It's Time: Which Candidate Do You Currently Favor?

[LoneLaugher]

Trump.

And the other half of the topic was "Why?"

Honestly, because he isn't a politician. Also because he's rich already and not sucking up to billionaire donors doing their bidding. Every other GOP and Dem both are with the exception of Carson. But Carson's a religious crazy person.

I don't worry a lot about donors as a rule. I think it tells you a lot about a candidate to see which donors they align with, but as a general rule, I think ideology decides donors, rather than donors deciding ideology.

I am obviously looking for a conservative candidate, and I want someone who isn't chummy with the GOP establishment, but I'm very dubious about people who have no experience with the specific skill set of working in the government. I think Obama has shown us how disastrous a complete neophyte can be.

So....you choose Cruz? Weeeeeeeeee!

 

[leftwinger]

I vote first to say VP will go to work. No more laying in bed checking phone message, eating toast. This job is now far too big, teetering on complete collapse.

I would go Trump/Carson. Trump work financials, Carson work ghetto and other. War? get a good Sec Defense. Trump knows how to hire the best. We need a winner. Trump has always been winner.

Trump would have final "trump card" but Carson is very close #1.

Trump/Cruz? why not.
Rand Paul always seemed good but nobody agrees?

 

[dcraelin]

I think we're approaching the point in the campaign where the voters who aren't hardcore support bases and campaign workers are starting to get a feel for the candidates and leaning one direction or the other, although we obviously still have a lot of time before it's necessary to make a final choice.

So which candidate are you currently favoring, and why?

For myself, I'm currently throwing my support to Ted Cruz. As I've said in other places, he's smart, principled, conservative, and has shown himself to be willing and able to take on and oppose both the Democrats and the establishment of the GOP.

I havent voted major party for president in years but here is my take.

Trade is one of the most important issues a president deals with, that and other foreign policy. Our trade policy has been bought and manipulated by corporate whores.

Trump at least pretends to be concerned about that.....
so in a way does Paul ...or at least his father did...saying it is not true free trade.

Cruz actually worked as a trade, something or other, in the Bush admin I believe, this immediately disqualifies him as far as I'm concerned...that and his wife worked for Goldman-Sachs.

Carson hasnt addressed it as far as I've heard

Fiorina talks against the crony capitalism rampant in DC,

on the other side I dont trust Hillary's new-found opposition to trade.
Sanders is also a critic of our trade policy.

so of the republicans probably Trump, Fiorina, Paul
and the Democrats Sanders.

Well, although I don't agree with you, I do have to say you're very clear on which issues matter to you and whose positions align with what you want, so that's certainly good.

you know after posting that I realized there were two other republicans who don't seem real bad on trade that I forgot about because the media isn't giving them a lot of attention.

Santorum and Huckabee. Santorum I believe won 11 states last time around and certainly should not be ignored by the media. He should really be on the main stage debates also.

 

[Pete7469]

So to bring you back to the topic, who are you favoring so far and why?

I have been a Ted Cruz fan since he beat RINO Dewhurst for the senate seat. I was hoping he would run for president as soon as I heard him speak. I don't believe any other candidate will work to restore the constitutional restraints on federal power that have been abandoned by the states since the civil war as hard as Ted Cruz.

A lot of people complain about "big money influence", and pretend they will abandon their own big money donors. That's obviously complete bullshit and it isn't the solution. The people who write the laws always leave a means to skirt the laws.

The solution is to remove the power of the federal government and therefore remove the commodity federal officials sell to the lobbyists. I know for damn sure no RINO like Jeb, Crispy, Graham Cracker or Kasich will do a fuckin thing but increase federal power, just a little slower than hitlary. Most of the other candidates might do it less slow but the only guy I trust to not just stop the growth of federal power but roll it back is Ted Cruz. Rand Paul I think would also do so, but I do not think his foreign agenda is all there.Carson might stop it, and even roll some things back. Trump...

I don't know WTF Trump would do, but I'll vote for him in a heart beat before a RINO.

 

[Arianrhod]

So to bring you back to the topic, who are you favoring so far and why?

I have been a Ted Cruz fan since he beat RINO Dewhurst for the senate seat. I was hoping he would run for president as soon as I heard him speak. I don't believe any other candidate will work to restore the constitutional restraints on federal power that have been abandoned by the states since the civil war as hard as Ted Cruz.

A lot of people complain about "big money influence", and pretend they will abandon their own big money donors. That's obviously complete bullshit and it isn't the solution. The people who write the laws always leave a means to skirt the laws.

The solution is to remove the power of the federal government and therefore remove the commodity federal officials sell to the lobbyists. I know for damn sure no RINO like Jeb, Crispy, Graham Cracker or Kasich will do a fuckin thing but increase federal power, just a little slower than hitlary. Most of the other candidates might do it less slow but the only guy I trust to not just stop the growth of federal power but roll it back is Ted Cruz. Rand Paul I think would also do so, but I do not think his foreign agenda is all there.Carson might stop it, and even roll some things back. Trump...

I don't know WTF Trump would do, but I'll vote for him in a heart beat before a RINO.

Let me make sure I understand you. You support Cruz. Except when you support Trump. Except when you support Cruz. Except...

Have I omitted anything?

 

[Programmer]

I go with Trump. I can't vote for him in the primary. Reason: I think it will be more exciting, and I'm confident that I/We could survive it.

Your big interest in choosing a President is excitement? You know this is the future of our nation, not entertainment, right?

Tongue in cheek, yes. For the most part, I am the future of the nation from my perspective, and we own that severally and as a bloc. It would defy the universe if the President alone impacted my life more than me and what I do with my time, etc.

You know... excitement isn't limited to entertainment value... right?

 

[Programmer]

I go with Trump. I can't vote for him in the primary. Reason: I think it will be more exciting, and I'm confident that I/We could survive it.

Your big interest in choosing a President is excitement? You know this is the future of our nation, not entertainment, right?

Someone needs to convey that message to Trump.

Trump is clearly doing fine balancing popularity and politics like he knows what it takes to be president. Other than Clinton, who else is doing so at this point?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I go with Trump. I can't vote for him in the primary. Reason: I think it will be more exciting, and I'm confident that I/We could survive it.

Your big interest in choosing a President is excitement? You know this is the future of our nation, not entertainment, right?

Someone needs to convey that message to Trump.

Well, the voters will, or they won't. That's how it works.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I go with Trump. I can't vote for him in the primary. Reason: I think it will be more exciting, and I'm confident that I/We could survive it.

Your big interest in choosing a President is excitement? You know this is the future of our nation, not entertainment, right?

Tongue in cheek, yes. For the most part, I am the future of the nation from my perspective, and we own that severally and as a bloc. It would defy the universe if the President alone impacted my life more than me and what I do with my time, etc.

You know... excitement isn't limited to entertainment value... right?

No, I don't. In this context, there is no good about "excitement". As far as I'm concerned, proper government administration should be boring and should allow me to ignore it for days, even weeks, at a time. It's like driving a semi for a living (which I used to do): if it's "exciting", you're doing it wrong.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I go with Trump. I can't vote for him in the primary. Reason: I think it will be more exciting, and I'm confident that I/We could survive it.

Your big interest in choosing a President is excitement? You know this is the future of our nation, not entertainment, right?

Someone needs to convey that message to Trump.

Trump is clearly doing fine balancing popularity and politics like he knows what it takes to be president. Other than Clinton, who else is doing so at this point?

Honestly, I don't know how much "balancing" Trump is actually doing. It seems more to me like he's just capitalizing on the popularity aspect. How long that's going to last depends entirely on how shallow and silly the American people have become. I guess we'll see that measurement as the campaign continues.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I vote first to say VP will go to work. No more laying in bed checking phone message, eating toast. This job is now far too big, teetering on complete collapse.

I would go Trump/Carson. Trump work financials, Carson work ghetto and other. War? get a good Sec Defense. Trump knows how to hire the best. We need a winner. Trump has always been winner.

Trump would have final "trump card" but Carson is very close #1.

Trump/Cruz? why not.
Rand Paul always seemed good but nobody agrees?

No, I think the entire Paul family are loons.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think we're approaching the point in the campaign where the voters who aren't hardcore support bases and campaign workers are starting to get a feel for the candidates and leaning one direction or the other, although we obviously still have a lot of time before it's necessary to make a final choice.

So which candidate are you currently favoring, and why?

For myself, I'm currently throwing my support to Ted Cruz. As I've said in other places, he's smart, principled, conservative, and has shown himself to be willing and able to take on and oppose both the Democrats and the establishment of the GOP.

I havent voted major party for president in years but here is my take.

Trade is one of the most important issues a president deals with, that and other foreign policy. Our trade policy has been bought and manipulated by corporate whores.

Trump at least pretends to be concerned about that.....
so in a way does Paul ...or at least his father did...saying it is not true free trade.

Cruz actually worked as a trade, something or other, in the Bush admin I believe, this immediately disqualifies him as far as I'm concerned...that and his wife worked for Goldman-Sachs.

Carson hasnt addressed it as far as I've heard

Fiorina talks against the crony capitalism rampant in DC,

on the other side I dont trust Hillary's new-found opposition to trade.
Sanders is also a critic of our trade policy.

so of the republicans probably Trump, Fiorina, Paul
and the Democrats Sanders.

Well, although I don't agree with you, I do have to say you're very clear on which issues matter to you and whose positions align with what you want, so that's certainly good.

you know after posting that I realized there were two other republicans who don't seem real bad on trade that I forgot about because the media isn't giving them a lot of attention.

Santorum and Huckabee. Santorum I believe won 11 states last time around and certainly should not be ignored by the media. He should really be on the main stage debates also.

The main stage of the debates is determined by the percentage of support they have in the polls. Clearly, Santorum is generating virtually zero interest among likely voters, so . . .

 

[Cecilie1200]

So to bring you back to the topic, who are you favoring so far and why?

I have been a Ted Cruz fan since he beat RINO Dewhurst for the senate seat. I was hoping he would run for president as soon as I heard him speak. I don't believe any other candidate will work to restore the constitutional restraints on federal power that have been abandoned by the states since the civil war as hard as Ted Cruz.

A lot of people complain about "big money influence", and pretend they will abandon their own big money donors. That's obviously complete bullshit and it isn't the solution. The people who write the laws always leave a means to skirt the laws.

The solution is to remove the power of the federal government and therefore remove the commodity federal officials sell to the lobbyists. I know for damn sure no RINO like Jeb, Crispy, Graham Cracker or Kasich will do a fuckin thing but increase federal power, just a little slower than hitlary. Most of the other candidates might do it less slow but the only guy I trust to not just stop the growth of federal power but roll it back is Ted Cruz. Rand Paul I think would also do so, but I do not think his foreign agenda is all there.Carson might stop it, and even roll some things back. Trump...

I don't know WTF Trump would do, but I'll vote for him in a heart beat before a RINO.

I agree about Cruz, and I also have zero use for Bush, Christie, Graham, and Kasich.

I've already said I think Paul is a nutjob.

Trump . . . I don't think Trump is all that conservative, but I do think he's conscious enough of public opinion to respond to what his constituents want, which would be a refreshing change to having things rammed down our throats.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So to bring you back to the topic, who are you favoring so far and why?

I have been a Ted Cruz fan since he beat RINO Dewhurst for the senate seat. I was hoping he would run for president as soon as I heard him speak. I don't believe any other candidate will work to restore the constitutional restraints on federal power that have been abandoned by the states since the civil war as hard as Ted Cruz.

A lot of people complain about "big money influence", and pretend they will abandon their own big money donors. That's obviously complete bullshit and it isn't the solution. The people who write the laws always leave a means to skirt the laws.

The solution is to remove the power of the federal government and therefore remove the commodity federal officials sell to the lobbyists. I know for damn sure no RINO like Jeb, Crispy, Graham Cracker or Kasich will do a fuckin thing but increase federal power, just a little slower than hitlary. Most of the other candidates might do it less slow but the only guy I trust to not just stop the growth of federal power but roll it back is Ted Cruz. Rand Paul I think would also do so, but I do not think his foreign agenda is all there.Carson might stop it, and even roll some things back. Trump...

I don't know WTF Trump would do, but I'll vote for him in a heart beat before a RINO.

Let me make sure I understand you. You support Cruz. Except when you support Trump. Except when you support Cruz. Except...

Have I omitted anything?

Any understanding that the purpose of this thread is to discuss who we favor and why, even if we aren't set in stone in our selection. THAT would be what you omitted.

Oh, and the fact that no one has to justify themselves to you. Take your snottiness and judgement elsewhere, and start your own damned thread.

 

[Arianrhod]

So to bring you back to the topic, who are you favoring so far and why?

I have been a Ted Cruz fan since he beat RINO Dewhurst for the senate seat. I was hoping he would run for president as soon as I heard him speak. I don't believe any other candidate will work to restore the constitutional restraints on federal power that have been abandoned by the states since the civil war as hard as Ted Cruz.

A lot of people complain about "big money influence", and pretend they will abandon their own big money donors. That's obviously complete bullshit and it isn't the solution. The people who write the laws always leave a means to skirt the laws.

The solution is to remove the power of the federal government and therefore remove the commodity federal officials sell to the lobbyists. I know for damn sure no RINO like Jeb, Crispy, Graham Cracker or Kasich will do a fuckin thing but increase federal power, just a little slower than hitlary. Most of the other candidates might do it less slow but the only guy I trust to not just stop the growth of federal power but roll it back is Ted Cruz. Rand Paul I think would also do so, but I do not think his foreign agenda is all there.Carson might stop it, and even roll some things back. Trump...

I don't know WTF Trump would do, but I'll vote for him in a heart beat before a RINO.

Let me make sure I understand you. You support Cruz. Except when you support Trump. Except when you support Cruz. Except...

Have I omitted anything?

Any understanding that the purpose of this thread is to discuss who we favor and why...

The "who" was clear from his post; the "why" was not. His two choices were so completely disparate in their promises it's puzzling.

 

[Programmer]

I go with Trump. I can't vote for him in the primary. Reason: I think it will be more exciting, and I'm confident that I/We could survive it.

Your big interest in choosing a President is excitement? You know this is the future of our nation, not entertainment, right?

Someone needs to convey that message to Trump.

Trump is clearly doing fine balancing popularity and politics like he knows what it takes to be president. Other than Clinton, who else is doing so at this point?

Honestly, I don't know how much "balancing" Trump is actually doing. It seems more to me like he's just capitalizing on the popularity aspect. How long that's going to last depends entirely on how shallow and silly the American people have become. I guess we'll see that measurement as the campaign continues.

What I mean is that Trump is considerably more popular than Ted Cruz, for example. It is speculated that they cater to the same cut of the GOP base. Trump has decided not to make one of these flat, 'scrap the IRS' tax plans. I'm confident that there will be none of that bullshit in the Whitehouse after this coming cycle. Trump's plan recognizes that fiscal conservatism excludes fiscal radicalism and the uncertainty and volatility that comes with it.

This is where I think the silliness and shallowness is Carson, Cruz, Fioina, Huckabee and Paul's game, but it's not in the popularity race, it's the way these people think they can run the country. Jeb Bush and Rubio have tax plans I think are qualified, but they can't run a campaign worth an ass. Rubio's such a 'serious' candidate that he can't use conjunctions when he's speaking. That's weird to me.

As a disclaimer, I haven't studied Fiorina's or Carson's plans like the others I mentioned. I characterize them as extreme (and policy-based pandering) based on the last debate. I very lightly skimmed Rubios bit and had trouble distinguishing it from Bush's. I don't think research will change my opinion, but we'll see when I get some time.

 

[Programmer]

I go with Trump. I can't vote for him in the primary. Reason: I think it will be more exciting, and I'm confident that I/We could survive it.

Your big interest in choosing a President is excitement? You know this is the future of our nation, not entertainment, right?

Tongue in cheek, yes. For the most part, I am the future of the nation from my perspective, and we own that severally and as a bloc. It would defy the universe if the President alone impacted my life more than me and what I do with my time, etc.

You know... excitement isn't limited to entertainment value... right?

No, I don't. In this context, there is no good about "excitement". As far as I'm concerned, proper government administration should be boring and should allow me to ignore it for days, even weeks, at a time. It's like driving a semi for a living (which I used to do): if it's "exciting", you're doing it wrong.

I have the impression that this is inevitable in our country. We're not picking a dictator, but a group of them that are locked in stalemate most of the time.

Since I'm not one of these double-down on everything candidates, may I change my assertion from exciting to refreshing? It gets to the reason I'm excited, lets say.

Further, I'm 'excited' about new versions of middleware frameworks, even though that's all work not play.

ex·cit·ing
ikˈsīdiNG/
adjective

1. causing great enthusiasm and eagerness.

 

[dcraelin]

I think we're approaching the point in the campaign where the voters who aren't hardcore support bases and campaign workers are starting to get a feel for the candidates and leaning one direction or the other, although we obviously still have a lot of time before it's necessary to make a final choice.

So which candidate are you currently favoring, and why?

For myself, I'm currently throwing my support to Ted Cruz. As I've said in other places, he's smart, principled, conservative, and has shown himself to be willing and able to take on and oppose both the Democrats and the establishment of the GOP.

I havent voted major party for president in years but here is my take.

Trade is one of the most important issues a president deals with, that and other foreign policy. Our trade policy has been bought and manipulated by corporate whores.

Trump at least pretends to be concerned about that.....
so in a way does Paul ...or at least his father did...saying it is not true free trade.

Cruz actually worked as a trade, something or other, in the Bush admin I believe, this immediately disqualifies him as far as I'm concerned...that and his wife worked for Goldman-Sachs.

Carson hasnt addressed it as far as I've heard

Fiorina talks against the crony capitalism rampant in DC,

on the other side I dont trust Hillary's new-found opposition to trade.
Sanders is also a critic of our trade policy.

so of the republicans probably Trump, Fiorina, Paul
and the Democrats Sanders.

Well, although I don't agree with you, I do have to say you're very clear on which issues matter to you and whose positions align with what you want, so that's certainly good.

you know after posting that I realized there were two other republicans who don't seem real bad on trade that I forgot about because the media isn't giving them a lot of attention.

Santorum and Huckabee. Santorum I believe won 11 states last time around and certainly should not be ignored by the media. He should really be on the main stage debates also.

The main stage of the debates is determined by the percentage of support they have in the polls. Clearly, Santorum is generating virtually zero interest among likely voters, so . . .

NOT clearly.....clearly the pollz are manipulated BS. done by a small small slice of the population who are ok with wsating time on the phone.

I believe Santorum was also polling poorly the last time prior to Iowa and ended up winning it.

 

[Pete7469]

The "who" was clear from his post; the "why" was not. His two choices were so completely disparate in their promises it's puzzling.

Liberals are puzzled by gender, so it no surprise you can't seem to comprehend what was written.

First of all I listed 1 candidate I fully endorse and why, I listed 2 other candidates I can also support and mentioned that I think they would also roll back regressivism, but to a lesser extent than Cruz.

I did mention I would support Trump over a RINO, and that I had no idea what he would really do.

Incidentally I would vote democrook for the first time in my life if it was a choice between Bernie and Bush. If it's Hitlary/Bush I will write in a cartoon character.

I'm leaning towards Yosemite Sam because of his stance on the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So to bring you back to the topic, who are you favoring so far and why?

I have been a Ted Cruz fan since he beat RINO Dewhurst for the senate seat. I was hoping he would run for president as soon as I heard him speak. I don't believe any other candidate will work to restore the constitutional restraints on federal power that have been abandoned by the states since the civil war as hard as Ted Cruz.

A lot of people complain about "big money influence", and pretend they will abandon their own big money donors. That's obviously complete bullshit and it isn't the solution. The people who write the laws always leave a means to skirt the laws.

The solution is to remove the power of the federal government and therefore remove the commodity federal officials sell to the lobbyists. I know for damn sure no RINO like Jeb, Crispy, Graham Cracker or Kasich will do a fuckin thing but increase federal power, just a little slower than hitlary. Most of the other candidates might do it less slow but the only guy I trust to not just stop the growth of federal power but roll it back is Ted Cruz. Rand Paul I think would also do so, but I do not think his foreign agenda is all there.Carson might stop it, and even roll some things back. Trump...

I don't know WTF Trump would do, but I'll vote for him in a heart beat before a RINO.

Let me make sure I understand you. You support Cruz. Except when you support Trump. Except when you support Cruz. Except...

Have I omitted anything?

Any understanding that the purpose of this thread is to discuss who we favor and why...

The "who" was clear from his post; the "why" was not. His two choices were so completely disparate in their promises it's puzzling.

I had no trouble understanding what his criteria were from that post. I don't necessarily AGREE with them, but I understand what they are.