Skip to comments.
Who is the most conservative Republican candidate for president? [CRUZ!]
Washington Post ^
| June 16 at 2:00 PM
| Pablo Barberá
Posted on 06/17/2015 9:45:26 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
The Republican field is crowded, which implies that primary voters have little information about where some of the candidates stand. That is particularly the case this season, with a few relatively unknown contenders who lack legislative experience or a long history of campaign contributions that would allow researchers to precisely identify where they stand on the liberal-to-conservative political dimension.
However, one characteristic all candidates share is that they have active and popular Twitter accounts. And as I showed in an article published earlier this year in the journal Political Analysis now freely available online as an Editors Choice article it is possible to analyze the candidates Twitter networks to compute precise ideological scores and thus identify how conservative or liberal each of them is.
The intuition behind this method is simple: Citizens prefer to follow on Twitter those political accounts that they perceive to be ideologically close to their own positions. Tea party supporters, for example, tend to follow Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, but not Chris Christie. The same occurs on the other side of the spectrum: Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders will have a more liberal set of followers than Hillary Clinton. Relying on this assumption, I developed a statistical model that estimates simultaneously the positions of political actors and voters. And since not only politicians but also media outlets, private companies, and interest groups are active on Twitter the resulting ideological scores are comparable for different sets of accounts.
The figure below displays the ideological scores of all declared and rumored major primary candidates as of June 1
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
TOPICS: Canada; Constitution/Conservatism; Cuba; Government; Israel; Mexico; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Russia; US: Arkansas; US: California; US: Florida; US: Indiana; US: Louisiana; US: Maryland; US: Massachusetts; US: New Jersey; US: New York; US: Ohio; US: Pennsylvania; US: Rhode Island; US: South Carolina; US: Texas; US: Vermont; US: Wisconsin; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2016election; 911truth; 911truther; 911truthers; akadeblasio; alsharpton; andrewcuomo; arkansas; bencarson; benghazi; berniesanders; billdeblasio; bobbyjindal; california; canada; carlyfiorina; charliehebdo; chirlanemccray; chrischristie; clintoncash; clintonfoundation; cromnibus; cruz; cuba; deathtoislam; doddfrank; donaldchump; donaldhump; donaldtrump; eib; election2016; elizabethwarren; exportimportbank; fauxahontas; florida; france; garland; georgepataki; glasssteagall; hillaryclinton; hitlery; homosexualagenda; indiana; iran; israel; jebbush; johnkasich; libertarians; libya; lieawatha; lincolnchafee; lindseygraham; louisiana; marcorubio; martinomalley; maryland; massachusetts; medicalmarijuana; mexico; mikebloomberg; mikehuckabee; mikepence; nancypelosi; newjersey; newyork; nicaragua; occupywallstreet; occutard; occutardation; occutards; ohio; pages; pamelageller; paris; pennsylvania; peterking; peterschweizer; rfra; rhodeisland; rickperry; ricksantorum; russia; scottwalker; southcarolina; tedcruz; texas; tisa; tpa; tpp; treygowdy; uranium; venezuela; vermont; waronterror; wikileaks; wisconsin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-94 next last
To: SoConPubbie
“And Cruz has made it clear that he is withholding judgment on the TPP until it negotiations have been completed before he decides whether he will vote for it or not.”
Right. TPA gets approved and TPP and subsequent trade legislation will still be reviewed by Congress and the Senate and it will get killed there by Republicans.
The only reason I can think that people here no longer like Cruz is because he is approving a vote on giving a “Democrat” the power to create trade legislation.
There is no reason to worry here. Cruz will always do what is right for America. That’s how he is wired. The fog of war on this legislation has muddied the waters so much and due to its secrecy everyone is speculating.
41
posted on
06/17/2015 10:35:38 AM PDT
by
EQAndyBuzz
( Hillary: Ethically Sleazy & Politically Stupid)
To: EQAndyBuzz
I listened to that interview and I concluded ... Cruz may be entirely correct, but IMO ... Americans are looking for a fighter and if in fact the vote wasn't that important in the first place ... one might wonder why Cruz would vote for it when it didn't matter anyway ...... and especially when Cruz should be making people points ... not political ones.
SOME votes should be symbolic.
42
posted on
06/17/2015 10:39:34 AM PDT
by
knarf
(I say things that are true .... I have no proof ... but they're true)
To: knarf
I think we should be more concerned about AMERICAN than conservative.
Sorry, but you could not be more wrong.
Being concerned about things from a conservative perspective IS being concerned about things from an AMERICAN perspective.
43
posted on
06/17/2015 10:41:35 AM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: DaxtonBrown
Looking forward to the general election I would theorize that the only three with a chance to beat Hillary are Cruz, Trump and maybe Perry. The rest will go down to Hillary in a general election.
44
posted on
06/17/2015 10:42:37 AM PDT
by
Georgia Girl 2
(The only purpose o f a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
To: SoConPubbie
It is my understanding that TPA allows trade agreements to be approved on a 51 vote basis rather than a 60, and no amendments allowed. Given who who we have as president I have absolute faith that trade agreements will be against the interests of our country. Given who we have in the Senate I have absolute faith they can muster 51 to give Obama what he wants.
Cruz is still my candidate but I think he is wrong to believe that TPA will do more good than harm. Apparently I am more cynical about his peers than he, but I think I am right.
To: SoConPubbie
Maybe this will shed some light?
Op-ed: Hatch should fix H1-B visa program instead of expand it
From that article:
How do corporations benefit from this? Major savings: Many of the workers laid off at Disney and SCE earned $100,000 a year or more. Government data indicate the H-1B workers replacing them earn around $60,000.
46
posted on
06/17/2015 10:42:46 AM PDT
by
upchuck
(Downsizing and decentralizing government is something the Republican establishment just wonÂ’t allow)
To: EQAndyBuzz
You are right - it’s the trade deal that’s the problem.
BUT...
we can’t see it AND tpa would allow the trade deal thru without inspection and only an up or down vote... i do not trust these weasels and nobody does hence the outcry. Say whatever about 60 days but I do not believe them, not one bit. And what recourse is there should they fail to make public the deal?
it should be 2/3 of the senate that approves treaties... which some say this is... but we don’t know b/c they won’t show us.
They’re trying to go too fast. Like TARP. Gotta do it now, Now, NOW!!!
to cool everyone’s jets we need to slow it down and show the public the deal.
they have really screwed up lying to us so much that we refuse to believe them.
47
posted on
06/17/2015 10:43:57 AM PDT
by
Principled
(Government Slowdown using the budget process!)
To: SoConPubbie
I agree, but most voters are not reading FR or listening to Conservative talk ...
They ARE being hammered with the word "conservative" and being led to aligning that with non American
If a news item was between American and Democrat ... I think the public would begin to mature their thought processes
48
posted on
06/17/2015 10:46:00 AM PDT
by
knarf
(I say things that are true .... I have no proof ... but they're true)
To: EQAndyBuzz
...due to its secrecy everyone is speculating. Can you blame them? So many lies all the time... and no consequences. It's just plain common sense that when there are no consequences for lying, it does not abate. Indeed in cases where lying gives great monetary rewards, the lack of consequences ensures lying to increase.
WE. DON'T. BELIEVE. POLS.
49
posted on
06/17/2015 10:47:55 AM PDT
by
Principled
(Government Slowdown using the budget process!)
To: upchuck
From that article: How do corporations benefit from this? Major savings: Many of the workers laid off at Disney and SCE earned $100,000 a year or more. Government data indicate the H-1B workers replacing them earn around $60,000.
There were approximately 1000 U.S. workers affected by those occurrences. I have, as yet, to see any other verifiable proof that any other corporation have been abusing the H1-B process. While this is deplorable, it does not provide a satisfactory level of proof that Corporate America is abusing the H1-B process and stealing jobs from America.
Is it wrong? Absolutely!
Should it be fixed so that these relatively rare occurrences don't happen again, of course!
Does it prove that Ted Cruz's position on H1-Bs is incorrect or ill-advised. Absolutely not!
50
posted on
06/17/2015 10:48:40 AM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: knarf
Then you are talking about a change of messaging, right?
If so, you maybe right!
51
posted on
06/17/2015 10:49:24 AM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: Principled; EQAndyBuzz
we cant see it AND tpa would allow the trade deal thru without inspection and only an up or down vote... i do not trust these weasels and nobody does hence the outcry. Say whatever about 60 days but I do not believe them, not one bit. And what recourse is there should they fail to make public the deal?
Totally false. Probably the most-repeated myth right now isnt even related to TPA but instead to the TPP, which is still being negotiated. According to the anti-TPA script, the TPP is so secret that nobody knows whats in it, andmuch like Obamacare legislationnobody, not even Congress, will know whats in it until the agreement is passed into law. Once again, however, nothing could be further from the truth:
- First, Obamas USTR and Congress have been consulting on the TPP since December 14, 2009, when then-USTR Kirk notified Congress that President Obama intended to enter into TPP negotiations. USTR then held initial consultations with Congress in 2010 and, according to a January 2015 fact-sheet, has since held almost 1,700 congressional briefings on TPP alone. USTR also previewed various TPP proposals with key congressional committees before taking them to our trading partners. (Odd that the TPP talks have been going on for six years, but the vast majority of these secrecy complaints have only emerged in the last few months, huh?)
- Second, USTR has provided access to the full negotiating texts for any Member of Congress, including for Members to view at their convenience in the Capitol, accompanied by staff members with appropriate security clearance. This access began in 2012, and several House members and senatorsboth supportive of TPA (like Mike Lee) and opposed (like Sens. Jeff Sessions and Elizabeth Warren, as well as Rep. Rosa DeLauro)have reviewed the draft negotiating texts. Moreover, the level of security surrounding these TPP texts isnt part of some scary Obama administration plot; its set by Congress (which, as youll recall, is controlled by Republicans these days). A U.S. government official confirmed to me that the Senate and House security offices determine the procedures for viewing classified material in the Capitol reading room where the TPP text is kept for Members—not the administration
some people claim that its more difficult to view military or intelligence information, but its all subject to the same rules that are set and enforced by Capitol security.”
- Third, USTR has engaged the public on the TPP via published reports and stakeholder meetings with groups like labor unions, consumer groups, and, of course, corporations and trade associations. Some of these stakeholders have even reviewed the negotiating texts and US proposals. Admittedly, the official texts arent available to the general public, but this is common practice for all FTAs (as a quick Google search reveals) and for good reason: just like other high-value negotiations among private parties or governments, revealing draft proposals before a deal is struck emboldens the opposition, undermines the parties negotiating positions, and exposes negotiators to public scrutiny over provisions that might not even be in a final deal. Publishing draft FTA texts would make completing a deal difficult, if not impossible, and its thus no coincidence the most vocal advocates for full transparency in free trade negotiations are actually those most opposed to free trade.Its also important to understand just how unoriginal this secrecy canard is:
Yes, protectionists have been using the same secrecy lines for over 20 years. In fact, if you replaced NAFTA with TPP in those old Ross Perot commercials, theyd be almost indistinguishable from the ones on our TVs today.
- Finally, unlike the oft-analogized Obamacare legislation, the actual text of any final TPP deal will be required by law to be publicly available (online) for monthsyes, monthsbefore Congress votes on it. As you can see from the table below (source), under TPA the president must make the entire text of any trade agreement, including TPP, available to the public for 60 days before he can even sign it.Once its signed, Congress will have weeks, maybe months, to scour the deal, hold mock markups in various committees, and suggest changes to the agreement before the president sends Congress legislation implementing the FTA for a final vote. Also, within 105 days of the FTAs signing, the U.S. International Trade Commission must issue a report on the deals economic impactagain prior those bills being submitted to Congress. And once the bills finally are submitted, Congress will then have up to 90 legislative days (which is like five months in normal human days) to review the bills and hold final votes.
Bottom line: when or if TPA is passed, the general public will have monthsand if the presidential elections interfere, maybe yearsto review the TPP before Congress acts on it. Think thats crazy? Well, its precisely what happened to U.S. FTAs with Colombia, Panama and South Korea, which were signed by President Bush but sat around (online) for years before they were submitted to, and passed by, Congress in 2011.
52
posted on
06/17/2015 10:50:32 AM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: RightOnTheBorder
I am about exactly in the same place. Cruz is my candidate but don’t know [yet] why he would allow himself to be caught appearing to be OK giving 0bama this power.
53
posted on
06/17/2015 10:51:32 AM PDT
by
Principled
(Government Slowdown using the budget process!)
To: RightOnTheBorder
It is my understanding that TPA allows trade agreements to be approved on a 51 vote basis rather than a 60, and no amendments allowed.
TPA has been around since at least 1974 and it has never allowed amendments.
You are being played.
54
posted on
06/17/2015 10:52:21 AM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: EQAndyBuzz
“There is no reason to worry here. Cruz will always do what is right for America. Thats how he is wired. The fog of war on this legislation has muddied the waters so much and due to its secrecy everyone is speculating.”
If they dig a little and think before speculation they find Cruz is simply for free trade and he would like to do it right.
The alternative is a volatile nut like Trump who thinks he can just hold the world hostage.
55
posted on
06/17/2015 10:53:24 AM PDT
by
right way right
(Disclaimer: Not a prophet but I have a pretty good record.)
To: SoConPubbie
I am a BIG Cruz supporter and still am.
He is falling for the Chamber of Commerce on H1b.
I suspect he is trying to mend fences with GOP leaders.
I’d really like to have him meet some FR engineers like myself who have been forced out by H1b.
I could get him to change his mind in 15 min.
56
posted on
06/17/2015 10:54:55 AM PDT
by
Zathras
To: SoConPubbie
I don't want to hear Cruz later say he voted NO on TPP after voting Yes on TPA.
I equate this with Conservatives passing bills out of committee, then voting against the bill on the floor, claiming not their fault for the bill's passage.
I'm still on-board, just hiding & watching.
I like Walker but I want to know more about pro-life Carly Fiorina.
Cruz / Fiornia ...sure to steal Hillary's "time for a woman" thunder. Handling herself very well so far.
57
posted on
06/17/2015 11:03:28 AM PDT
by
TexasCajun
(Hillary: Ethically Sleazy & Politically Stupid)
To: SoConPubbie
Elizabeth Warren is too left for leftists...ok
WaPo is in the center of the average Twitter user...ok
But Rush Limbaugh is in line with the average republican congresscritter?...no way
58
posted on
06/17/2015 11:04:19 AM PDT
by
kidd
To: TexasCajun
I personally do not want to see a woman at the helm given the state of our country and the Internal stage as it is. ..no matter what they stand for...none of them come close to being a Margret Thatcher.
59
posted on
06/17/2015 11:11:12 AM PDT
by
caww
To: grania
Well see who can passionately and convincingly articulate constitutional conservative values.Words are cheap, and promises broken after elections... why not just look at their actual legislative/voting records and actions (for governors) to see who is conservative? Far more meaningful in my opinion.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-94 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson