I think Ted Cruz peaked in Iowa

[Coach]

Credit Cruz for having a game plan and playing it smart. Now he's the front-runner and more of a target. But how will Cruz do in New Hampshire? Look for Rubio and maybe Kasich to move up in the rankings. Curz might not even come in second.

 

[IndySteel]

I think you're right. The only reason he won Iowa is because of their wacky caucus format and the hardcore bible thumpers in that state. If they had just simply cast a normal frickin vote then Trump would've rolled.

 

[oneforthebus]

There are other bible thumper states he will do well in. But Iowa shows that people have real concerns about electability. Rubio has the best chance of the three at beating Hillary.

Kasich is not going to get close, anywhere. This is now seen as a three man race and I don't think that's going to change. I look for him to drop out shortly, probably after New Hampshire.

 

[Steelin]

Rubio is not a conservative. Talk is cheap. I hope he doesn't win the nomination.

 

[Coach]

There are other bible thumper states he will do well in. But Iowa shows that people have real concerns about electability. Rubio has the best chance of the three at beating Hillary.

Kasich is not going to get close, anywhere. This is now seen as a three man race and I don't think that's going to change. I look for him to drop out shortly, probably after New Hampshire.

I think Kasich is the dark horse in the race. He's a well-established guy in the party, and rather likeable from a must-win state. Kasich is the best VP pick of the lot.

I keep hearing Rubio has the best chance to win the election, but I think he needs a bit more seasoning and has a problem with immigration.

As for winning the election, Hillary's star fades with each passing month, and there's no way Sanders brand of socialism would play on a national scale.

 

[Coach]

Kasich is (forgive the Vanguardian tactic of bolding) a huge MODERATE!!!!

Here are Kasich's positions. He does not sound like a moderate to me. I'd say center right. The bolded positions are conservative views.

http://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/27017/john-kasich/#.VrJcZjYrJTY

Issue Positions

In response to the increasing unwillingness of candidates to answer issue questions, Project Vote Smart has researched Presidential and Congressional candidates' public records to determine candidates' likely responses on certain key issues. These issue positions, from the year 2016, are provided below as a courtesy to voters.

Pro-life Abortion: Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?

No Budget: In order to balance the budget, do you support an income tax increase on any tax bracket?

No Crime: Do you support mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenders?

Unknown Position Economy: Do you support federal spending as a means of promoting economic growth?

Yes Economy: Do you support lowering taxes as a means of promoting economic growth?

No Education: Do you support requiring states to implement education reforms in order to be eligible for competitive federal grants?

Yes Energy: Do you support building the Keystone XL pipeline?

No Energy: Do you support funding for the development of renewable energy (e.g. solar, wind, thermal)?

No Environment: Do you support the federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions?

No Guns: Do you generally support gun-control legislation?

Yes Health Care: Do you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")?

No Immigration: Do you support requiring illegal immigrants to return to their country of origin before they are eligible for citizenship?

No Marriage: Do you support same-sex marriage?

Unknown Position National Security: Do you support targeting suspected terrorists outside of official theaters of conflict?

Unknown Position Social Security: Do you support allowing individuals to divert a portion of their Social Security taxes into personal retirement accounts?

 

[IndySteel]

Here are Kasich's positions. He does not sound like a moderate to me. I'd say center right. The bolded positions are conservative views.

http://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/27017/john-kasich/#.VrJcZjYrJTY

Issue Positions

In response to the increasing unwillingness of candidates to answer issue questions, Project Vote Smart has researched Presidential and Congressional candidates' public records to determine candidates' likely responses on certain key issues. These issue positions, from the year 2016, are provided below as a courtesy to voters.

Pro-life Abortion: Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?

No Budget: In order to balance the budget, do you support an income tax increase on any tax bracket?

No Crime: Do you support mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenders?

Unknown Position Economy: Do you support federal spending as a means of promoting economic growth?

Yes Economy: Do you support lowering taxes as a means of promoting economic growth?

No Education: Do you support requiring states to implement education reforms in order to be eligible for competitive federal grants?

Yes Energy: Do you support building the Keystone XL pipeline?

No Energy: Do you support funding for the development of renewable energy (e.g. solar, wind, thermal)?

No Environment: Do you support the federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions?

No Guns: Do you generally support gun-control legislation?

Yes Health Care: Do you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")?

No Immigration: Do you support requiring illegal immigrants to return to their country of origin before they are eligible for citizenship?

No Marriage: Do you support same-sex marriage?

Unknown Position National Security: Do you support targeting suspected terrorists outside of official theaters of conflict?

Unknown Position Social Security: Do you support allowing individuals to divert a portion of their Social Security taxes into personal retirement accounts?

He sucks.

 

[Spike]

We're not in Iowa anymore

then there's this

 

[21STEELERS21]

I thought "The Wall" was Trumps favorite.

 

[diver]

I like Trump, but lately he is coming across as a big *****. Won't do the debate, gonna sue Ted Cruz cause he lost. Maybe he is right in both cases, but he still looks like a *****.

 

[hamster]

I thought "The Wall" was Trumps favorite.

Is that really a good idea. To think?

 

[Stoney]

Donald Trump is a buffoon. Even time I hear him speak, I like him less and less. His facial expressions when listening to others speak is something I would expect from a spoiled 6 year old. He is not a conservative and never has been.

There are only two things that could ever get me to vote for that horse's ***, fortunately for him one is Hillary Clinton and the other is Bernie Sanders.

 

[Stoney]

I should add that while I'm not totally enamored with Ted Cruz, when I think of which candidate I'd want picking the next two Supreme court Justices, it would be him. We can't afford another John Roberts.

 

[IndySteel]

Rubio just passed Cruz in NH for 2nd.

Donald Trump stays in first, with 36%; Rubio takes over second place, with 15%. Ted Cruz, now in third, has 14%. Jeb Bush, 8%; and John Kasich 7%.

 

[SteelChip]

Donald Trump is a buffoon. Even time I hear him speak, I like him less and less. His facial expressions when listening to others speak is something I would expect from a spoiled 6 year old. He is not a conservative and never has been.

There are only two things that could ever get me to vote for that horse's ***, fortunately for him one is Hillary Clinton and the other is Bernie Sanders.

I think that is becoming a more frequent opinion although the "buffoon" could be replaced with several descriptions I have heard lately, all that seem to fit to some degree or another.

Like; childish, spastic, vengeful, immature, vague, bombastic.......I could go on but truth be told, I'd rather have him than either of the lefties, anyday!!

 

[Coach]

I should add that while I'm not totally enamored with Ted Cruz, when I think of which candidate I'd want picking the next two Supreme court Justices, it would be him. We can't afford another John Roberts.

I'd like to see the following ticket.


President Trump - Sorry, there's just no one else who could destroy Clinton or Sanders, and Donald will get things done. Cruz I think is smart and a good debater, but there's just something about him I don't like. I would, however, vote for Cruz because the alternative would be terrible. This is a must win election.

Vice President Kasich. He's been in control of Ohio, a must-win state.

Attorney General. Christie.

Surgeon General - Carson.

Secretary of state - This will be a very important pick for Trump. Not sure who I'd pick

Secretary of defense. Dick Cheeney, if he's healthy enough for the job.

 

[21STEELERS21]

The only sure thing about Cruz is he will never be President of the United States. I believe he gets offered a talk
show and doesn't run for office ever again. I think he wants to be a William F. Buckley Jr. type.

 

[deljzc]

Iowa being first in the primary season has hurt the GOP party considerably. Especially since the 24-7 news cycle and talking heads that just need stuff to ramble on and on about.

Every GOP candidate has to go off the deep end to get votes in Iowa. I'm starting to think Iowa is a place of stupid, religious farmers that see more cows than people and have no idea what the rest of the world is about. Yet somehow have the responsibility to at least "approve" of a top-3 GOP field every election cycle. It's kind of a stupid process.

Trying to get votes in Iowa, you have to say some pretty stupidly religious things and when broadcast to the rest of the country, just makes every GOP candidate look like a loony toon religious wack-job. Half the religious **** Rubio and Trump said in Iowa are blatant, bold-faced lies just trying to get support. Cruz IS that stupidly religious unfortunately, which is why he'll fail miserably in most of the rest of the country (thank god).

I just think if the GOP want to promote a "new party" and get away from the moral righteousness, anti-minority, pro-gun, pro-life rhetoric that I think fails consistently on a national platform, they should start pushing for a more progressive state to use first to start weeding out their candidates rather than Iowa.

 

[Coach]

Iowa being first in the primary season has hurt the GOP party considerably. Especially since the 24-7 news cycle and talking heads that just need stuff to ramble on and on about.

Every GOP candidate has to go off the deep end to get votes in Iowa. I'm starting to think Iowa is a place of stupid, religious farmers that see more cows than people and have no idea what the rest of the world is about. Yet somehow have the responsibility to at least "approve" of a top-3 GOP field every election cycle. It's kind of a stupid process.

Deljzc,

There was record turnout for the Republicans in Iowa

http://graphics.latimes.com/election-2016-iowa-results/


Ted
CRUZ
51,666 27.6%

Donald
TRUMP
45,427 24.3%

Marco
RUBIO
43,165 23.1%

Santorum who won IOWA in 2012 had but 29,839 votes. He's a distant 4th in terms of votes received. The real news is the turnout and amount of people who want a change from Obama like politics and RINO's, but you won't see that news on CBS!

Yet those are the facts.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Santorum who won IOWA in 2012 had but 29,839 votes. He's a distant 4th in terms of votes received. The real news is the turnout and amount of people who want a change from Obama like politics and RINO's, but you won't see that news on CBS!

Santorum's vote total was more than all three Democrats combined.

 

[21STEELERS21]

I thought the Democrats vote differently than Republicans in the caucuses.

Obama carried it twice, I expect Hillary will as well.

 

[Max Power]

I thought the Democrats vote differently than Republicans in the caucuses.

Obama carried it twice, I expect Hillary will as well.

They did, the Dems are treated like cattle and wander between pastures. Repubs just vote by ballot. Just a little difference there.

 

[diver]

Iowa being first in the primary season has hurt the GOP party considerably. Especially since the 24-7 news cycle and talking heads that just need stuff to ramble on and on about.

Every GOP candidate has to go off the deep end to get votes in Iowa. I'm starting to think Iowa is a place of stupid, religious farmers that see more cows than people and have no idea what the rest of the world is about. Yet somehow have the responsibility to at least "approve" of a top-3 GOP field every election cycle. It's kind of a stupid process.

Trying to get votes in Iowa, you have to say some pretty stupidly religious things and when broadcast to the rest of the country, just makes every GOP candidate look like a loony toon religious wack-job. Half the religious **** Rubio and Trump said in Iowa are blatant, bold-faced lies just trying to get support. Cruz IS that stupidly religious unfortunately, which is why he'll fail miserably in most of the rest of the country (thank god).

I just think if the GOP want to promote a "new party" and get away from the moral righteousness, anti-minority, pro-gun, pro-life rhetoric that I think fails consistently on a national platform, they should start pushing for a more progressive state to use first to start weeding out their candidates rather than Iowa.

Can you explain to me why it is only Republicans who to you say stupid things to get votes? Clinton and Sanders seem to be trying to outdo themselves for all the free stuff they can give away. But i guess that isn't stupid.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Can you explain to me why it is only Republicans who to you say stupid things to get votes?

My guess would be because there are so many candidates. Need to say stupid things to get attention in the crowd.

Clinton and Sanders seem to be trying to outdo themselves for all the free stuff they can give away. But i guess that isn't stupid.

That's the only way Democrats can compete with each other.

 

[diver]

My guess would be because there are so many candidates. Need to say stupid things to get attention in the crowd.


That's the only way Democrats can compete with each other.

My point was it seems that to some people only Republicans say crazy things, or only Christians say crazy things. It seems that Democrats never say crazy things or are extreme. I am tired of that mantra being constantly spewed. Sanders and Clinton say stupid things every day. Oh, but they aren't extreme.

We have to quit allowing this narrative. An example of this is how the gun debate has been framed. Anybody who is against gun control is extreme, but the gun control folks, why they are just so level headed. I have yet to hear a logical argument as to why someone like me should have my rights limited, someone who shoots guns safely, cleans and maintains them with safety in mind, and stores them safely. THere is no logic there. Yet I am extreme.