Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
you don't see Christi or Rand Paul in the race? That somewhat surprised me.
All pubs I know hate Christie. They call him a RINO and his photo Op with president Obama was treason. It will be interesting to see how he fares. I certainly think he is going to throw his hat into the ring.
your opinion or mine, is just that opinion, not always the truth!!! don't like the candidates, don't vote: that is your choice, just don't spend 4 years gripping about what a lousy job the president is doing. BTW, I don't have a clue who will even be running: I just have an opinion...
Why can't I gripe if no matter either one of the two is going to do the same thing anyway? The point is that no matter who you vote for in either party will be at the whims of a select few billionaires. Until a third or even fouth party has a realistic chance of competing, please explain what real difference will it make?
I believe this is the real reason why r. Paul ran as a Republican and he STILL got treated as a step-child! Herman "Uncle Rukus" Cain got more recognition than he did and he had a porkchop chance in a lion's den of wininng.
Why can't I gripe if no matter either one of the two is going to do the same thing anyway? The point is that no matter who you vote for in either party will be at the whims of a select few billionaires. Until a third or even fouth party has a realistic chance of competing, please explain what real difference will it make?
I believe this is the real reason why r. Paul ran as a Republican and he STILL got treated as a step-child! Herman "Uncle Rukus" Cain got more recognition than he did and he had a porkchop chance in a lion's den of wininng.
you do have a right, we all have a right to express our opinions, but most of us still find one candidate that appeals to us slightly more than another.
As for Ron Paul, I do not disagree with you totally, but if you know much about his background and his inability to get things done, you might realize there was more to his not getting attention than his Libertarian views. He was too much his own man. To be a successful candidate you have to have something special that voters will appreciate: it might be charisma, which he didn't have; it might be the ability to attract both sides: he didn't have, or something like name recognition: which he didn't have. You also don't make statements that sit wrong with many. He would not have won the general election had he gotten the nomination. Also jumping from party to party didn't help him. Rand Paul is very different, he too has the problem with being a little to "in your face" but he doesn't seam as cranky as his dad (maybe age has something to do with that) he is making a name for himself in Washington and he is a Republican with some Libertarian leanings, not visa versa.
The GOP or Conservative Party (that's the way it should call itself, republicanism is no representative ideology, much less a right-wing one, mostly socialists and marxists proudly called themselves republicans in the history of the last 150 years, only in the US republicanism has a right-wing touch, google it, you 'll be surprised how many left-wing parties referred to themselves as republicans, oh and I know this has a certain history in the Jeffersonian Democratic-Republican Party and different original definitions of the term in the US and elsewhere, still it's confusing and annoying for someone interested in recent international history and politics to see the vaguity of this strong word) should nominate someone who actually believes in what they are saying: that Reagan was such a conservative hero and his agenda was almost all great.
Nevertheless he loved compromising and negotiating with his friend Speaker O'Neill, appointed 2 pro-choice SC justices, signed a bill granting amnesty to illegal aliens who came before 1982, signed a bill in 1986 granting socialist emergency treatment for ill individuals, was criticized for being too friendly with Gorbachev, the list goes on and on...
Christie could really be such a Reagan conservative and win in a landslide despite demographic changes, if not Hillary, but someone left of center like Warren will become nominated by the other party which is anyway quite unlikely.
For the "conservative" comedy show to continue, those tickets could be awesome:
Ok, now seriously, I would love to see the two moderate ladies from Maine (I know one of them is no longer senator) to be on a ticket, it won't happen anyway. Murkowski, Sandoval, Huntsman, they would all be interesting, but they will not receive the nomination which is likely, let alone run.
you do have a right, we all have a right to express our opinions, but most of us still find one candidate that appeals to us slightly more than another.
As for Ron Paul, I do not disagree with you totally, but if you know much about his background and his inability to get things done, you might realize there was more to his not getting attention than his Libertarian views. He was too much his own man. To be a successful candidate you have to have something special that voters will appreciate: it might be charisma, which he didn't have; it might be the ability to attract both sides: he didn't have, or something like name recognition: which he didn't have. You also don't make statements that sit wrong with many. He would not have won the general election had he gotten the nomination. Also jumping from party to party didn't help him. Rand Paul is very different, he too has the problem with being a little to "in your face" but he doesn't seam as cranky as his dad (maybe age has something to do with that) he is making a name for himself in Washington and he is a Republican with some Libertarian leanings, not visa versa.
I concur, It is just so fraustrating to see promising young idealogical politicians go to Washington and become just as corrupt as the rest. There is even some clown complaining that they are not paid enough for what little that they do After the manipulation of the Obama election(?) I realized especially after the (un) supreme court allowed that anyone can give as much money to their favorite puppet, uh I mean candidate as they want that politics on the national level is a dog and pony show that caters to the extremely wealthy.
Please, please, please run Jindal! I can hear the commercials now, with that Tubular Bells song from the Exorcist movie (Jindal performed one in college) in the background.
Rand Paul/Ben Carson or Ben Carson/Rand Paul ticket.
That seems like a dream-team in comparison to what republicans have offered up lately.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
After the manipulation of the Obama election(?) I realized especially after the (un) supreme court allowed that anyone can give as much money to their favorite puppet, uh I mean candidate as they want that politics on the national level is a dog and pony show that caters to the extremely wealthy.
