Rubio, Christy, Paul....all are much much better than Romney in answering gotcha questions on their feet. Not my first choice personally any of them. But yes, they are better candidates than Romney could ever be.
I have not seen much of that governor of NM on TV. I don’t think she will be popular on FR because I understand her stance on immigration is on the soft side.
Free market is not the important item. What is important is that the candidate be able to explain WHY IT IS BETTER for workers. One way to explain it is cite ACTUAL examples from other countries. There is lot of history out there. Why this is important? Because it is liberal’s best tool to fool the masses...fair shot...1% rich...income disparity...are very effective talking points to fool the unwashed masses. I think only Cruz & Rubio are good at explaining this.
So,,,Appearance on TV, ability to field gotcha questions without looking like a deer in headlights (Palin suffered that treatment in 2008), expound on optimistic outlook for future based on free markets (like Reagan), not antagonize ANY voting block (Akin & Mourdock), and have a strong campaign organization and ability to raise lot of money (Obama), are all necessary attributes for a successful result.
I thought you were pushing Paul just like you push Romney?
In fact some of your worst liberal anti-social conservatism trolling is for Rand Paul isn’t it?