• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Candidate for the Republicans

Who should be The Candidate?

  • Rand Paul

    Votes: 4 18.2%

  • Jeb Bush

    Votes: 4 18.2%

  • Ted Cruz

    Votes: 4 18.2%

  • Chris Christie

    Votes: 2 9.1%

  • another

    Votes: 8 36.4%
  • Total voters
    22
polgara said:
Greetings, JC. :2wave:

Yes, Kasich has been around for a while, and everything he has done to date has been for the good of the people of this Country - he was the Chairman and the lead architect of the US House budget committee in 1997 that brought us the first balanced budget since 1969, which soon turned a deficit of -$163 billion dollars into a surplus of + $236 billion dollars! Not easy to do, but he accomplished it! :clap:

Since he became Governor of Ohio, new businesses have come to our State, providing many jobs to grateful workers. He is well liked and trusted by both sides of the aisle, and that was proven when he carried 86 out of 88 counties in the last midterm election, garnering votes from both parties, in what was called a landslide by experts!.

And probably more than anything else, he is a good honest man. He doesn't make promises he doesn't expect to keep; and he is well spoken and enthusiastic about what he believes good governance is - he cares about the people he governs, and we care and approve of him in return! What else can I say, except to add that whoever the Republican candidate for POTUS is, they will have to carry Ohio, and Florida, to win the election!
Click to expand...

That's true, Ohio is an important state, and I would have more faith in him automatically taking Ohio than Jeb automatically taking Florida.

Btw, hope your day's going well! :) I'm at the library trying to stay awake while learning a new landscape design progam. :yawn: :coffeepap
 
I want to see the most conservative candidate with a realistic chance of winning. I do not want more RINO's or fake conservatives--meaning Bush, Christie, Kasich, and Graham, for starters.
 
JC Callender said:
That's true, Ohio is an important state, and I would have more faith in him automatically taking Ohio than Jeb automatically taking Florida.

Btw, hope your day's going well! :) I'm at the library trying to stay awake while learning a new landscape design progam. :yawn: :coffeepap
Click to expand...

For a Friday, my day is going fine! :lamo: Are you at a seminar?
 
JC Callender said:
Nope, just learning on my own as a way to provide better estimates. :comp:
Click to expand...

Number one rule: You make money, else why bother? That seemed to work for the people I know, as long as honesty was also there - then you get repeat business! Then you become a millionaire..... Well, sometimes not...but what you got to lose? Big corporations start off small... :lamo:
 
I am not ready to commit. There is nobody, and I do mean nobody, on the GOP roster, at least among those who have officially announced, that I would have to hold my nose to vote for except Graham. Him, I don't know if I could hold my nose tight enough to vote for him, but I suppose I could if by some terrible act of fate, he was the nominee. But the GOP is offering a great group of candidates this time around, each bringing something of benefit to the table.

Which one can I most believe in? I don't know but I'm watching and studying until I know who I need to support. But any one of them is head and shoulders above any of the Democrats who have announced or any of the Independents. If it came down to Lindsay Graham being the GOP nominee, I would have to get behind Gary Johnson, Libertarian.

If you guys want to find how which candidate you most align with today, here is an excellent quiz:
2016 Political Quiz

Be sure to click on the expanded options and more questions to get all the options and questions.

Today I align most with Marco Rubio (who is not my first choice personally.) Last time I took the quiz I aligned most with Ben Carson. Tomorrow might be somebody different. :) I am aligned only 4% with Hillary Clinton and 2% with Bernie Sanders.
 
Zyphlin said:
Interesting

I got 92% Rubio, 82% Paul, and 81% Cruz.

I came in at 44% Clinton and 24% Sanders.
Click to expand...

Interesting quiz though, and very comprehensive if you click on the link to get the additional options for answers (it is the other or other options choice you click on) and also click on the links to get the additional questions. But so many of my personal positions on issues are not engraved in granite, it is no doubt affected about how I am thinking on any given day which changes the outcome when I take that quiz at different times.

But no time I have taken it have any of the non-GOP candidates made it even into the teens for me.
 
AlbqOwl said:
But no time I have taken it have any of the non-GOP candidates made it even into the teens for me.
Click to expand...

Part of that for me is it doesn't do nuance well, understandably so. So for example with Sander's it has us "agreeing" on things like background checks for gun purchases because we both say "yes", but ignores my typed in caveat for exempting private transfers of overship between family members or other individual private sales. Or in disallowing NSA collection, but ignoring my caveat of allowing it with a warrant and probable cause. Or in my agreement in continuing the Park Service, but not agreeing with his desire to EXPAND it.

The other part is that I'm not as staunchly socially conservative when it comes to policies, so we agree on things like terminally ill suicide, same sex marriage, and drug legalization.

Finally, there's just a few things that I think have a mix of support on the left and right. For example Net Neutrality and Common Core support.
 
Zyphlin said:
Part of that for me is it doesn't do nuance well, understandably so. So for example with Sander's it has us "agreeing" on things like background checks for gun purchases because we both say "yes", but ignores my typed in caveat for exempting private transfers of overship between family members or other individual private sales. Or in disallowing NSA collection, but ignoring my caveat of allowing it with a warrant and probable cause. Or in my agreement in continuing the Park Service, but not agreeing with his desire to EXPAND it.

The other part is that I'm not as staunchly socially conservative when it comes to policies, so we agree on things like terminally ill suicide, same sex marriage, and drug legalization.

Finally, there's just a few things that I think have a mix of support on the left and right. For example Net Neutrality and Common Core support.
Click to expand...

The nuances are the ultimate deciding factor on quizzes like this, as there really is no ability on most questions to specify your exact position. For me it is easy to reject Hillary and Sanders' positions even on social issues in which we mostly agree, because they would both have the federal government accomplish their goals while I want the federal government to have no say whatsoever in matters such as marriage, education, abortion, most gun laws, etc.

I am comfortable with one community having wide open abortion laws, for instance, while another has extremely restrictive abortion laws or bans the procedure outright. My own personal beliefs fall between those two views so I would be comfortable with a community having policy in alignment with what I value. But. . . I believe in liberty that allows people to adopt their own culture and way of life. I strongly resist that being dictated from the federal level because if a local community screws it up, they don't screw up anybody else. If the federal government screws up, they screw it up for everybody and there is nowhere to escape without giving up my country.
 
Zyphlin said:
Interesting

I got 92% Rubio, 82% Paul, and 81% Cruz.

I came in at 44% Clinton and 24% Sanders.
Click to expand...

I found out that for some damn reason isidewith has no real compilation of Jeb Bush's stances, but has plenty for Rubio. Most of my supposed differences with Jeb came down to "we don't know what Jeb thinks on this one" (even though they should with his rather lengthy tenure and speaking tours). A few times I scratched my head thinking "I could have sworn he thought differently from the quiz makers' viewpoint of his positions...but okay." At least they correctly identified me as an authoritarian.

Anyway, for the most part I'm going to side with the establishment over the base any day of the week.
 
Last edited:
sawdust said:
Fiorino lost a proxy fight but the choices she made for HP made the company stronger, doubling it's size. She wasn't fired for incompetence, she laid of workers and executives and made enemies in the board room. Her record with the company however increased innovation and sales. I think you need to do a little reading outside media matters and moveon.org.
Click to expand...

OK...

Carly Fiorina forced out at HP - Feb. 10, 2005
Powerful HP chief Fiorina is ousted | The San Diego Union-Tribune
The Rise & Fall Of Carly Fiorina - CBS News
The Inside Story Of Carly's Ouster - Businessweek

She was fired primarily because she halved the stock value. The Street's view of the Company was tarnished. The CEO's job is to enhance shareholder value; she did the opposite. To paraphrase John Belushi from Animal House: "... face it, [they] f'd/up; they trusted her.

The company DID NOT double its size during her tenure. The fact that HP has twice the revenue today as it did in 2000 is not impressive in the tech industry; in fact, it means HP underperformed.

"...During her tenure, the market value of HP halved and the company incurred heavy job losses.[24] The HP Board of Directors asked Fiorina to step down in 2005, and she resigned on February 9, 2005...."

"....The move came after she was unable to build the Palo Alto-based company into a reliable profit machine with the broad heft to challenge IBM and Dell at the top of the industry. ...."


Carly Fiornia's chances of being the President of the US fall somewhere between 'nil' and 'none'. She has NOTHING to run on except that she is rich. She just wants another severance package.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom