I agree.
Posted on 09/15/2013 7:01:45 AM PDT by BarnacleCenturion
I STRONGLY disagree.
If Palin doesn’t run, I’ll gladly stand behind one of the others.
But for now, she’s number one. :D
I like Paul/Cruz or Cruz/Paul
Jeb Bush makes me sick. His son is running for an office here in Texas which I will go and vote against him. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree in that family. Jeb giving Hillary that award was the last straw for any Bush for me.
I think Ron Johnson would be a good VP. He could lose his seat in Wisconsin.
I dont think you would need to have both Paul and Cruz on the same ticket. I think one of them will drop out if necessary.
I trust Rand Paul to be laughed at by a GOP congress when he uses Karl Rove logic to hispander.
I trust Paul more as an executive than his behaviour as a Senator on amnesty.
Neocons don’t play nice. Rand Paul will be smeared out of public life if he makes a serious run. It will be ugly.
This was a nice couple of weeks. But prepare for the dying empire to continue perpetual war. Pray for your kids.
He NEVER told the viewers he had back surgery and was on medication. All of his gaffs can be blamed on his bad politicking.
One of the reasons he probably isn't running for reelection as governor is that he can't get elected----Texans NEVER knew until the presidential debate that he had given illegals in-state tuition.
Perry is the one that told the electorate WE were heartless WRT amnesty.......making us the villains and himself the good ol' latino suckup boy.
The way he entered the prez race was an outrage---he never campaigned---but he stopped the momentum of Michele Bachman who actually won the primary. Perry acted like he had won---plastering himself allover the media w/ that snarky Texas grin.
“How could Paul mess it up? The mistake would be if a nominated Rand Paul chooses one of those establishment politicians for VP. US citizens know what globalist sellouts are, and choosing one would give the dems an opening.”
Like Reagan did, beginning a 12 year GOP run?
He had the wisdom to know he needed those establishment votes, to win.
I don’t think the comparison to Reagan’s VP choice is valid. Most people are fed up with the mess establishment choices have made of the country....including Reagan’s VP.
Yeah and he was a ****ty Gov to boot! *snarky Tx grin*
For 4 terms.
While I’d greatly prefer Rand Paul to crypto-liberals like Jeb Bush and Chris Christie, I find his support for amnesty for illegal immigrants hard to stomach. I don’t think that I could bring myself to vote for any pro-amnesty candidate, which, as far as I know, leaves Ted Cruz as the only acceptable GOP candidate who is likely to be running.
“I don’t think the comparison to Reagan’s VP choice is valid. Most people are fed up with the mess establishment choices have made of the country....including Reagan’s VP.”
My point is you need the entire spectrum of the GOP, to win.
A new factor is the “libertarian” part of the spectrum, which seems quite popular.
The GOP has not held power since 2006, so the mess now is not theirs.
A more likely scenario would be an establishment candidate like Jeb Bush or Christie picking a conservative running mate like Paul or Cruz as a token. Since the VP has virtually no actual authority, barring the death of a President, it would be all for show.
Honest injun, I’m not saying this with any snark in my heart or voice, but you really think that Sarah Palin would get 270 electoral votes?
I think she’d get approximately the amount of support that Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity would. Now, I’d love a President Sean or President Rush, but realistically it ain’t going to happen.
Now, granted, I’m the guy who thinks we are beyond voting in this country, the mooches, morons and soon to be the illegals just have overwhelmed the electorate...but as much as I agree with her, I just think Sarah is too polarizing. In other words, I agree with her WAY too much to every think she has a chance with the low information voters LOL.
I would gladly vote for Rand Paul or Ted Cruz, but in a national election they would have almost zero chance to win.
The voting majority are just slightly ahead of Koo Koo the gorilla. Paul and Cruz will hit them with to much truth and that can’t be processed by the simpletons that make up the voting majority.
Consequently, Christie has absolutely no chance of winning the GOP nomination in 2016, nor any chance of being on the ticket as VP. Any northeasterners who think Christie is a viable national candidate are beyond deluded.
If there's one thing that can de-energize the conservative/TEA party base, it's liberal northeast Republican gun-grabbers.
Combine that with the fact that Christie consistently has to wipe 0bama's j--m off his face, I'd say that Christie is about as likely to be the GOP nominee in 2016 as Mitt Romney is...
Cruz is the best bar none. Rand Paul voted to confirm Kerry and Hagel saying that Obama deserves some lee way. Give me a break..our Clown in Chief already had his leeway with Hillary.
Cruz voted against both.
I know. I can't take a 2016 candidate poll seriously, that doesn't have Palin in it.
I agree.
Probably because Palin won’t run. I’d vote for her in a second if she did, but her time was 2012. I still have no idea why she passed it up.
I’m ashamed I voted for McCain and Romney. But I’m proud to say I never voted for old man Bush.
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.