Who would you pick to represent the GOP in the next election?

[bullets13]

Please state why.

[AggiesAreWe]

Stevenash

 

because he's due.

[LumRaiderFan]

I would like to see Rand Paul because I am more in line with his views than anyone else.

He is a small gov fiscal conservative with much more sensible views on foreign policy than his Dad.

That being said, I don't know if he will be electable in 2016....more of an evaluation of the voters rather than Paul.

All the most viable candidates for the GOP in 2016 are more of the same big gov spenders that will continue to go along with increasing the federal debt...hopefully that will change.

But, they will at least be on the right side of Second Amendment and military issues...IF they can beat Hillary.

[westend1]

Christie.  Dude says what he thinks.

[new tobie]

Chris Christie because he will do what he thinks is right no matter what!

[mat]

I don’t pay much attention to any of them at this point. I wait to see who’s left standing after they shot themselves in the foot or the left ridicules them out of contention. I would like to see Ted Cruz just to see what would happen but I know it won’t happen. Washington deserves a Ted Cruz. Realistically I’ like to see Ben Carson, someone that’s not a politician.

[stevenash]

If Ben Carson becomes much of a realistic potential candidate, he will "very suddenly" be "exposed" for having had an affair or killed a patient intentionally or have hired an illegal to mow his yard or clean his house, yada yada yada.  This will come about shortly after he has been labeled an Uncle Tom.  And of course, it was purely coincidental that Mr. Carson was audited( by the IRS) very shortly after his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast brought him his newfound notoriety.  I just hope someone doesnt suggest that this audit was the result of a couple of Rogue IRS agents or a video was somehow involved.

[77]

gonna be hard for any rep. to win with the media on the dem. side like they are plus all the illegal voting!  jmo

[mat]

I don’t pay much attention to any of them at this point. I wait to see who’s left standing after they shot themselves in the foot or the left ridicules them out of contention. I would like to see Ted Cruz just to see what would happen but I know it won’t happen. Washington deserves a Ted Cruz. Realistically I’d like to see Ben Carson, someone that’s not a politician.

[bullets13]

If Ben Carson becomes much of a realistic potential candidate, he will "very suddenly" be "exposed" for having had an affair or killed a patient intentionally or have hired an illegal to mow his yard or clean his house, yada yada yada. This will come about shortly after he has been labeled an Uncle Tom. And of course, it was purely coincidental that Mr. Carson was audited( by the IRS) very shortly after his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast brought him his newfound notoriety. I just hope someone doesnt suggest that this audit was the result of a couple of Rogue IRS agents or a video was somehow involved.

Perhaps the conservative right, which takes so much pride in legislating morality, needs to make sure that the candidates it puts forth indeed have a strong moral compass. It's really funny to me that the same people who are quick to ridicule Bill Clinton for his improprieties then turn around and blame the "liberal media" for exposing the improprieties of their own candidates.

[bullets13]

I don’t pay much attention to any of them at this point. I wait to see who’s left standing after they shot themselves in the foot or the left ridicules them out of contention. I would like to see Ted Cruz just to see what would happen but I know it won’t happen. Washington deserves a Ted Cruz. Realistically I’ like to see Ben Carson, someone that’s not a politician.

IMO it's going to take a moderately conservative republican to win it, and the far right's willingness to vote for him. To have a chance against Hillary, which will be the 2nd democratic candidate in a row that will be taking a large chunk of a demographic based on something that has nothing to do with politics, the republicans have to find a way to do two things: avoid disenfranchising ultra conservatives, causing them to avoid the polls, and find a way to swing the moderate vote away from the left. I think their best chance is to choose a moderate who might swing the fence sitters to the right, while somehow convincing the far right that electing a moderate republican is better than having an ultra-conservative get defeated by Hillary.

[mat]

IMO it's going to take a moderately conservative republican to win it, and the far right's willingness to vote for him. To have a chance against Hillary, which will be the 2nd democratic candidate in a row that will be taking a large chunk of a demographic based on something that has nothing to do with politics, the republicans have to find a way to do two things: avoid disenfranchising ultra conservatives, causing them to avoid the polls, and find a way to swing the moderate vote away from the left. I think their best chance is to choose a moderate who might swing the fence sitters to the right, while somehow convincing the far right that electing a moderate republican is better than having an ultra-conservative get defeated by Hillary.

Another damaging scenario for the GOP is self destruction. They ridiculed each other throughout the last primary debates and ruined all credibility. Newt had it right last time and tried to promote unity within the party debates but they were too focused on discrediting each other.

[new tobie]

IMO it's going to take a moderately conservative republican to win it, and the far right's willingness to vote for him. To have a chance against Hillary, which will be the 2nd democratic candidate in a row that will be taking a large chunk of a demographic based on something that has nothing to do with politics, the republicans have to find a way to do two things: avoid disenfranchising ultra conservatives, causing them to avoid the polls, and find a way to swing the moderate vote away from the left. I think their best chance is to choose a moderate who might swing the fence sitters to the right, while somehow convincing the far right that electing a moderate republican is better than having an ultra-conservative get defeated by Hillary.

You are right on target with this post, but a moderate candidate won't survive with the tea party influence.

[PAMFAM10]

Rand Paul

[PAMFAM10]

If Ben Carson becomes much of a realistic potential candidate, he will "very suddenly" be "exposed" for having had an affair or killed a patient intentionally or have hired an illegal to mow his yard or clean his house, yada yada yada. This will come about shortly after he has been labeled an Uncle Tom. And of course, it was purely coincidental that Mr. Carson was audited( by the IRS) very shortly after his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast brought him his newfound notoriety. I just hope someone doesnt suggest that this audit was the result of a couple of Rogue IRS agents or a video was somehow involved.

Ben will have big trouble I dont see him winning the white vote black vote or Hispanic vote

[rolltides]

Ron Paul

[BLUEDOVE3]

This is a good step for you guys. Focus on your own .get your own house in order.  ;)

[stevenash]

The answer is simple.  Promise lots of free stuff. It works every time

[stevenash]

Perhaps the conservative right, which takes so much pride in legislating morality, needs to make sure that the candidates it puts forth indeed have a strong moral compass. It's really funny to me that the same people who are quick to ridicule Bill Clinton for his improprieties then turn around and blame the "liberal media" for exposing the improprieties of their own candidates.

Doesnt matter if candidate has strong moral compass.  The "machine" will make the allegation (plant the seed) and the low info voters will accept it.  AKA- Harry Reid saying, on the Senate floor  he "heard" that Mitt Romney hadnt paid taxes in 10 years.  My guess is that, considering the way the IRS operates, it is highly likely Mr. Reid had already seen all of Mr. Romneys returns.  If he didnt, it really doesnt matter because he knew he was being disingenuos when he said it. 

[LumRaiderFan]

This is a good step for you guys. Focus on your own .get your own house in order.  ;)

 

Already got the house in order...the Senate and White House are next.

[new tobie]

Doesnt matter if candidate has strong moral compass.  The "machine" will make the allegation (plant the seed) and the low info voters will accept it.  AKA- Harry Reid saying, on the Senate floor  he "heard" that Mitt Romney hadnt paid taxes in 10 years.  My guess is that, considering the way the IRS operates, it is highly likely Mr. Reid had already seen all of Mr. Romneys returns.  If he didnt, it really doesnt matter because he knew he was being disingenuos when he said it. 

Reed probably new that Mitt would not show his taxes, must have had something to hide!

[stevenash]

Reed probably new that Mitt would not show his taxes, must have had something to hide!

If you have legally filed your taxes every year, what are you hiding?

[LumRaiderFan]

Reed probably new that Mitt would not show his taxes, must have had something to hide!

Hide what...all the millions he gives to church and charity.

[77]

Reed cant open his mouth without a lie fallin out!

[LumRaiderFan]

Reed cant open his mouth without a lie fallin out!

But he knows all he has to do is make one comment about anything and the sippers gulpers run with it without question.