Posted on 01/23/2014 4:50:23 PM PST by mandaladon
Don't laugh. He has built-in advantages in Iowa and New Hampshire, a party moving in his direction, and formidable fundraising potential. If Chris Christie was ever the frontrunner for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, he isn’t anymore. All along, the theory behind his candidacy was that he could overcome his lack of conservative bona fides with a combination of personality, competence, electability, and money. Bridgegate undermines all four.
In the minds of many voters, Christie’s personality has morphed from brash to bully. It’s harder to look competent when your top aides egregiously abused power under your nose. Christie’s supposed electability was based partly on polls showing that he was the only potential Republican nominee running even with Hillary Clinton. But Marist and Quinnipiac, whose surveys showed Clinton and Christie virtually tied in December, now show him trailing her by 13 and 8 points, respectively. The electability argument also depended on Christie’s supposed success in bringing New Jerseyans together across party lines, a harder claim now that Democrats in the state legislature are talking impeachment. And as Christie’s electability erodes, so will his vaunted support among GOP moneymen. As a Republican insider recently told BuzzFeed’s McKay Coppins, “There are definitely people jumping ship.”
So if Christie is no longer the candidate to beat in the 2016 Republican race, who is? Believe it or not, it’s Rand Paul.
To understand the Kentucky senator’s hidden strength, it’s worth remembering this basic fact about the modern GOP: It almost never nominates first-time candidates. Since 1980, George W. Bush is the only first-timer to win a Republican nomination. And since Bush used the political network his father built, he enjoyed many of the benefits of someone who had run before.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Spot on, Kidd...
Yeah, Walker is not afraid to defend his beliefs. He has courage. Rand, Cruz also great. I think all three are bullet proof
And FR is ground zero for circular firing squad behavior as we all know. Gingrich was the king of the RINOs here for a couple of years, you couldn't say one good thing about him unless you had your Nomex undies in place.
Then Palin backed off, Cain and Perry dropped out, and all of a sudden "Newt's Our Guy!!!"
Any of the six you have mentioned, plus Jindal and one or two others, would be just fine with me. I am not going to draw a line that excludes any limited-government conservative with a track record of conservative success based on a single issue. No matter what that issue may be.
Cruz, Palin, Keyes, Paul, Carson, Rush......in that order ;)
President: Walker because he is a governor with a track record.
VP Paul because he is a good communicator and can move people
Head of Cabinet: Cruz for there needs to be housecleaning
Cabinet Gowdey to assist in housecleaning.
I voted for Alan Keyes (twice), but he is not on my short list at this point, not that I don’t like him, but simply because I doubt that he will be a viable candidate this time around.
If I were king I would appoint a ticket something like Antonin Scalia/Tony Perkins, but I’m not king.
As a social conservative, I’m cautious about Rand Paul. I’m neither ruling him in nor out at this point, but he’s not on my first tier.
My short list of candidates that I am most interested in watching at this point are (in alphabetical order):
Ted Cruz
Bobby Jindal
Sarah Palin
Mike Pence
Rick Perry
Rick Santorum
I like Rand Paul other than his tendency toward his dad's weakness in foreign policy. The bad guys can capitalize on that if he doesn't straighten some of that out. Gaining the GOP nomination has always been the biggest problem for conservative/libertarian candidates.
Then there will also always be the question of whether he can be Hillary. Well, he wins the debate with Hillary in the forum of ideas every time except possibly foreign policy. But of course the Leftist MSM will steer as far away as possible from the real issues and debate except that which will help the Leftist candidate, so there would probably be a lot of MSM focus on foreign policy to highlight Paul's weakness.
Of course with Fred Thompson and possibly Mitt Romney, it was the other way around. Gradually Fred's face sagged so much that he looked like a sick puppy wishing he were anywhere but running for president and Romney single-handedly sabotaged his own campaign.
Before the 1920’s there were basically no immigration laws - basically anyone who wanted to come here could. I believe in that. This whole immigration thing is largely a function of the 20th century growth in government intrusion and laws. Conservatives’ ill-advised focus on this with Paul could derail a candidate who is serious about setting this country back on the right footing of less government and taxes and more free enterprise.
“Rand Paul is my second choice after Cruz”
+1. Bit worried about crazy daddy.
Another dark horse who's been way beneath the radar screen is Indiana Gov. Mike Pence.
I am too, but he might be able to deliver millions of his followers to vote for Rand in the general. It could make the race vs. Hillary somewhat interesting.
Rand Paul has all the right enemies - the Federal Reserve, the public unions, and the Federal Bureaucracy.
they haven’t created a coordinated media and social attack on Paul yet, but if they feel his chances are rising, you will see it happen.
I see Paul’s candidacy as a veritable 3rd party run without the inevitable downside of a third party libertarian/conservative candidate. He aint perfect, but I could/would vote for him
Look at freeperdom, rah rahing for the spawn of Ron. His masterplan of casting his son as a mainstream conservative rather than an apple that didn’t fall far (if not outright sock puppet) is coming to fruition.
I suppose he is one of the “better” choices because of how awful most of them are, Jeb, Butterbean, ect, but that’s not saying much.
Purely as a candidate, he doesn’t seem like a strong one.
Rande can pick up some of the “man pretty” voters that would back “His Rickness”.
I won’t vote for Ran Paul if he is the nominee
how is he on amnesty?
The problem is all the freebies federal and state that won’t be repealed any time soon.
An immigration position is going to be an issue whether or not amnesty is passed.
If it is passed it is possible a Steve King Tancredo type candidate could take votes away from Rand. Like with Panama even after the betrayal has happened.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.