Author Topic: Which of these five potential Republican presidents would you prefer in 2016? (Read 8098 times)

Kat Kid · « **on:** November 06, 2013, 04:15:00 PM »

Bush
Christie
Cruz
Paul
Rubio

I would prefer Paul because I think the areas he would be most likely to use his presidential powers to enact change would be in areas we are in broad agreement on: foreign policy, NSA, privacy etc.

He would probably fiddle around with the Fed and appoint some crank. But congressional oversight would do wonders to moderate his domestic agenda even if he vetoed everything to death. His potential as a "do-nothing" president is much more comforting than the rest of the bunch to me.

But what say you goEMAW?

CNS · « **Reply #1 on:** November 06, 2013, 04:21:43 PM »

I gotta agree on Paul. He doesn't seem like he would bend to the party agenda and would do what he personally thought was right.

That said, the only one who stands a chance is Christie, imo. He seems pretty solid too. I just hope the primary doesn't make him go all crazy right. He seems like a pretty centralized figure now.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #2 on:** November 06, 2013, 04:21:51 PM »

Rand or Ron? I'm probably going with Christie either way, but I'm willing to keep an open mind going into the debates.

EllRobersonisInnocent · « **Reply #3 on:** November 06, 2013, 04:25:05 PM »

Elizabeth Warren or Gary Johnson for me.

star seed 7 · « **Reply #4 on:** November 06, 2013, 04:30:31 PM »

pretty good picks ERII, but those weren't in the original post.

i'll go with christie.

EllRobersonisInnocent · « **Reply #5 on:** November 06, 2013, 04:35:33 PM »

Quote from: seven on November 06, 2013, 04:30:31 PM

pretty good picks ERII, but those weren't in the original post.

i'll go with christie.

Well the choices given are complete dumbasses so I went with Other. Paul would be the #1 option out of the original 5 though.

bubbles4ksu · « **Reply #6 on:** November 06, 2013, 04:36:51 PM »

Paul is the most unlikely so we can eliminate him.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #7 on:** November 06, 2013, 04:38:55 PM »

Quote from: bubbles4ksu on November 06, 2013, 04:36:51 PM

Paul is the most unlikely so we can eliminate him.

I could see the republican base getting behind Rand.

star seed 7 · « **Reply #8 on:** November 06, 2013, 04:44:01 PM »

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on November 06, 2013, 04:38:55 PM

Quote from: bubbles4ksu on November 06, 2013, 04:36:51 PM
Paul is the most unlikely so we can eliminate him.

I could see the republican base getting behind Rand.

i can't.

sys · « **Reply #9 on:** November 06, 2013, 05:59:44 PM »

christie. and yes, it's at least partly personality over policy.

michigancat · « **Reply #10 on:** November 06, 2013, 06:04:05 PM »

Paul then Christie. A Christie campaign would be a lot of fun. (I'd hope).

p1k3 · « **Reply #11 on:** November 06, 2013, 06:24:07 PM »

Paul for sure, although he seems like he is willing to bow down for the establishment which means I probably just won't vote again.

Kat Kid · « **Reply #12 on:** November 06, 2013, 06:25:37 PM »

Quote from: sys on November 06, 2013, 05:59:44 PM

christie. and yes, it's at least partly personality over policy.

I think his personality + politics on foreign policy are a recipe for disaster.

CNS · « **Reply #13 on:** November 06, 2013, 07:04:15 PM »

Seems like Paul would be pretty bad on foreign policy too.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

p1k3 · « **Reply #14 on:** November 06, 2013, 07:11:55 PM »

Quote from: CNS on November 06, 2013, 07:04:15 PM

Seems like Paul would be pretty bad on foreign policy too.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

how so? He would stop bombing browns which instantly makes him better than anyone in 40 years

wetwillie · « **Reply #15 on:** November 06, 2013, 07:16:29 PM »

0.42 · « **Reply #16 on:** November 06, 2013, 07:51:54 PM »

Yeah, Paul.

steve dave · « **Reply #17 on:** November 06, 2013, 08:05:19 PM »

Christie

CNS · « **Reply #18 on:** November 06, 2013, 08:24:17 PM »

Quote from: p1k3 on November 06, 2013, 07:11:55 PM

Quote from: CNS on November 06, 2013, 07:04:15 PM
Seems like Paul would be pretty bad on foreign policy too.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

how so? He would stop bombing browns which instantly makes him better than anyone in 40 years

He would also stop paying them any money. While I think we try to be too much to too many and would like to see us cut back, doing so drastically(as both the paul' s would want) would be a big deal.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

K-S-U-Wildcats! · « **Reply #19 on:** November 06, 2013, 08:45:28 PM »

Quote from: EllRobersonisInnocent on November 06, 2013, 04:25:05 PM

Elizabeth Warren or Gary Johnson for me.

Is Elizabeth Warren the one who lied about being native american to boost her academia cred? If that's right - she has no chance. Besides, we already know who the Dems are running in 2016.

K-S-U-Wildcats! · « **Reply #20 on:** November 06, 2013, 08:47:16 PM »

Of the five choices, I choose Rubio as long as he calls to personally apologize for that immigration bill. He's withdrawn his support, and that's a start, but I'm really going to need a sincere apology.

puniraptor · « **Reply #21 on:** November 06, 2013, 08:54:56 PM »

Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on November 06, 2013, 08:47:16 PM

Of the five choices, I choose Rubio as long as he calls to personally apologize for that immigration bill. He's withdrawn his support, and that's a start, but I'm really going to need a sincere apology.

gag

paul would beat his ass

Headinjun · « **Reply #22 on:** November 06, 2013, 09:19:40 PM »

Rands a douche who's been lifting speeches from Wikipedia.

He's also been campaigning for far right lunatics like Ken Cuccinelli.

He's a flake and nothing like his father.

Christie would be my choice, and if he can keep it moderate throughout the primaries he may just steal the show from Hillary. He's a likable person and his penchant for pragmatism is a likeable trait.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #23 on:** November 06, 2013, 09:31:15 PM »

I've kind of picked up on Rand being a douche as well.

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #24 on:** November 06, 2013, 09:51:05 PM »

Quote from: EllRobersonisInnocent on November 06, 2013, 04:25:05 PM

Elizabeth Warren or Gary Johnson for me.

LoL, Liz Warren is batshit crazy and Ernie Johnson would never give up his gig at Turner.

Bush is out of terms (presuming Obama doesn't change that rule by executive order)

Paul is probably too old at this point, plus he never really caught on the last three primaries.

That leaves Cruz, Christie and Rubio. Rubio auto-corrects to Rubicon on my tablet, so that's pretty cool, but braces make him unlikeable to the poors. . . I mean swing voters. Cruz is Canadian or something, so that would be totally hilarious to watch the libtards who got all hot and bothered by the birthers have to become birthers themselves, but ultimately not a seasoned enough politician. This leaves Christie, who would probably finish off Hillary "crypt keeper" Clinton's flop of a political career, and who is flippant and funny and the kind of no bullshit guy this country needs after two terms of nothing but whiny bullshit.