• 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!

2016 Republican Primary

REPUBLICANS ONLY PLEASE- YOUR TOP CHOICE FOR 2016 REPUBLICAN NOMINATION FOR PRESIDENT

  • Ted Cruz

    Votes: 8 10.0%
  • Rand Paul

    Votes: 23 28.8%
  • Marco Rubio

    Votes: 2 2.5%
  • Mike Huckabee

    Votes: 2 2.5%
  • Chris Christie

    Votes: 16 20.0%
  • Rick Perry

    Votes: 2 2.5%
  • Rick Santorum

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Jon Huntsman

    Votes: 11 13.8%
  • Paul Ryan

    Votes: 4 5.0%
  • Other (Please specify)

    Votes: 12 15.0%

  • Total voters
    80
Rand Paul accepted Obamacare.

How about Ted Cruz?

I could support Cruz. Honestly, his voice annoys me. I do like his confrontational attitude with democrats though. It's sorely needed. I look forward to a day when compromise doesn't mean "give the democrats 90% of what they want and call it a victory".
 
I can't help but notice that Rubio's appeal certainly seems to have waned, at least on this forum.
 
Electors from the Electoral College cannot vote for 2 candidates from the same state. As in, for President and Vice President. They are married so they likely live together and vote together in the same state.

Thanks for that reminder. Hell, don't even know if they live in the US anymore. The point was to choose a Hollywood conservative who knows firsthand about popularity and advertising themselves.
 
Jeb Bush will be the next President of the United States - can't believe you didn't place him even in the top ten picks.

I suffer from a bit of Bush fatigue, but if he got elected president, I would have so much fun watching the democrats go bonkers about it.
 
I suffer from a bit of Bush fatigue, but if he got elected president, I would have so much fun watching the democrats go bonkers about it.

At least you won't need a recount in Florida for this Bush, but a recount in Illinois would be fun.
 
I really don't have a problem with either Christie or Bush compared to the alternatives in the GOP..
Christie would be a fine choice, but I've always said Jeb Bush would be the best choice -
I had hoped he'd run in 2012 - I think he would have won, had he entered the race.
If states do not change their current GOP primary rules, Christie is a shoe-in..
Texas Republican Delegation 2012
This is just one of the 50 states and several territories..
Texas has a "proportional" primary and an "open" primary .
 
I can't help but notice that Rubio's appeal certainly seems to have waned, at least on this forum.

Amnesty for 20 million illegal immigrants is a hard pill to swallow. I can understand the reasons for it, but they don't outweigh the reasons not to do it.
 
I really don't have a problem with either Christie or Bush compared to the alternatives in the GOP..

If states do not change their current GOP primary rules, Christie is a shoe-in..
Texas Republican Delegation 2012
This is just one of the 50 states and several territories..
Texas has a "proportional" primary and an "open" primary .

The US primary system is a complete and utter mess.
 
Amnesty for 20 million illegal immigrants is a hard pill to swallow. I can understand the reasons for it, but they don't outweigh the reasons not to do it.

If GW Bush couldn't get agreement from a majority of Republicans for border security and immigration reform, it's hard to imagine someone like Rubio or Obama being able to succeed. GWB was uniquely qualified, experienced and placed to get it done, but there just wasn't sufficient will in the majority of the country to do it - I believe that's still the case.
 
As for Christie, his "bridge-gate" is really starting to blow up..
When a Senator like Rockefeller gets involved, CC better stop quipping..
Just saw a GOP poll with CC with 24% to 13% for Paul and then 11 and 10 for Rubio and Cruz .
If GW Bush couldn't get agreement from a majority of Republicans for border security and immigration reform, it's hard to imagine someone like Rubio or Obama being able to succeed. GWB was uniquely qualified, experienced and placed to get it done, but there just wasn't sufficient will in the majority of the country to do it - I believe that's still the case.
 
Is kind of sad/pathetic what the presidential elections have evolved into. Just over the last several cycles. Pattern is expontentially growing that each is more negative and deeper in the mud than the last one.

That said. Would hope there is weight given to Governors or ex-Governors. Provides a degree of management experience and a sense of accountability. Which is VERY UNLIKE what members of Congress are held to.

Think Bobby Jindal would be a reasonable consideration. Scott Walker from Wisconsin also. Chris Christy is a viable option, but suspect he would need to lose an amount of physical weight. Just to survive the rigors of a stressful campaign.
 
There's something in the Constitution about God running the Nation, right?
I put God's law above man's law.
Kudos to your thread though .
 
As for Christie, his "bridge-gate" is really starting to blow up..
When a Senator like Rockefeller gets involved, CC better stop quipping..
Just saw a GOP poll with CC with 24% to 13% for Paul and then 11 and 10 for Rubio and Cruz .

Nobody's really even thinking in terms of 2016 right now - won't really become interesting until the 2014 midterm fallout is fully appreciated.
 
Nobody's really even thinking in terms of 2016 right now - won't really become interesting until the 2014 midterm fallout is fully appreciated.

and nothing is absolute in who will win in 2014 either.

3 incumbent congressmen announced they would not be seeking reelection in 2014.
 
2016 GOP PRIMARY
Ted Cruz
Rand Paul
Mike Huckabee
Marco Rubio
Chris Christie
Rick Santorum
Rick Perry
Jon Huntsman
Paul Ryan
Other (Please specify)

Cruz, Paul, Huckabee, Perry and Santorum are unelectable in a national election. Sorry folks, but it is the truth. Unless Democrats nominate Kucinich or something, but against Hillary not a one of them will win.

Hunstman can never win a GOP primary. I know that they do nominate moderates but Huntsman is simply too unaplogetically moderate. He's only moved MORE toward the center while people like Romney and McCain moved to the right. I wouldn't be surprised if Huntsman pulls a Charlie Crist and announces he is becoming an Independent or Democrat in the future.

That leaves Rubio, Christie and Ryan. Rubio strikes me as something of a hack, I'm not sure if he has many core convictions. He was a Tea Party guy when it was popular, but now he's getting more moderate because he thinks the Tea Party wave has passed.

Christie I like, he checks most of the the right boxes. His main crime from the far-right's perspective is he hasn't used a conspiratorial tone or questioned Obama's birth certificate. He is elected in a blue state. I'm not sure what all these purists want. Do you really think swing states are going to vote for somebody like Ted Cruz?

Ryan is another good one, but I think he could possibly move up to majority leader or speaker in a future Congress. Of course maybe he is a RINO now, I don't know, I don't keep tabs on who has been excommunicated from the One Holy Church of True Conservatism but I heard some calling him a sell-out a few months ago.
 
6- First of all - if he were elected in 2016, he - just like Obama - would have both had 4 years in the U.S. Senate. Ted Cruz was also a Solicitor General of Texas for about 5 years - which technically does sort of count as a Leadership position. Obama was only a State Senator - even if for 8 years. Longer experience but less leadership experience than Ted Cruz.

I wouldn't really count Solicitor General as a leadership position. But really nitpicking about whether Obama or Cruz has less experience is pointless, considering how very little they both have, and neither have any executive.

Those "enemies" Ted Cruz made - that people like you always say - as if that is supposed to make me think Ted Cruz is bad? Wrong. All of those people he made "enemies" with - GOOD! MORE POWER TO HIM! I'm not a big fan of his enemies neither! McCain, Graham, Feinstein - I'M GLAD SOMEONE is standing up to the corrupted washington elite. Ted Cruz is a hero.

The problem isn't that he's disagreeing with them politically, which he should do. It's plenty possible to disagree politically without making outright personal enemies. The problem is that they, and many other members of both caucuses, hate him personally. Considering as President he'll have to work with them to get any of what you want done, done, that is not a good way to start. Rand Paul, on the other hand has the same positions as Cruz, but by all accounts is liked by members of both caucuses.

Obamacare needs to be defunded, and repealed. The government needed to be shut down. Perhaps then we'd have less people in the Obama Administration and NSA taking away people's freedom and privacy. That "shut down" was more Obama's fault anyway. If he didn't propose such bad policies that he BLATANTLY LIED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ABOUT - thinking he could pass it before anyone would know - and then it was Obama who refused to negotiate.

Obamacare does need to be repealed. The government shutdown was something that only hindered that cause, and it was pretty obvious beforehand that its all it would do. Yet Cruz decided to go through with something that would only hurt his "cause" anyway. It smells like a publicity stunt at the expense of actually trying to bring down Obamacare.

Stop letting the media deceive you. It's alright though, you will learn. I will teach you the truth.

I don't need your condescension.

Just trust in what I say more often. I know what I am talking about.

Well if some random internet person tells me to trust them, then gosh darn I'd better.
 
As for Christie, his "bridge-gate" is really starting to blow up..
When a Senator like Rockefeller gets involved, CC better stop quipping..
Just saw a GOP poll with CC with 24% to 13% for Paul and then 11 and 10 for Rubio and Cruz .

I don't think that itself will hurt Christie. I think his moderate credentials and support for Democrats will hurt him in the primary. He will win a chunk of the votes by the deceived voters who falsely believe he has the best chance of winning. It isn't even worth voting for him. He is as much of a Republican as Charlie Crist was when he was Governor of Florida.

But the conservatives/tea party needs to find one conservative candidate united in opposition to the establishment. They need one Governor.

In the 2008 primary, you had McCain and Romney each split the moderate vote. You had both Romney and Huckabee each split the "he has executive experience as a Governor" vote (for the candidates who know little about the policies, just that they look good on camera and have real leadership experience). Huckabee and Romney each dropped out early on. So that gave more power to McCain in the end having a larger chunk of the vote. Yet, he still didn't even really have a majority when every state voted.

In 2012, the minds of the voters have it wrong. They sacrifice their own beliefs on who is the better candidate, by who they think is more electable. That is foolish and it's thinking like that, which has really deceived America and given us bad candidates elected. And Romney had in the end won 52% - even after everyone else mostly dropped out and while Gingrich stayed in a little longer - as a "movement conservative" and Paul stayed in the race but didn't really stay in the campaign. If you total conservative Santorum's 20.43% - the guy who dropped out in April, tea party Gingrich's 14.21%, and libertarian Paul's 10.89% - you get about 45% of the voters who voted conservative. Then, the remaining 3% would be divided amongst Jon Huntsman, Rick Perry, and Michele Bachmann - who all dropped out earlier on. Jon Huntsman being more moderate, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann being more conservative.

But since the primary had ended earlier on, a lot of conservatives didn't vote for Romney in the primary because he's more moderate but didn't vote for any opposition because they guessed he was going to win the nomination anyway and didn't want to weaken him out of the primary against his general election opponent, Barack Obama.
 
I wouldn't really count Solicitor General as a leadership position. But really nitpicking about whether Obama or Cruz has less experience is pointless, considering how very little they both have, and neither have any executive.



The problem isn't that he's disagreeing with them politically, which he should do. It's plenty possible to disagree politically without making outright personal enemies. The problem is that they, and many other members of both caucuses, hate him personally. Considering as President he'll have to work with them to get any of what you want done, done, that is not a good way to start. Rand Paul, on the other hand has the same positions as Cruz, but by all accounts is liked by members of both caucuses.



Obamacare does need to be repealed. The government shutdown was something that only hindered that cause, and it was pretty obvious beforehand that its all it would do. Yet Cruz decided to go through with something that would only hurt his "cause" anyway. It smells like a publicity stunt at the expense of actually trying to bring down Obamacare.



I don't need your condescension.



Well if some random internet person tells me to trust them, then gosh darn I'd better.


1- Well if there are no good candidates with experience, I'd rather vote for a candidate I agree with more than an "experienced" candidate. Not that experience is bad. It's important for them to have. If only voters would elect better Governors...

2- I don't care if they hate Ted Cruz. We can have them all voted out in 2014, and 2016 - that'd be about 2/3 of the Senate. And then in President Ted Cruz' first midterm election in 2018, elect more like Ted Cruz. Problem solved. And as for the House, well, they can be voted out every 2 years! We can start 2 years early in 2014.

3- Something crazy needed to be done. Something to really get people's attention because obviously not enough was being done to repeal Obamacare. You can call it a publicity stunt and it was - but not a selfish one. Ted Cruz could just sit back and agree with everyone and be loved by everyone - at the expense of America - like so many of the others - but he isn't doing that. He is standing up to the corrupt washington elite that over 90% of America does not approve of anyway.

4- Nobody "needs" to eat Pizza to survive. But they need to eat to survive. And pizza does taste really good.

5- I'm not some random internet person. My name is Tothian, and I destroy evil.
 
So who is happier over CC's "bridge-gate", the DEms or the TEAs??
Nobody's really even thinking in terms of 2016 right now -
won't really become interesting until the 2014 midterm fallout is fully appreciated.
When I hear former RNC chief Michael Steele defending CC on Matthews,
I know this is a BFD ..
 
2- I don't care if they hate Ted Cruz. We can have them all voted out in 2014, and 2016 - that'd be about 2/3 of the Senate. And then in President Ted Cruz' first midterm election in 2018,
Cruz will lose his Senate reelection in 2018 to one of the Castro brothers .
 
1- Well if there are no good candidates with experience, I'd rather vote for a candidate I agree with more than an "experienced" candidate. Not that experience is bad. It's important for them to have. If only voters would elect better Governors...

Experience isn't a dealbreaker to me, but it is one of Cruz's many flaws.

2- I don't care if they hate Ted Cruz. We can have them all voted out in 2014, and 2016 - that'd be about 2/3 of the Senate. And then in President Ted Cruz' first midterm election in 2018, elect more like Ted Cruz. Problem solved. And as for the House, well, they can be voted out every 2 years! We can start 2 years early in 2014.

That's not even remotely realistic. Maybe if you could elect every single member of Congress to be like Ted Cruz, than a Cruz presidency would work, but there is no chance in hell of that happening ever.

3- Something crazy needed to be done. Something to really get people's attention because obviously not enough was being done to repeal Obamacare. You can call it a publicity stunt and it was - but not a selfish one. Ted Cruz could just sit back and agree with everyone and be loved by everyone - at the expense of America - like so many of the others - but he isn't doing that. He is standing up to the corrupt washington elite that over 90% of America does not approve of anyway.

The problem is that he did it in a way that unabashedly helped Obamacare. He helped it, he most likely knew that he was helping it, and he did it anyway.
 
1- Well if there are no good candidates with experience, I'd rather vote for a candidate I agree with more than an "experienced" candidate. Not that experience is bad. It's important for them to have. If only voters would elect better Governors...
Over 30 governors are Republicans and you're complaining?!?!?!
 
Back
Top Bottom