Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by GAFinch, Mar 8, 2014.
Paul or Cruz would be my top choices.
As I said in the past, you don't want a Chitcago thug in office, you don't want a New Jersey thug either. They are both equally despicable.
Time again for "please sir, may I have more?"
Odd how the marijuana thing comes right up in the story. I'd be OK with legalizing it, but only if they test for it before a person could get public assistance. If they have extra cash for recreational drugs, we are giving them a little too much money. Just my take on it.
Ron Paul won it in 2010 and 2011. Mittens won it in 2007, 2008 & 2009. The last winner of the straw poll that actually became president was G. W. Bush in 2000. Before that, it was Reagan.
I would really like to see Rand Paul or Ted Cruz get the nomination, and preferably run together on the same ticket. Odds are, I will not get what I want. It should be interesting to watch. Many of the others that ran, I would like to not hear much about ever again.
I prefer Cruz. He has been forcing the GOP leadership Rinos to break cover.
Rand's last few speeches showed a real effort to move towards the center. That sucks, frankly. I am very disappointed in Rand Paul.
I like Rand Paul. I know there isn't anyone that is going to be chosen that everybody can agree with but he is about the closest to everything I believe in there could be. I am actually from and reside in KY and he used to come to our gun ranges and shoot with is and take photos. Even if a guy says they are for gun rights I don't think you would find them taking photos since they wouldn't be able to twist it later. He has a no nonsense way of speaking and expressing his views. I don't have the link handy but search for his discussion about cfl light bulbs and govt needing to be out of our lives and not telling the public what light bulbs we HAVE to use.
let me say this.
This. There are so many on that list that shouldn't be there: Trump, Huckabee, Carson, Santorum, Christie, Palin. It makes the most sense to take the top 2. Not that we have to live or die by a poll taken 2 years before an election.
I'll take Cruz, Paul needs to disappear. Paul is the Rino favorite this time.
How do you figure. I don't recall Paul having a "Rino" reputation.
I'm not picking anyone - but, how many of the very people supporting Rand Paul right now were lambasting Obama for his lack of executive experience?
If it wasn't good enough for Obama, then how is one term as a Senator good.enough for Paul?
It will probably be Christy Cream/McCain
While I'm glad to see the results I have the feeling they will nominate Christie because that's who the media wants to be nominated, just like Romney last time. They'll just hide away or dig up dirt on anyone who competes with him, or tell you they're "Unelectable," because they know Hillary can beat Christie and not anyone else. People will fall for it again because it's easier for them to let TV form their opinions for them.
Paul has been backpedeling for a while now. He wants everybody to like him. He is becomming whatever any group wants him to be. Sound familiar.
I'm interested in replies to this.
That is a fault. For Obama it was a minor one of a list that had no positive side. For Paul, not only is it minor, but the Democrats have no room to criticize him on it. I will say, without hesitation, experience is about an equal flaw for those two.
What I was asking for was more like examples of votes or bills or things he had done. All I have seen are 2 conclusions that don't explain why you all have come to those conclusions.
damm it! you'll take what the rnc/dnc gives you and you'll be happy with it!
Who cares if Paul is "back peddling"? We're trying to win an election here and he needs to portray himself in a way that is as electable as possible. With Paul/Cruz we will be able to pick up not only the republican vote but tea party and libertarian as well. To me, this would seem to be a dems worst nightmare.
Why not Cruz/Paul then?