Hot Air survey: Presidential primary candidate and issue testing

posted at 8:41 am on May 5, 2014 by Patrick Ishmael

It’s about that time. I’ve written this first survey as a pretty basic walk-through of the candidates, highlighting a handful of potentially motivating (or divisive) issues that could appear during the primaries. Obviously there are many issues that could be considered, so if you have suggestions for things to test in the future, please leave a note in the last question.

And this looks long, but it really isn’t. Should take just a couple minutes. Thanks for your time!

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

On the ‘I consider myself’ part, shouldn’t there be an option for ‘Independent’? Seems like kind of a glaring omission.

WhatSlushfund on May 5, 2014 at 8:50 AM

The President has no role what-so-ever to play in the calling of a Constitutional convention. Such a convention would be called by the states themselves. Even Congress doesn’t have a say in whether or not such a convention is called. Aside from potentially swaying public opinion, the President would be irrelevant in such a matter, so I didn’t factor that much into my vote.

Shump on May 5, 2014 at 8:52 AM

Welcome back Patrick :)

cmsinaz on May 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM

Based solely on that list, Ted Cruz is my guy. The only time I would vary is if someone that I could at least CONSIDER would call for an Article V convention in his platform, and that would be Rick Perry.

Perry would not get my vote in any other circumstance because I do not trust him on amnesty. Indeed, my biggest issue right now is amnesty, I will not vote for any candidate who supports it.

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM

still digging Rick Perry

we shall see

cmsinaz on May 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM

On the ‘I consider myself’ part, shouldn’t there be an option for ‘Independent’? Seems like kind of a glaring omission.

WhatSlushfund on May 5, 2014 at 8:50 AM

Independent is a (lack of) political affiliation, not an ideological vantage point.

As for me, I found it amusing to keep clicking on Mike Huckabee’s name for the guy I’d support. No, I’m not going to change my mind on supporting him if Romney announces his support for weed. Sheesh.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM

The President has no role what-so-ever to play in the calling of a Constitutional convention. Such a convention would be called by the states themselves. Even Congress doesn’t have a say in whether or not such a convention is called. Aside from potentially swaying public opinion, the President would be irrelevant in such a matter, so I didn’t factor that much into my vote.

Shump on May 5, 2014 at 8:52 AM

The President could (and should) use his bully pulpit to call for the States to support an Article V convention. Presidents don’t make laws either (well, they DO if their name is Barack HUSSEIN Obama) but that doesn’t stop them from proposing laws to Congress.

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 8:56 AM

As for me, I found it amusing to keep clicking on Mike Huckabee’s name for the guy I’d support. No, I’m not going to change my mind on supporting him if Romney announces his support for weed. Sheesh.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM

Why would you support the faux evangelical Huckabee? He’s a pro amnesty RINO.

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 8:57 AM

Joe Scarborough…heh.

Don’t get the Constitutional convention question. Call a Constitutional convention for what?

Vigilante on May 5, 2014 at 8:58 AM

On the ‘I consider myself’ part, shouldn’t there be an option for ‘Independent’? Seems like kind of a glaring omission.

WhatSlushfund on May 5, 2014 at 8:50 AM

Independent is a political stance, as between political parties. His question is regarding your philosophical stance.

However, his use of the liberal versus conservative spectrum is badly outdated. Today’s “liberals” are the opposite of what liberals were historically supposed to be. These modern “liberals” are really “progressives” in the sense of believing all progress is in the direction of increasing socialism/central control/tyranny.

I am both a true liberal and a true conservative. There is nothing more solidly conservative in today’s political world than trying to preserve true liberal ideals.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 8:58 AM

Why would you support the faux evangelical Huckabee? He’s a pro amnesty RINO.

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 8:57 AM

He’s going to be the most pro-life and pro-marriage guy among the candidates, which are my biggest priorities. Had Jeff Sessions been an option, I might have gone with him instead, but each one of those guys listed is going to support amnesty.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 8:58 AM

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM

Mmm, not so sure about that. The question is ‘what do you consider yourself?’ These self-identifiers are not carved in stone. They’re subjective. What’s “Conservative” to one person, isn’t to another. The question is ‘how do you self-identify?’ Lots of people self-identify as ‘Independent.’ Pretty common in polling.

Anyway, just put me down for Ted Cruz on everything Patrick.

WhatSlushfund on May 5, 2014 at 9:01 AM

Joe Scarborough…heh.

Don’t get the Constitutional convention question. Call a Constitutional convention for what?

Vigilante on May 5, 2014 at 8:58 AM

In my opinion (and the growing opinion of many) we need an Article V Constitutional Convention of the States if we are ever going to put the DC monster back in the lockbox.

See Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/08/the-liberty-amendments-mark-levins-constitutional-sequester/

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 9:03 AM

He’s going to be the most pro-life and pro-marriage guy among the candidates, which are my biggest priorities. Had Jeff Sessions been an option, I might have gone with him instead, but each one of those guys listed is going to support amnesty.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 8:58 AM

I just see Huckabee as a complete fraud. If he’s so pro-life why did he grant clemency to murderers to murder again? Everything he did as governor of Arkansas suggested to me that his Christianity was confined to Sunday only.

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 9:04 AM

Where is Hiram Huntsman?

celtic warrior on May 5, 2014 at 9:05 AM

I don’t see the person’s name listed who won every Damn one
of these HotAir polls circa 2010-2011…..

..what a joke.

ToddPA on May 5, 2014 at 9:09 AM

In my opinion (and the growing opinion of many) we need an Article V Constitutional Convention of the States if we are ever going to put the DC monster back in the lockbox.

See Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/08/the-liberty-amendments-mark-levins-constitutional-sequester/

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 9:03 AM

Actually able to move my choice once. :)

Axe on May 5, 2014 at 9:10 AM

I just see Huckabee as a complete fraud. If he’s so pro-life why did he grant clemency to murderers to murder again? Everything he did as governor of Arkansas suggested to me that his Christianity was confined to Sunday only.

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 9:04 AM

It shows that he believes in the possibility for redemption, but also unfortunately shows that he’s too quick to believe that people have redeemed themselves, so I’m not going to pretend he’s flawless. I don’t support him because of his religiosity, but because I believe he’d appoint the justices necessary to overturn Roe v Wade and wouldn’t give us another Souter. On top of that he has a good personal backstory about coming out from poverty, has a folksy demeanor, and is able to convey a message that can reach a broad audience rather than just a conservative echo chamber. That convinces me that he’d be a good representative to put forward for the GOP and could successfully conduct outreach. His performance with minorities in Arkansas was quite exceptional, winning 48% of the black vote once.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 9:11 AM

I don’t see the person’s name listed who won every Damn one
of these HotAir polls circa 2010-2011…..

..what a joke.

ToddPA on May 5, 2014 at 9:09 AM

She’s not going to run.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 9:11 AM

Bobby Jindal. Great candidate and great President.

The only others on the list I think would make good candidates and Presidents would be Ted Cruz, Scott Walker and Rick Perry.

Ben Carson would be great, but it doesn’t seem likely. But who knows.

As for Chris Christie, I voted for him the first time as Governor, but didn’t vote for anyone the second time. Left Governor blank and voted for the other NJ elections.

So, I wouldn’t even vote for him in the general election for President.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:12 AM

So it’s a given that any successful Republican candidate will declare PPACA dead, null & void, unenforceable, unworkable, unfair and completely a waste of time and taxpayer money, right?
.
..

..
.
RIGHT?

ExpressoBold on May 5, 2014 at 9:13 AM

She’s not going to run.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 9:11 AM

I wish she would. She “gets it” better than anyone has since Reagan.

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 9:14 AM

In my opinion (and the growing opinion of many) we need an Article V Constitutional Convention of the States if we are ever going to put the DC monster back in the lockbox.

See Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/08/the-liberty-amendments-mark-levins-constitutional-sequester/

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 9:03 AM

Love the idea and love Mark Levin.

A regular Constitutional Convention would be scary to have today, given the liberals and moderates who dominate the national conversation in the media and the wheels of government.

But an Article V one would be great.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:15 AM

Calling a Constitutional Convention at this piont is sheer stupidity. Who knows what kind of progressive BS would get enshrined in what then would be called a sacred document that must be followed to the letter.

I like how you put Libertarians as far right, and not left as some conservatives would have us.

tdarrington on May 5, 2014 at 9:15 AM

Where is Hiram Huntsman?

celtic warrior on May 5, 2014 at 9:05 AM

.
Listen, this Todd Huntsman thing is not going to work out! He can barely speak Mandarin, for goodness sake!

ExpressoBold on May 5, 2014 at 9:15 AM

What are the prizes for picking the right answers?

NotCoach on May 5, 2014 at 9:16 AM

tdarrington on May 5, 2014 at 9:15 AM

And what would 3/4, let 2/3, of the states put in the Constitution you don’t like?

NotCoach on May 5, 2014 at 9:18 AM

Based solely on that list

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM

+1

Vero Beach Florida on May 5, 2014 at 9:19 AM

She’s not going to run.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 9:11 AM

We don’t know if any of the people on the list are going to run.

Fallon on May 5, 2014 at 9:19 AM

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:15 AM

I don’t think you would see anything but an Article V convention.

NotCoach on May 5, 2014 at 9:19 AM

He’s going to be the most pro-life and pro-marriage guy among the candidates, which are my biggest priorities. Had Jeff Sessions been an option, I might have gone with him instead, but each one of those guys listed is going to support amnesty.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 8:58 AM

At this point, the federal government is not going to be able to reverse the marriage decline. Too many states are already allowing gay marriages. The military is openly gay now. Is Huckey going to work to get rid of easy divorce at the federal level somehow? Will he be able reinstate Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell? The only thing that can restore marriage a between a man and a woman is a Constitutional Amendment that makes it explicitly between a man and a woman. Do you see anyone being able to pass this?
But even that will not really save marriage. The biggest problem with marriage is the ease at which one can exit a marriage. How does the federal government control divorce? A new federal power to do it?
Face it, if Marriage is your core vote reason, no one is going to save you on the federal level at this point.

Same pretty much goes for right to life. Unless you see a constitutional amendment happening, then no President is going to change anything.

Right now about the only thing we can do to prevent more harm to the nation is to keep the federal government from minting 10 to 20 million brand spanking net new Democrat voters through amnesty. Here is a clue for you… Once the Democrats gain these new voters through amnesty, it will make not one damned bit of difference if Huckabee accomplished anything on anything you wanted, because it will be reversed in the next 8 years in total and then continue to get worse for the next 50 years or more.

astonerii on May 5, 2014 at 9:21 AM

She’s not going to run.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 9:11 AM

You’ve won the Lottery now, how many times??

ToddPA on May 5, 2014 at 9:22 AM

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:15 AM

I don’t think you would see anything but an Article V convention.

NotCoach on May 5, 2014 at 9:19 AM

I would hope not! Cause a 3rd Constitutional Convention would be dangerous.

But I like Levin’s idea of an Article V convention.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:23 AM

I wish she would. She “gets it” better than anyone has since Reagan.

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 9:14 AM

I am inclined to agree, but like all of the other potential GOP nominees (and of course all of the Democrats) she doesn’t seem to have a firm grasp of what’s fundamentally wrong with all of the discussions of “immigration reform.”

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 9:24 AM

stoic patriot –

If your top concerns are gay marriage and pro-life, I would think Dr Ben Carson or Rick Santorum would be better choices than Huckabee. Huck is actually worse than Jeb Bush, and that is saying something.

str8tface on May 5, 2014 at 9:25 AM

The survey doesn’t make it through the firewall at work, so put a Mike pence vote down for me.

Deafdog on May 5, 2014 at 9:26 AM

At this point, the federal government is not going to be able to reverse the marriage decline. Too many states are already allowing gay marriages. The military is openly gay now. Is Huckey going to work to get rid of easy divorce at the federal level somehow? Will he be able reinstate Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell? The only thing that can restore marriage a between a man and a woman is a Constitutional Amendment that makes it explicitly between a man and a woman. Do you see anyone being able to pass this? But even that will not really save marriage. The biggest problem with marriage is the ease at which one can exit a marriage. How does the federal government control divorce? A new federal power to do it? Face it, if Marriage is your core vote reason, no one is going to save you on the federal level at this point.

Maybe an amendment would pass, maybe it wouldn’t. But I do know that you won’t get anywhere unless you push for it, and Huckabee would be one of the few to do so. As Arkansas governor, he signed a covenant marriage bill into law, basically providing for one means to chip away at no-fault divorce. Appoint more judges who at least are willing to say that no, gay marriage is not a fundamental right, and while that might not reverse the decline, it will at least stop it.

As for the military, POTUS is commander-in-chief, so while it might not have the force of legislation, that can be (legitimately) reinstituted via executive order.

Same pretty much goes for right to life. Unless you see a constitutional amendment happening, then no President is going to change anything.

That is quite frankly wrong. Partial-birth abortion was also supposedly here to stay until George W. Bush signed the partial-birth abortion ban act into law in 2003, and then had it upheld (only because he got 2 SCOTUS appointments) in Gonzales v. Carhart. Pre-emptive surrender is a guarantee not to get anywhere. Keep fighting, and if you win elections with the right candidate, you get somewhere.

Right now about the only thing we can do to prevent more harm to the nation is to keep the federal government from minting 10 to 20 million brand spanking net new Democrat voters through amnesty. Here is a clue for you… Once the Democrats gain these new voters through amnesty, it will make not one damned bit of difference if Huckabee accomplished anything on anything you wanted, because it will be reversed in the next 8 years in total and then continue to get worse for the next 50 years or more.

astonerii on May 5, 2014 at 9:21 AM

Again, I oppose amnesty. And again, from the candidate list above, not one of them is going to be any better than Huckabee on the issue. If you want a better candidate than Huckabee on the issue, put up Steve King of Iowa or Jeff Sessions of Alabama.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 9:27 AM

I stand with Walker.

WisRich on May 5, 2014 at 9:27 AM

She’s not going to run.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 9:11 AM

We don’t know if any of the people on the list are going to run.

Fallon on May 5, 2014 at 9:19 AM

You’re technically right, in that no one on that list has formally declared his/her candidacy. But realistically, it’s safe to say many of those names are likely, especially Christie and Perry.

Am I a mind reader? No. But I’m confident Palin will never run for POTUS. Indeed, of that list, I’d say only Carson, Rice, Romney and Scarborough are less likely to throw their hats in.

Ted the Average on May 5, 2014 at 9:28 AM

You’ve won the Lottery now, how many times??

ToddPA on May 5, 2014 at 9:22 AM

In January of 2011, when she was riding at the top of the polls and was winning on InTrade, I predicted she would not run, even though I thought (and still think) she’d make an excellent President.

I think someday she will run, and when she does run I will almost certainly be voting for her, if not more.

She knows she needs to add something to her resume.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 9:29 AM

stoic patriot –

If your top concerns are gay marriage and pro-life, I would think Dr Ben Carson or Rick Santorum would be better choices than Huckabee. Huck is actually worse than Jeb Bush, and that is saying something.

str8tface on May 5, 2014 at 9:25 AM

Rick Santorum is my second choice. I’m not sold on Ben Carson at all because I haven’t heard him talk about either issue. It doesn’t seem to be his focus, whereas with Santorum and Huckabee, they make it central cruxes of their campaigns. In Huckabee’s case, when asked what the most pressing issue is facing the country, Huckabee has answered at debates that it was the sanctity of life. How many others when posed with that question would answer that way from the list above? That shows a courage of conviction and a willingness to speak forthrightly that few others have.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 9:30 AM

***

Perry would not get my vote in any other circumstance because I do not trust him on amnesty. Indeed, my biggest issue right now is amnesty, I will not vote for any candidate who supports it.

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM

I’m with you on amnesty. I’m just pessimistic that GOP candidates see this as a all-or-nothing proposition in which they have to give everything away.

Border security AND internal enforcement shouldn’t be negotiating points. Those are commonsense measures that most, sadly not all, Americans want.

Where I’m confounded is why GOP candidates aren’t staking out the ground of which illegal immigrants to deport. For example, the mumble something about background checks. Phuck that. They should be talking about deporting anyone with a criminal record and anyone belonging to or affiliated with a gang. Deported. Publicize the stats, dredge up some Willie Hortons, but get rid of the bad guys.

Next, deport the visa overstayers. Three or four of the 9/11 perpetrators were visaoverstayers. Vilify the hell out of them; and forever deny them legal entry unless they come forward and leave. That would be 40% of the crowd. They had an express agreement with us, and they need to honor it.

I’d like to get the identity thieves and the identity fabricators too, but the GOP is too weak kneed.

Then, the GOP should insist that the price for legal status of these illiterate poor people is an end to birthright citizenship. Why are we allowing people from Muslim countries bring pregnant women to the country, deliver a child who automatically gets citizenship, only to return in 20 years to harm us? It’s insanity.

BuckeyeSam on May 5, 2014 at 9:30 AM

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:12 AM

Bobby is my candidate as well. Smart as whip and a rock-solid conservative. He has a “charisma” deficient? I beg to differ; see CPAC 2014. He gave a good speech. However, even it were true, “charisma” falls pretty low on my list of essential attributes/characteristics.

Ted the Average on May 5, 2014 at 9:32 AM

Ok, that’s a crazy survey.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2014 at 9:32 AM

We need to look outside Politicians.

I would suggest General James Mattis, Judge Diane Sykes and former US Solicitor General Paul Clements deserve a look.

kcewa on May 5, 2014 at 9:37 AM

My Top Picks (in the order of my preference): Rick Perry, Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, Susana Martinez, Mike Pence, Condoleezza Rice.

Interesting to see would be: Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Ben Carson

Rick Perry 2016

bzip on May 5, 2014 at 9:38 AM

Bobby Jindal is good on economics, defense, energy, social issues and immigration. Reagan’s 3 legged conservative stool and more.

He has the expertise and experience to get things done. He is a problem solver.

He has the guts to speak out; calling out Obama early in his presidency when many were afraid to.

He is very intelligent and know how to communicate conservatism.

He is likeable.

He is someone the Tea Party would be proud of and the establishment Republicans can accept.

I suggest many of you take another look at him.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:39 AM

Again, I oppose amnesty. And again, from the candidate list above, not one of them is going to be any better than Huckabee on the issue. If you want a better candidate than Huckabee on the issue, put up Steve King of Iowa or Jeff Sessions of Alabama.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 9:27 AM

Romney’s position on amnesty is better than that of anyone else on the list.

Of course we have to actually believe he’ll stick to that position ……

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 9:40 AM

He’s going to be the most pro-life and pro-marriage guy among the candidates
Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 8:58 AM

Until his advisors tell him otherwise. Anybody’s dog who’ll walk him.

katy the mean old lady on May 5, 2014 at 9:43 AM

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:12 AM

Bobby is my candidate as well. Smart as whip and a rock-solid conservative. He has a “charisma” deficient? I beg to differ; see CPAC 2014. He gave a good speech. However, even it were true, “charisma” falls pretty low on my list of essential attributes/characteristics.

Ted the Average on May 5, 2014 at 9:32 AM

Absolutely. He made one bad speech that got attention. But in reality he is a terrific speaker, and he can talk off the top of his head without prepared words. He is that good.

He actually is very likeable. I also don’t care about charisma, but I do think likeability is important in candidates. He has it. (PS, I know likeability isn’t a word. lol)

After seeing him in action a couple times, that one speech will be quickly forgotten.

Second look here, people.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:43 AM

Romney’s position on amnesty is better than that of anyone else on the list.

Of course we have to actually believe he’ll stick to that position ……

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 9:40 AM

Exactly. It reminds me of John “Build the dang fence” McCain.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 9:43 AM

And what would 3/4, let 2/3, of the states put in the Constitution you don’t like?

NotCoach on May 5, 2014 at 9:18 AM

They put obama back in office, I don’t want to tempt them. I wouldn’t want anything in the progressive agenda in the Const. The constitutional convention should be held after the revolution when the feeling of Liberty runs high. Otherwise we might end up with social justice codified into the constitution.

tdarrington on May 5, 2014 at 9:44 AM

I went with Ted Cruz on every one but if he came out in favor of marijuana legalization, then I went with Ben Carson. I thought seriously about going Ben Carson all the way. Scott Walker would be high on my list as well.

backwoods conservative on May 5, 2014 at 9:45 AM

Until his advisors tell him otherwise. Anybody’s dog who’ll walk him.

katy the mean old lady on May 5, 2014 at 9:43 AM

I doubt that. I think Huckabee’s the genuine article. Both his rhetoric and his actions have been consistent with respect to abortion and marriage, and he’s done more to advance each cause than the others listed.

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 9:46 AM

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:39 AM

Also voted for Jindal throughout.

I would need to know more about him on immigration, but as he lives in a border state I imagine his position is very well fleshed out.

Best things about Jindal are his executive experience, his filling in the leadership vacuum Obama always leaves when dealing with the BP Oil spill, his commitment to school vouchers, and his general aptitude for competence and no-nonsense governance.

BKennedy on May 5, 2014 at 9:48 AM

Calling a Constitutional Convention at this piont is sheer stupidity. Who knows what kind of progressive BS would get enshrined in what then would be called a sacred document that must be followed to the letter.

I like how you put Libertarians as far right, and not left as some conservatives would have us.

tdarrington on May 5, 2014 at 9:15 AM

Its not a constitutional convention. It is the article V convention listed specifically in our constitution for the purposes of the STATE LEGISLATORS to amend the constitution. Then anything that comes from the convention would need to pass 3/4 of the states LEGISLATURES to become law. This is not a national referendum.

NWConservative on May 5, 2014 at 9:49 AM

They put obama back in office, I don’t want to tempt them. I wouldn’t want anything in the progressive agenda in the Const. The constitutional convention should be held after the revolution when the feeling of Liberty runs high. Otherwise we might end up with social justice codified into the constitution.

tdarrington on May 5, 2014 at 9:44 AM

Well too late. You have the direct election of senators and the income tax, both enshrined in the constitution by progressives.

And the state legislators don’t have any effect on the presidency. If they did Romney would be president as republicans control an outright majority of legislatures.

NWConservative on May 5, 2014 at 9:53 AM

Rick Perry for President
Ted Cruz for senate majority leader.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 5, 2014 at 9:56 AM

My fave on the list was Ben Carson, hands down. I do like Huckabee–he’s a conservative with a heart. Chris Christie is a close second–not because he’s perfectly conservative, but because he really and truly scares the democrats. That’s why they’re gunning for him this early in the game.

Rand Paul is excellently libertarian, while Paul Ryan is simply brilliant vice-presidential material, but both need a great deal more seasoning.

I don’t ever want to see Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush on one of these lists again.

RockinRickOwen on May 5, 2014 at 9:57 AM

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 9:27 AM

Schmuckabee is a statist.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 5, 2014 at 10:00 AM

Based solely on that list, Ted Cruz is my guy. The only time I would vary is if someone that I could at least CONSIDER would call for an Article V convention in his platform, and that would be Rick Perry.

Perry would not get my vote in any other circumstance because I do not trust him on amnesty. Indeed, my biggest issue right now is amnesty, I will not vote for any candidate who supports it.

ConstantineXI on May 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM

This post sums up where where I stand–exactly. In fact, I voted exactly the same way I believe.

KickandSwimMom on May 5, 2014 at 10:01 AM

Then anything that comes from the convention would need to pass 3/4 of the states LEGISLATURES to become law. This is not a national referendum.

NWConservative on May 5, 2014 at 9:49 AM

That would mean it would take only 13 states to block it.

So, for instance, the legislatures of Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Oklahoma and Kentucky could completely block it all by themselves.

However, that goes to show how useless it would be since it also means it could be completely blocked by the legislatures of Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Delaware, Minnesota, Illinois, Hawaii, California, Washington and Oregon.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 10:01 AM

Perry, Pence, Palin, Jindal, Walker-in order-and I won’t vote for anyone beyond that list.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 5, 2014 at 10:02 AM

Rick Perry for President
Ted Cruz for senate majority leader.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 5, 2014 at 9:56 AM

You/Me *like this*

gophergirl on May 5, 2014 at 10:03 AM

gophergirl on May 5, 2014 at 10:03 AM

Great minds and all…

annoyinglittletwerp on May 5, 2014 at 10:03 AM

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:39 AM

Also voted for Jindal throughout.

I would need to know more about him on immigration, but as he lives in a border state I imagine his position is very well fleshed out.

Best things about Jindal are his executive experience, his filling in the leadership vacuum Obama always leaves when dealing with the BP Oil spill, his commitment to school vouchers, and his general aptitude for competence and no-nonsense governance.

BKennedy on May 5, 2014 at 9:48 AM

Yup. and from what I’ve read, he is good on immigration, too.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 10:07 AM

Perry, Pence, Palin, Jindal, Walker-in order-and I won’t vote for anyone beyond that list.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 5, 2014 at 10:02 AM

All excellent candidates! I just have a different order. I want Jindal first. The rest I have no order for. And I would add Carson, if that’s not a pipe dream.

And, yes, Ted Cruz would be more valuable as Senate Majority Leader, if we had a good conservative President. But if it’s between a RINO and Cruz for President, we need to pull Cruz out of the Senate.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 10:13 AM

Yup. and from what I’ve read, he is good on immigration, too.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 10:07 AM

He supports the idea of “comprehensive immigration reform.” He flat out doesn’t get what is wrong with the discussion.

Enforce the laws that are on the books. Implement e-verify. Do that for at least a few years. Show the American people our government is serious about enforcing the laws they write.

Then, and only then, we can have a discussion about “compassion” for those who have cut in front of the line.

People “in the shadows” are not the problem. Scofflaw ‘law enforcement’ is the problem. Jindal, like the rest of the candidates, does not understand that basic reality.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 10:16 AM

Palin/Cruz 2016!!!

ShainS on May 5, 2014 at 10:17 AM

So what’s wrong with Rand Paul? Does he make too much sense?

Spiders from Mars on May 5, 2014 at 10:18 AM

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 10:16 AM

I think everyone supports “comprehensive immigration reform.”

It’s just what each candidate thinks is needed in the reforms that makes a difference. Some are soft on illegal immigration and some aren’t.

Jindal is good on immigration.

Bobby Jindal:

“The inscription on the Statue of Liberty, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,” is a beautiful sentiment. I wish it were as simple to apply it today as it was in past centuries, when we welcomed to our shores just about anyone who could get here. We need to find a controlled way to continue welcoming immigrants. That approach would require three main things: first, to ensure that our borders are secure–not talk about it or study it, just do it; second, enforce our existing immigration laws; and third, refocus our legal immigration policy to encourage high-skilled immigrants who embrace American values. I also think we need to continue to be a place where refugees fleeing persecution can find safe harbor and a new home. Immigration should help our country compete in the world and improve the quality of life for US citizens while offering unlimited opportunity to hard-working immigrants looking for freedom.”

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 10:27 AM

Spiders from Mars on May 5, 2014 at 10:18 AM

he’s proving himself to be an amnesty shill-no Perry isn’t-and too much like Herr Doktor in other ways.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 5, 2014 at 10:27 AM

Palin/Cruz 2016!!!

ShainS on May 5, 2014 at 10:17 AM

Here here!!!

Opinionator on May 5, 2014 at 10:33 AM

Also voted for Jindal throughout.

I would need to know more about him on immigration, but as he lives in a border state I imagine his position is very well fleshed out.

BKennedy on May 5, 2014 at 9:48 AM

I like Jindal too, but he’s not from a border state.

J.S.K. on May 5, 2014 at 10:35 AM

Here here!!!

Opinionator on May 5, 2014 at 10:33 AM

Hear, hear, too :)

Opinionator on May 5, 2014 at 10:36 AM

HYPOTHETICAL: Jeb Bush announces his support for Medicaid block granting. For whom would you vote?

Is Medicaid block granting good or bad? I don’t even know enough about it to have an opinion.

J.S.K. on May 5, 2014 at 10:37 AM

Bobby Jindal, Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,

Did I fail to mention Bobby Jindal?

rukiddingme on May 5, 2014 at 10:37 AM

Is Medicaid block granting good or bad? I don’t even know enough about it to have an opinion.

J.S.K. on May 5, 2014 at 10:37 AM

Good. Will never happen.

kcewa on May 5, 2014 at 10:41 AM

rukiddingme on May 5, 2014 at 10:37 AM

^with either Haley or Martinez as his running mate.

rukiddingme on May 5, 2014 at 10:41 AM

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 10:16 AM

Don’t forget Bobby Jindal was one of the few high profile Republicans to go against the Gang of Eight on immigration. Clearly, publicly and early on. When all the Republican powers that be in the establishment were hanging their hat on Rubio.

Bobby Jindal said this a couple months ago:

In particular, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal called the immigration system “completely backwards,” urging for reform but not at the expense of border security, and also calling for more visas to be given to highly skilled workers coming to the US.

“What I believe we need is a system of high walls and a broad gate,” Jindal said. “Right now, we’ve got the opposite. We’ve got low walls and a narrow gate. What I mean by that is we make it very difficult for people to come here legally. We make it very easy for people to come here illegally.”

With regards to bringing workers into the US, Jindal called it “a problem we can address,” and also said that “people [coming] into our country legally because it’s good for us. When people want to come here, work hard, get an education, play by the rules, that’s good for America.”

http://www.americanbazaaronline.com/2014/02/03/jindal-favors-visas-ryan-favor-amnesty-immigration-reform/

Jindal is good on immigration. And one of the few Tea Party type candidates that the establishment wouldn’t mind supporting in a general.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 10:41 AM

Bobby Jindal, Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,Bobby Jindal,

Did I fail to mention Bobby Jindal?

rukiddingme on May 5, 2014 at 10:37 AM

lol

Oh, I will have to give him a second look. lol

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 10:42 AM

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:12 AM

Now, why was I not surprised to see your name at the bottom of the post highlighting Bobby Jindal? Oddly enough, I voted for him, too. :) Love you, Elisa!

pannw on May 5, 2014 at 10:43 AM

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 9:12 AM

Now, why was I not surprised to see your name at the bottom of the post highlighting Bobby Jindal? Oddly enough, I voted for him, too. :) Love you, Elisa!

pannw on May 5, 2014 at 10:43 AM

lol

Love you too.

Everyone here have a great day and God bless. Got to run.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 10:45 AM

I think everyone supports “comprehensive immigration reform.”

…….

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 10:27 AM

And that is the problem. None of them have even the most basic understanding of what has gone wrong with our immigration system, so they all talk of it in terms of our needing to comprehensively reform it.

We don’t need that. We just need to enforce the laws.

Our problem with massive illegal immigration is a direct and inevitable consequence of our rulers refusing to enforce the very same laws they voted for us to have. No amount of ‘comprehensiveness’ is going to fix that problem, the real problem. They will just pass their amnesty, legalizing the people who came here in violation of our laws, and then go directly back to ignoring enforcement.

We know that for a FACT. It is what they DID ALREADY. It is what they will do again. Believing otherwise is not mistaken or wrong. It is willful idiocy. So must for ‘comprehensive’ ‘reform.’

I want a Chief Executive who will enforce our laws. Apparently that is too much to ask.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 10:48 AM

I like Jindal too, but he’s not from a border state.

J.S.K. on May 5, 2014 at 10:35 AM

Gee, neither is Florida. Do you think we have only illegals from Mexico?

katy the mean old lady on May 5, 2014 at 10:50 AM

Calling a Constitutional Convention at this piont is sheer stupidity. Who knows what kind of progressive BS would get enshrined in what then would be called a sacred document that must be followed to the letter.

I like how you put Libertarians as far right, and not left as some conservatives would have us.

tdarrington on May 5, 2014 at 9:15 AM

in order to pass an amendment you need 3/4 of the states to approve it.
so basically nothing will get passed.

conservative tarheel on May 5, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Rick Perry for President
Ted Cruz for senate majority leader.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 5, 2014 at 9:56 AM

Here’s one to go with your morning coffee:)

http://weaselzippers.us/184935-perry-wants-to-raise-the-maximum-wage/

MontanaMmmm on May 5, 2014 at 10:54 AM

MontanaMmmm on May 5, 2014 at 10:54 AM

You had me worried for a sec. LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on May 5, 2014 at 11:05 AM

Anyway, just put me down for Ted Cruz on everything Patrick.

WhatSlushfund on May 5, 2014 at 9:01 AM

Ditto.

hollygolightly on May 5, 2014 at 11:16 AM

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 10:48 AM

I am not arguing with you. I agree with you.

More importantly, Bobby Jindal agrees with you too.

Did you read my 2 posts in total? Where did you get the idea that Jindal supports amnesty? He was one of the few who came out against the Gang of Eight. The term “comprehensive immigration reform” doesn’t always equal amnesty. Obviously we need reform and we need more than one thing. Illegal immigration is a mess and danger for this country. First of all we need border security. I agree with you. So does Jindal.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 10:27 AM

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 10:41 AM

Research what he has been saying and voting for for the past decade, including what he has said recently.

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 11:16 AM

Why is Condi Rice on that list?

portlandon on May 5, 2014 at 11:17 AM

Ted Cruz and Bobby Jindal are my picks based on what I’ve heard from/about all those on the list so far.

hollygolightly on May 5, 2014 at 11:24 AM

You/Me *like this*

gophergirl on May 5, 2014 at 10:03 AM

ALT/GG 2016! Just don’t give ALT the football!

HonestLib on May 5, 2014 at 11:27 AM

Elisa on May 5, 2014 at 11:16 AM

When a politician talks about CIR, he is talking about legalization before enforcement. When they talk about doing CIR with ‘triggers’ for legalization only after enforcement has been ‘proven,’ they are slinging bs.

Once legalization has been approved, the enforcement part will be ignored. That is as close to an absolute metaphysical certainty as you will ever see in your life.

Just enforce the laws. If employers are getting in trouble because they don’t know if they are hiring illegals, then pass e-verify.

Problem solved.

The politicians, most definitely including Jindal, do not care about the problem the American people actually care about. They don’t care about widespread law breaking and the invasion of America by a different culture that seeks to supplant ours with one more socialistic.

What they care about is Hispanic votes and cheap labor.

fadetogray on May 5, 2014 at 11:31 AM

Right now my commitment factor to any of these is generally: meh.

I don’t actively want Jeb, Christie, Scarborough, Huckabee, Rice, Rubio or Ryan. More or less in that order

I will do a write-in or third party if any of these are at the top of the ticket.

And if Romney doesn’t do a good year of door-to-door getting to his Mormon roots, you can add him to the list too. Two R candidates with no ground game equals a loss as the media will help the opponent’s air game, no end. And if the NRA is the first group to get to me about a candidate, I know that they have lost as you shouldn’t need a third party to be the first to ask people to vote for someone. If you can’t put together a campaign that can figure this out, then please don’t run.

ajacksonian on May 5, 2014 at 11:31 AM

I believe that Ben Carson has a 2nd Amendment problem that no one wants to talk about. He mentioned banning certain weapons in cities. I vote second amendment issues and that is a non-starter for me.

Cottonpony on May 5, 2014 at 11:32 AM

I like Jindal too, but he’s not from a border state.

J.S.K. on May 5, 2014 at 10:35 AM

Louisiana is sufficiently close to the border by boat that it would require enforcement. That said, looking at the map again I did not realize quite how far south Texas dips before you actually hit Mexico. I stand corrected, at least to an extent.

I still imagine the Coast Guard is quite busy to Louisiana’s south.

BKennedy on May 5, 2014 at 11:33 AM

Stoic Patriot on May 5, 2014 at 9:27 AM

Methinks Stoic Patriot just wants to lose elections supporting fantasy positions that the rest of America has long since abandoned.

I get that you guys really, really want to outlaw abortion, but you need to WAKE UP AND SMELL THE REALITY. All campaigning against abortion will do is lose you votes with single women. Comparatively, abortion is not going to drive your base to the polls either, not enough people give a whit about it. You need to learn to settle for maybe first trimester limitation, and even then, you don’t say shit about it until AFTER the election — then just quietly enact it like every other liar-in-chief.

Gay marriage, see above. Same problem, you’ll get lambasted for it, and lose the election. Quietly deal with it later, as best you can, but SHUT UP about it before the election.

Focus on the ECONOMY — You know, that thing that will completely destroy the NATION if left in its current death-spiral state. What’s more important to you SoCons, dead babies you don’t know, or your OWN death, and perhaps your family’s, during the anarchy that will result from a financial collapse?

I know this sounds dismissive, but you people have been losing us elections for a long time now with this bs.

nullrouted on May 5, 2014 at 11:33 AM

I don’t see the person’s name listed who won every Damn one
of these HotAir polls circa 2010-2011…..

..what a joke.

ToddPA on May 5, 2014 at 9:09 AM

Amen. She doesn’t make the list and Joe Scarborough, Ben Carson and Ms. Rice do (and I love me some Condaleeza and Ben, but there is no more chance of them running as the one whose name cannot be spoken). Sheesh.

miConsevative on May 5, 2014 at 11:35 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3