Cruz to enter GOP race for President

[Larry T Spider]

Kasich would get my vote in the primary out of the current crop of nut jobs and yet another Bush/Romney re-run. People are taking Romney losing without ever being a real threat as a sign to push to the far right. Sadly, I have always liked Romney a lot and he is my type of candidate much more than the Cruz/Perry types. I feel like they have a much better chance of producing change than the **** flingers that can't build a governing coalition. The saddest part of this to me is that I think the far right primary voters are looking for exactly that. They want somebody to crap all over Obama, yell and scream with a patriotic vengeance, and chastise anybody that isn't to the right of Attila the Hun. It's like they want a right wing radio host to actually try to run the country.

 

[Larry T Spider]

I didn't really know much about him, so I did some reading. I wouldn't say he is an ideal candidate, but he is worth considering. My only reservation about him (based on what I know so far) is that he is very far right of mainstream on social issues. For example:

• Opposes gay marriage and civil unions.
• Opposes adoption by gay couples.
• Opposes abortion except for rape and incest.
• Supports reducing death-penalty appeals.
• Thinks the answer to crime is tougher sentencing.
• Opposes medical marijuana.
• Thinks biblical stories are literally true. (I am not offended by this, but it tends to go along with things I do find offensive.)

These things suggest a candidate who puts his religious beliefs first. That scares me more than a bad economy does.

Why can't we find a fiscally conservative candidate with mainstream views on social issues? I'm not talking abortion on demand, drugs for all, and bans on guns and lethal executions. I'm just talking about reasonable balance.

If he wants to be the GOP nominee this is the game that he has to play. I don't like it, but I am far outnumbered by people that care about these issues deeply in the primary. There is an absolute litmus test on social issues that he has to pass. It may not be the focus of his campaign but it has to be in his official stances or the **** flingers will rip him apart.

 

[Seattle Husker]

It's like they want a right wing radio host to actually try to run the country.

That may not be too far from the truth based on the behavior of candidates the Tea Party has put into Congress.

 

[Kw Horn77]

Hmm, I thought only native born citizens were eligible to be president unless both parents were US citizens at the time of the birth. Cruz' father became a citizen in 2005. It seems like he's not eligible to be President. Legal Eagles here, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Only one has to be a US Citizen which also means to qualify the parent has to be of legal age. Therefore, Cruz meets all of the qualifications to be president.

 

[Kw Horn77]

Rick Perry is what Cruz would be if he had gone to A&M instead of Princeton and Harvard Law School.

No, Perry is just to the left of dead center, not a conservative at all. This has a long way to go before the Primaries or general election. In the meantime we have to suffer with obama's tyrannical rule.

 

[Kw Horn77]

I didn't really know much about him, so I did some reading. I wouldn't say he is an ideal candidate, but he is worth considering. My only reservation about him (based on what I know so far) is that he is very far right of mainstream on social issues. For example:

• Opposes gay marriage and civil unions.
• Opposes adoption by gay couples.
• Opposes abortion except for rape and incest.
• Supports reducing death-penalty appeals.
• Thinks the answer to crime is tougher sentencing.
• Opposes medical marijuana.
• Thinks biblical stories are literally true. (I am not offended by this, but it tends to go along with things I do find offensive.)

These things suggest a candidate who puts his religious beliefs first. That scares me more than a bad economy does.

Why can't we find a fiscally conservative candidate with mainstream views on social issues? I'm not talking abortion on demand, drugs for all, and bans on guns and lethal executions. I'm just talking about reasonable balance.

You probably need to vote for a Libertarian as they are Liberal on Social Issues and Conservative on Fiscal Issues. (i.e. - Rand Paul.)

At this point in time I will be voting for one of the following:

1. Scott Walker - knows how to govern unlike the current president
2. Mike Huckabee - knows how to govern unlike the current president
3. Ted Cruz - could possibly be the GOP version of obama, but not nowhere near as bad, he actually cares about America.
   • At least he believes in God
   • Jesus Christ as the Son of God
   • The Bible as the word of God

I still think that anyone running for President needs 3 requirements:

1. US Citizen with open records that can be verified
2. An Honorable Military Veteran that has the respect of the military personal
3. A Governor or a CEO - someone that knows how to govern
4. Not a Senator, Congressman, or a radical rabble-rouser

 

[Kw Horn77]

So if we abolish the IRS, how do we collect taxes? Same way a chuch collects tithes?

Read the Book on the FAIR TAX, it might just change your mind.

 

[NJlonghorn]

I still think that anyone running for President needs 3 requirements:

1. US Citizen with open records that can be verified
2. An Honorable Military Veteran that has the respect of the military personal
3. A Governor or a CEO - someone that knows how to govern
4. Not a Senator, Congressman, or a radical rabble-rouser

5. Ability to count.

 

[chango]

Kasich doesn't have a problem with divorce though, does he?

 

[Larry T Spider]

Ted Cruz - could possibly be the GOP version of obama, but not nowhere near as bad, he actually cares about America.

• At least he believes in God
• Jesus Christ as the Son of God
• The Bible as the word of God

• 
  Well, I'm sold. Where do I sign up?

 

[chango]

LOL.. you're right, KW. At least he belives those 5 things.

 

[NJlonghorn]

No, Perry is just to the left of dead center, not a conservative at all. This has a long way to go before the Primaries or general election. In the meantime we have to suffer with obama's tyrannical rule.

Uhm, okay. According to On the Issues (Perry), "Rick Perry is a Hard-Core Conservative." They rate him as 80% conservative on fiscal issues and 90% conservative on social issues.

By way of contrast, Kasich rates at 70% on both social and fiscal issues. On the Issues (Kasich).

 

[NJlonghorn]

For what it's worth, On the Issues (Obama) has President Obama as 80% liberal on both social and fiscal issues. Thus, according to them, Perry is more conservative than Obama is liberal.

 

[Seattle Husker]

No, Perry is just to the left of dead center, not a conservative at all. This has a long way to go before the Primaries or general election. In the meantime we have to suffer with obama's tyrannical rule.

This post made me wonder where you see the center. I suspect you see the center much further to the right of where I see it.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Welcome Kw Horn77. Stick around.

Is it possible that you fall into the camp that Mr. Deez and I were describing earlier in this thread? There is a vocal far right minority that thinks their support is much larger than it actually is, IMHO. This is why you see Perry as "left of dead center" when by any other measure he's pretty far right.

 

[Larry T Spider]

I think both the far left and far right view the center far off in their direction because of where they live. I have a friend that is very conservative who lives in east texas. His view of the center is much more right than my friends that live in San Francisco. Neither has the opportunity to interact with the other party very often giving them a warped sense of where the middle is.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I think both the far left and far right view the center far off in their direction because of where they live. I have a friend that is very conservative who lives in east texas. His view of the center is much more right than my friends that live in San Francisco. Neither has the opportunity to interact with the other party very often giving them a warped sense of where the middle is.

You'll get no argument from me on that statement. The fact that the coasts are getting further left while the middle goes further right further clouds where the true middle is.

 

[Mr. Deez]

I didn't really know much about him, so I did some reading. I wouldn't say he is an ideal candidate, but he is worth considering. My only reservation about him (based on what I know so far) is that he is very far right of mainstream on social issues. For example:

• Opposes gay marriage and civil unions.
• Opposes adoption by gay couples.
• Opposes abortion except for rape and incest.
• Supports reducing death-penalty appeals.
• Thinks the answer to crime is tougher sentencing.
• Opposes medical marijuana.
• Thinks biblical stories are literally true. (I am not offended by this, but it tends to go along with things I do find offensive.)

These things suggest a candidate who puts his religious beliefs first. That scares me more than a bad economy does.

Why can't we find a fiscally conservative candidate with mainstream views on social issues? I'm not talking abortion on demand, drugs for all, and bans on guns and lethal executions. I'm just talking about reasonable balance.

I'm not sure where you got all that, but it's not a particularly fair criticism. First, you're not going to find many Republicans or Democrats who haven't at one point been hostile to the gay agenda (including Obama and Hillary Clinton), because until about 15 years ago, the idea of gay marriage or any kind of unique legislation or rights for gays was considered fringe.

Second, people can change their views on some of this. In the mid-'90s, I supported the drug war and reducing death penalty appeals. After seeing the effects of those laws over the course of the last 20 years, I've changed my views on those issues. People can grow on things.

Third, you'll never find a candidate who lines up perfectly with you. I know I haven't found one who lines up with me. However, if you learn more about Kasich, you'll find that though he is a social conservative and a Christian, he has always put fiscal responsibility first and made it the cornerstone of his agenda. He made a name for himself as a key member of the House Budget Committee and often worked across the aisle to advance fiscal responsibility (especially with former Rep. Tim Penny, D-MN) back in the '80s and '90s, and of course, when he chaired Budget, we balanced the budget. That issue really is his forte.

Finally, he's not a "****-flinging monkey." He is a policy-oriented conservative and a consensus builder, who was willing to take on his Party when he thought it was the right thing to do. Ohio did the Medicaid expansion under his watch, and that wasn't an easy thing for any Republican to do. I disagree with him for doing that, but it took balls. The guy was able to win reelection with over 63 percent of the vote. Even in an off-year election, in a swing state that's not going to happen without significant crossover support. You should give the guy a chance.

 

[caryhorn]

My response to Mr. Cruz's announcement:

 

[Mr. Deez]

Read the Book on the FAIR TAX, it might just change your mind.

Do keep in mind that the Fair Tax is not the same thing as the Flat Tax. That makes a big difference. The Fair Tax really could mean the end of the IRS, because states could collect the tax revenue through their current sales tax collection infrastructure and pay it to the feds. However, even the states have tax collection agencies that pursue non-payers. I would support the Fair Tax but only if the Sixteenth Amendment was repealed.

The Flat Tax is still an income tax and would still require a federal agency to pursue delinquent taxpayers.

 

[Mr. Deez]

LOL.. you're right, KW. At least he belives those 5 things.

OK Dude, what's with the monkey?

 

[NJlonghorn]

I'm not sure where you got all that, but it's not a particularly fair criticism.

I got most of it from a website called "On the Issues", which evaluates politicians and candidates on a wide range of issues then gives an overall score, 0-100% on social issues and 0-100% on fiscal issues. While it is far from the end of the analysis on a candidate, I find it to be a good place to start.

people can change their views on some of this.

Very true -- especially someone who hasn't been on the national scene in many years. However, his positions on abortion and gay rights are based on actions taken in Ohio within the last year or so. He seems to have dug in his heels on those issues.

Third, you'll never find a candidate who lines up perfectly with you.

Of course. I was expressing "reservations" about Kasich, not rejecting him as an option. In fact, he's near (and maybe at) the top of my list right now.

Finally, he's not a "****-flinging monkey."

Agreed. I don't agree with him on all social issues, but at least he's a 70% guy, not a 90% guy like Perry or Cruz.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I'd wager that Kasich has a major name recognition problem first and foremost. Heck, Allen West may have more name recognition on the National scene then Kasich. Is he thought to be a considering his run or is he on a wish list? As we all know, the politicians we'd like to run aren't always willing to put themselves out there to ***** themselves out enough for a Presidential run.

 

[Mr. Deez]

This post made me wonder where you see the center. I suspect you see the center much further to the right of where I see it.

I would never call Perry Left of center. However, to be fair, he took a major right turn after 2002. He was a moderate to conservative leaning Democrat as a state legislator - not really a bomb thrower. Even as Lt. Governor, Perry wasn't that controversial of a figure, and even in his first legislative session as governor, he signed into law (and did nothing to fight) what was considered a pretty big spending state budget. (It was the last session in which Democrats controlled the Texas House, and they kinda ran wild.) In addition, while Bush pushed the Legislature to keep hate crimes legislation bottled up at the Capitol, Perry took the opposite stance. He publicly called for hate crimes legislation to be enacted and did a big signing ceremony with press, etc. Things changed a lot after the 2002 election, and lurched further right with each election.

The biggest recurring theme for Perry has been that he has been a corporate ***** of questionable ethics. That is what his real agenda has always been.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I would never call Perry Left of center. However, to be fair, he took a major right turn after 2002. He was a moderate to conservative leaning Democrat as a state legislator - not really a bomb thrower. Even as Lt. Governor, Perry wasn't that controversial of a figure, and even in his first legislative session as governor, he signed into law (and did nothing to fight) what was considered a pretty big spending state budget. (It was the last session in which Democrats controlled the Texas House, and they kinda ran wild.) In addition, while Bush pushed the Legislature to keep hate crimes legislation bottled up at the Capitol, Perry took the opposite stance. He publicly called for hate crimes legislation to be enacted and did a big signing ceremony with press, etc. Things changed a lot after the 2002 election, and lurched further right with each election.

The biggest recurring theme for Perry has been that he has been a corporate ***** of questionable ethics. That is what his real agenda has always been.

Thanks for the enlightenment. He staked out a far right stance in his Presidential run. I guess that was simply pandering to the Republican primary process.

 

[Mr. Deez]

I'd wager that Kasich has a major name recognition problem first and foremost. Heck, Allen West may have more name recognition on the National scene then Kasich. Is he thought to be a considering his run or is he on a wish list? As we all know, the politicians we'd like to run aren't always willing to put themselves out there to ***** themselves out enough for a Presidential run.

I've heard rumors that he is considering a run, but he hasn't committed to anything. Who knows what he'll do? Isn't Cruz the only jackass who has jumped in officially at this point?

Outside of Ohio, Kasich's name recognition isn't big, and yes, that's a weakness. I think the main reasons are that he has always been a little more populist than the establishment wing, and even though he's a social conservative as NJLonghorn properly pointed out, he has never worn that on his sleeve, so the social conservative grassroots of the GOP has never really taken a big interest in him.

 

[Larry T Spider]

Perry clearly moved more to the right after each election. I was actually a supporter back in the beginning and got to show up and eat crab cakes with the rich people after his first election as gov. He lost me along the way with his corruption and political pandering to the far right. I have always wondered if his views changed or if Texas became a more rigidly conservative state over the last 10 years and he had to keep up. Maybe both?

 

[Mr. Deez]

Thanks for the enlightenment. He staked out a far right stance in his Presidential run. I guess that was simply pandering to the Republican primary process.

Absolutely. The guy has no soul at all.

 

[Mr. Deez]

I was actually a supporter back in the beginning and got to show up and eat crab cakes with the rich people after his first election as gov.

At least you didn't go to his men-only, wild sausage fundraiser. And yes, that was a real thing.

 

[militaryhorn]

Why can't we find a fiscally conservative candidate with mainstream views on social issues? I'm not talking abortion on demand, drugs for all, and bans on guns and lethal executions. I'm just talking about reasonable balance.

I will announce my intention to become president tomorrow...I expect I will have 1 vote based on this criteria.