Posted on 04/03/2015 9:45:50 AM PDT by pinochet
1. Rand Paul is strong among libertarian Republicans and anti-war isolationists on foreign policy.
2. Ted Cruz is strong among pro-life evangelicals and those in favor of a hawkish interventionist foreign policy. He is also favored by those who see the elimination of Obama Care as a priority.
3. Scott Walker, as a governor, is favored by those who want someone with executive experience. He stood up against public sector unions, just like Reagan stood up against the air traffic controllers. The unions forced a recall election against Governor Walker but lost. Scott Walker is also favored among supporters of school choice. Scott Walker is also seen as the person who is most likely to oppose amnesty for illegal aliens.
Rand is a no-go, sadly. I like him, but no.
For me, its Cruz. Cruz/Walker will be a wonderful team. I don’t expect these two to spend much energy attacking one another because they are probably going to be partners for the next eight years.
I like Walker, but how many of those has he won against Washington Democrats? Just sayin...
And I’d add this, Cruz has much more appeal than just evangelicals, anti Obama Care folks and defense hawks. He’s big in the liberty community (tho not as big as Paul in that universe) and he’s big in the small business community - his leadership PAC, started years ago, is called “Jobs Growth and Opportunity PAC.”
The first and last qualify for higher office. The middle has to steel it illegally like Hussein Soetoro, pure and simple!!!
Walker and Cruz have a up side. Paul is stuck with whatever support he’s got now.
No argument from me, but only one from your list had actually announced his candidacy, and until Walker announces, I’ll support Cruz.
But financially, I’ll support FreeRepublic. This forum does more.
Rand is fine right where he is. Senators get paid to run their mouths, and he’s pretty good at it most of the time. He’s shown he will fold up his principles for the GOPe to get ahead. Stay in the Senate.
I think primary weight of the first ten states (Iowa, New Hampshire, Col, Minn, Utah, NY, NC, Mich, Nevada, and SC) is what matters...with Iowa and New Hampshire carrying a bump-up each.
Rand Paul can’t win or place second in any of these. Walker ought to win six of these minimum. Cruz might carry two of them. Bush will finish second or third in all ten...meaning that he’s out of the picture by the end of Feb.
Toss in the effect of the debates, and it’s mostly a race between Cruz and Walker, with the other guys carving out thirty-percent of the overall primary vote by the end. No clear winner till the convention.
I do believe that the word you are looking for is “steal”.
Rand is a no-go, sadly. I like him, but no.
For me, its Cruz. Cruz/Walker will be a wonderful team. I don’t expect these two to spend much energy attacking one another because they are probably going to be partners for the next eight years.
++++
We think alike. Hope your wish comes true. We need to work hard here at FR to make it so.
New Hampshire is crucial for Bush. My guess is he’ll put in a token effort in Iowa and roll the dice on the Granite State. If he doesn’t win there he’s likely done as a serious contender.
1. Walker - Actually fights and wins against the left
(Recall attempts and unions)
2. Cruz - Brilliantly articulates freedom, conservatism
and the Constitution for everyone.
3. Paul - I have no idea.
You said Walker was the strongest candidate on immigration. Which position? He’s had several.
Ted Cruz said we have to enforce the laws currently on the books and secure the border. That to me is the soundest position on immigration.
1.) Paul is somewhat anti-establishment. I believe he is an ideologue who is convinced that government IS the problem. I think he plays nice the best he can with the GOPe but if given power would do what it takes to actually shrink government and not just grow it 90% as fast as the Democrats want.
2.) I think Cruz is very anti-establishment. I think he instinctively believes that conservatism is right and would defend it in the White House.
3.) I don't think Walker is anti-establishment. I think he did act bravely in the anti-union fight but ultimately it was a fight which had the blessing of the GOPe. Against Obamacare, the homosexual agenda, nationalization of industry, nationalization of education, abortion, immigration, the Chamber of Commerce, Corporatism, crony capitalism, etc... I don't think he would lift a finger without the GOPe's permission.
Cruz has great instincts and can draw support from the working class.
— I believe Rand is the best communicator of the bunch. Communicating his ideas, however, is one reason I won’t be supporting him.
— Cruz is by far the most intellectual. I agree with him on most everything. I do sometimes have a difficult time understanding what he’s saying.
— Scott Walker is a good communicator but he has flipped on a few issues like amnesty. I like him but that has been a negative for him to me.
This is a rather incomplete and incorrect list. As discussed elsewhere at great length in on Free Republic, Walker is clearly for legalizing illegal aliens, which is amnesty.
We need to pickup Blue States.
I sent $$$ to Cruz because I believe in him.
Texas is already in the bag.
Walker could likely bring IA, WI, NV, OH, FL and small chance of OR and PA.
Rand Paul maybe brings OR but unlikely.
Cruz, Walker and others all have substance and strong arguments for their supporters to advance.
Paul is just fluff and hot air, there just isn’t anything there.
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.