Republican Candidates for 2016 Race

[RJDiogenes]

It's politics. Words have no meaning.

With a slate of morons, psychopaths, and mental defectives like that, the most likely candidates are either Bush, based on name recognition, or Trump, because he can afford to buy everyone off.

Of course, I'll write somebody in before I'll ever vote for a Republican. It's hard enough bringing myself to vote for a Democrat these days.

 

[1001001]

Ridiculous Shit Show.

The whole lot of them.

Trump, Jindal, Cruz, Santorum, and Huckabee are especially noxious. Rand Paul is, generously, a little whimsical in the brain pan.

Bush wins by default.

 

[Trekker4747]

If we're "lucky" Bush will win the nomination among this group of crazy-house escapees. Every single Republican candidate in this race has been absolutely nuts and insane. Playing to bottom of the barrel base of the barrel. They're trying to the appeal to that crusty, thick, gooey slag on the bottom that's been there from generations and is just the base components of the worst part of the party.

Donald Trump is on a completely different planet, possibly galaxy.

So Bush is the lesser of the evils... And that's not saying much because there's a lot of problems with him as well.

Rick Santorum

If Rick Santorum gets the nomination and -heaven forbid the Presidency- we're going to become that hyper-religious state of insanity we saw in "Escape from LA."

 

[J.T.B.]

On paper it's a stronger field than 2012 with governors Bush, Christie, Huckabee, Jindal, Kasich, Pataki, Perry and (upcoming) Walker. What doesn't seem to have changed is that everyone will try to get to the right of everyone else in the primary campaigns, leaving the nominee a few months of scrambling back toward the center for moderate voters before the general.

If they stick with the plan of splitting the first debate into two, one for the top ten polling and one for everyone else, the "kiddie table" debate will have obvious entertainment value. But I hope Trump's numbers stay high, it will be great to have him in amongst the "serious" candidates.

 

[ichab]

There is not a single person running on the GOP side that is progressive.

 

[auntiehill]

I found John Stewart's description of the Republican candidates most apt: "Ten Pounds of Shit in a Five Pound Bag."

 

[Hound of UIster]

There is not a single person running on the GOP side that is progressive.

Isn't that suppose to be a good thing from a Republican perspective? I seem to recall from the 00s era that it was not a word that the right wing base used too much.

 

[J.T.B.]

I found John Stewart's description of the Republican candidates most apt: "Ten Pounds of Shit in a Five Pound Bag."

I miss him already.

 

[suarezguy]

I dislike Jeb Bush and it'll be fun to see the other candidates beat up on him ... but he could end up being the last man standing. If the attacks are effective enough, Marco Rubio could end up a compromise candidate. He's probably my favorite, followed by Paul, Christie, Walker, Cruz and then Graham.
It may be most interesting to see how Paul presents himself compared to the other candidates. Hopefully he'll do well in New Hampshire and get a lot of momentum.

Yeah, I'd love to know who the five "progressive" GOP candidates are, and what about them makes them "progressive."

They're certainly not progressives in overall identity but Paul and Cruz have been relatively cautious about the using the military, Christie centrist on social issues and Graham pretty supportive of environmental protection.

 

[CoveTom]

Rick Santorum - Fundie who runs for President as a full-time job because not even Fox News wants to give him a salary

Minor correction. Rick Santorum is a Roman Catholic. And being one myself, I can tell you that the fundamentalists hate Catholics.

 

[fonzob1]

Chin up, fellow progressives.

Certainly. "Progressives" should be happy that they had 8 years of Barrack Obama as president, not miserable.

On paper it's a stronger field than 2012 with governors Bush, Christie, Huckabee, Jindal, Kasich, Pataki, Perry and (upcoming) Walker. What doesn't seem to have changed is that everyone will try to get to the right of everyone else in the primary campaigns, leaving the nominee a few months of scrambling back toward the center for moderate voters before the general.

If they stick with the plan of splitting the first debate into two, one for the top ten polling and one for everyone else, the "kiddie table" debate will have obvious entertainment value. But I hope Trump's numbers stay high, it will be great to have him in amongst the "serious" candidates.

I agree about Trump. The debates will be far more entertaining if he is among the primary candidates.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Chin up, fellow progressives.

Certainly. "Progressives" should be happy that they had 8 years of Barrack Obama as president, not miserable.

Well, that was a non sequitur. And what are the scare quotes for?

Anyway, I'm sure that actual progressives would be each capable of making up their own mind about something like that, as well as deciding whether they're miserable.

 

[ichab]

There is not a single person running on the GOP side that is progressive.

Isn't that suppose to be a good thing from a Republican perspective? .

It very much is. I'm simply responding to someone who claimed otherwise.

 

[1001001]

I agree about Trump. The debates will be far more entertaining if he is among the primary candidates.

No question about that.

John Stewart destroyed him. It was epic and awesome.

http://entertainthis.usatoday.com/2015/07/03/jon-stewart-campaign-slogan-donald-trump/

"Somebody's doing the raping...."

What an absolute moron.

 

[horatio83]

Certainly. "Progressives" should be happy that they had 8 years of Barrack Obama as president, not miserable.

First of all, that you put quotation marks around progressives says a lot. Second of all, many progressives are certainly not happy with a president that violates habeas corpus (and for all that matters, nobody should be happy with that).
Third of all, instead of debating the vice and virtues of all these candidates it might be more worthwhile to reflect upon the pseudo-aristocratic nature of Bush and Clinton running for presidency instead of playing the usual left vs. right game.
Not that there are no differences between left and right ... but virtually (Sanders is an exception and Paul might also have little corporate sponsorship but I am not sure about that) all of the folks who are running for presidency are corporate scum that loves to deflect our attention from economic matters by playing these cultural issues games, having us rally behind one sides on the issue of gay rights, abortion or religious freedom or whatever. Not that these issues are irrelevant but there are things that matter more.

 

[Sector 7]

Donald Trump is an unabashed bigot. He represents all that is wrong with corporate America: uncontrolled greed, suppression of American workers, elitist values of "He who has the money makes the rules" and more.

I found John Stewart's description of the Republican candidates most apt: "Ten Pounds of Shit in a Five Pound Bag."

This is one of my favorite Jon Stewart works!

Certainly. "Progressives" should be happy that they had 8 years of Barrack Obama as president, not miserable.

First of all, that you put quotation marks around progressives says a lot. Second of all, many progressives are certainly not happy with a president that violates habeas corpus (and for all that matters, nobody should be happy with that).
Third of all, instead of debating the vice and virtues of all these candidates it might be more worthwhile to reflect upon the pseudo-aristocratic nature of Bush and Clinton running for presidency instead of playing the usual left vs. right game.
Not that there are no differences between left and right ... but virtually (Sanders is an exception and Paul might also have little corporate sponsorship but I am not sure about that) all of the folks who are running for presidency are corporate scum that loves to deflect our attention from economic matters by playing these cultural issues games, having us rally behind one sides on the issue of gay rights, abortion or religious freedom or whatever. Not that these issues are irrelevant but there are things that matter more.

Nothing matters more than the right of individual Americans to be treated with dignity, respect and to be equal to all other Americans.

 

[Tora Ziyal]

"Somebody's doing the raping...."

OMG, Digits, did Trump really say that? Please tell me it's just Stewart's version!

Rick Santorum - Fundie who runs for President as a full-time job because not even Fox News wants to give him a salary

Minor correction. Rick Santorum is a Roman Catholic. And being one myself, I can tell you that the fundamentalists hate Catholics.

CoveTom, there are fundamentalist Catholics. I've met some, and Santorum seems to be one.

 

[fonzob1]

"Somebody's doing the raping...."

OMG, Digits, did Trump really say that? Please tell me it's just Stewart's version!

It's for real. It's exactly what he said.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O6Nmx_kZMQ

 

[Tora Ziyal]

I suppose it makes sense.

After all, Asian, Native American, and African American don't rape. And White men certainly don't rape! I wasn't raped in a home invasion until a lot of Spanish-speaking immigrants had moved into my neighborhood. Oh wait...

he was a US-born White dude...

 

[Starkers]

Speaking as a Brit can I ask, just Trump have a hope in hell of getting the Republican nomination? He's like a parody, except I doubt any comedian would come up with a character like that because they'd think him too unrealistic!

That said, and again speaking as a Brit, the notion of President Trump does make me giggle (Trump being another word for fart where I come from!) It doesn't make me giggle enough to ever want it to happen of course!