Cruz very definitely wasn’t.
The GOP might just choose to avoid that entirely and pass Cruz over.
After all the birther nonsense with Obama (born in Hawaii, accused of having been born in Kenya), nominating Cruz (who was definitely born in Canada) could end up causing problems for the GOP. It’d be very hard to argue a case for Cruz that wouldn’t apply to Obama–both had American mothers and forgein-born fathers, neither of the fathers were U.S. Citizens at the time of the child’s birth (Obama’s father died when Obama was young, Cruz’s father didn’t become a U.S. Citizen until 2005.)
Picking Cruz would be handing a weapon over to any opponents. It might not be true (I personally have no problems accepting both men as being U.S. Citizens qualified to run regardless of where they were born, by virtue of their mothers), but all the nonsense Obama went through with being accused of having been born in Kenya and therefore, not really eligible could end up boomeranging back on Cruz if he gets the nomination and giving him a fight right from the beginning–especially again, as Obama was able to show he was born in the U.S. (and there’s still people arguing this), and Cruz very definitely wasn’t.
The GOP might just choose to avoid that entirely and pass Cruz over.
C
Crossbones
Guest
IMO, the best thing the Republicans can do is wait until December 2015 - March 2016 and decide their candidate through the electorate (i.e., who wins the primaries). The last 4 elections, the Republican nominee was decided by the money men before the primaries even begun and we ended up with a two-term president that most Republicans disavow as representative of their core beliefs and the Republicans losing twice.
Let the process develop slowly so that a strong candidate can emerge from the pack instead of being stuck with someone that most people don’t much care for.
And the best thing is that most of these potential candidates are blank slates and the electorate won’t already have strong opinions on*. I think this was a strength of the Obama campaign. People didn’t know much about him and hadn’t formed negative opinions. What the candidates present in the campaign will be how the electorate knows them and that’ll make it harder to paint a negative picture (as it was for President Obama and President GW Bush).
Let the process develop slowly so that a strong candidate can emerge from the pack instead of being stuck with someone that most people don’t much care for.
And the best thing is that most of these potential candidates are blank slates and the electorate won’t already have strong opinions on*. I think this was a strength of the Obama campaign. People didn’t know much about him and hadn’t formed negative opinions. What the candidates present in the campaign will be how the electorate knows them and that’ll make it harder to paint a negative picture (as it was for President Obama and President GW Bush).
- BTW, this disqualifies Governor Perry and Representative Bachmann, which is just fine.
I
ishii
Guest
How would a white southern, evangelical preacher conservative get pull independents and moderates? How would a conservative, white southern governor of Texas pull independents and moderates living in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin ?
I think the southern evangelicals have no where else to go. They aren’t really libertarians so they wouldn’t jump on to a Ron Paul type candidate. I’m not saying ignore them or take them completely for granted. But I don’t think we need half the ticket to be for them so they don’t run away. Besides, a Jindal or a Walker or Rubio e.g. would be plenty conservative and socially conservative. I think the religious right would vote for a Catholic non-evangelical ticket. Who else are they going to vote for?
Why? for the reasons I stated repeatedly: a white, southern, evangelical preacher conservative is not the candidate who will pull moderates and independents. Neither will Santorum or Cruz. Paul might - due to his name - and certainly he’s working hard to appeal to all the different groups right now. I’m disappointed in his statement on gay marriage. Seemed very wishy washy.
Which works in Texas. Not sure how it would play in purple or blue states. Furthermore, his breakdown in the primaries really soured me on him. I think we should add a 6th question to FollowChrist34’s excellent 5 questions to all the candidates: Is this candidate a good communicator who can survive in a debate and on the campaign with the inevitably slick Dem candidate and “gotcha” type questions from the media? Perry has demonstrated the opposite quality. Do you think that a candidate who says, “If elected I will do 3 things, which are… umm ahh, guess I forgot the 3rd one…” That will not fly in a national campaign. I would say that Paul Ryan, smart as he is, failed in his debate with Biden as well - opting for the “nice guy” approach and letting Biden run all over him and basically not be challenged for the outrageous things he said. Romney, smart as he was, did not perform effectively in the last two debates with Obama. (though, Candy Crowley was helping Obama in that last debate). Who would be the best candidate for #6? Chris Christie. He would also pull #'s 1,4 & 5. #'s 2 & 3 might be a challenge given Christie’s reputation as more of a moderate. Also, he might not fair well in a war on women smear campaign conducted by the Democrat media.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
To me, Cruz’s citizenship status is less important than his fire-brand, confrontational type of conservative politics. It plays to the base and those who can’t stand Obama, but that’s not the candidate who will appeal to a wide enough group of people. That said, I’d love to see him against Hillary in a debate.
Ishii
E
Exiled_Child
Guest
With electronic voting machines I don’t believe honest elections still exist in the United States, at least not at the presidential level. It’s possible that voting may actually matter at the state and local level, though.
I
ishii
Guest
It also disqualifies Romney (who is said to be mulling a 2nd run) and perhaps even Jeb Bush due to his name. People have strong opinions about the Bush family and Jeb Bush might have difficulty rising above that. Bachmann was never a serious candidate to begin with.
Ishii
C
Crossbones
Guest
You’re probably right on Governor Jeb Bush, which might be a shame because what little I knew about him was positive and I thought he would be a viable presidential candidate.
And, please, please, pretty please, no Governor Romney. Stop mulling and enjoy your reitrement.
F
FollowChrist34
Guest
Sorry to say I agree with you here. Perry/Cruz would not play the West Coast or Northeast well at all. And Huckabee doesn’t do much for me either; I can’t even watch him on TV. I actually do personally like both Perry and Cruz though. Maybe Cruz can be Secretary of State - I would love that.
I
ishii
Guest
Agree. I like Jeb Bush too - perhaps he’d make a better president than his brother. I too think its time for other candidates to run - other than Romney. We have too many good, viable candidates now - he doesn’t need to run. There are numerous successful governors that can run. Rand Paul and/or Ted Cruz would be a mistake, imo.
Ishii
P
Path_Finder
Guest
First the Border Crisis and then:
These are close to Presidential-like crisis that Governor Perry is going straight-up against. We will see how this develops.
R
RGCheek
Guest
Oh, I don’t know about the preacher part but as for the rest of it…LBJ, Carter, Reagan (from MO), Bush the Elder, Bush the Younger, and Clinton kind of suggest that being from the South isn’t the obstacle you seem to think it is.How would a white southern, evangelical preacher conservative get pull independents and moderates? How would a conservative, white southern governor of Texas pull independents and moderates living in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin ?
Sure they do; the local bar, the living room couch in front of the TV, to bed early, etc, anywhere BUT fighting the lines to get into the voting booth.
That is why we had the losers Dole, McCain and Romney; Southern Evangelicals and ‘Values Voters’ in general most certainly DO have somewhere else to go.
P
Path_Finder
Guest
Reagan, Illinois. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan I don’t see anything per Missouri. The Gipper. Might as well say Reagan was from California too.
George HW Bush, born in Mass. He was pretty well formed by the time he moved to Texas, the Southwest. I don’t know if George HW Bush, the Senior ever really held public office, he was in the CIA. I’d say he was pretty much from about all of those places including DC per government jobs.
But I agree, being from the South is no obstacle, in fact, I’ve probably stated as much 2 times in this thread.
- Status