Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Rubio Leads the Ricochet Caucus, Trump Gaining
It’s that time again for your monthly update. Rubio continues to lead the pack with a sizable margin with Cruz right behind him. In 3rd and 4th place are Fiorina and Trump(!), more on that later.
For the 2nd choice, the Ricochet vote is roughly an even split between Rubio, Cruz, and Fiorina. Interestingly, Christie emerges from statistical insignificance.
For Rubio supporters, their 2nd choice mostly goes to Cruz and Fiorina.
For Cruz supporters, their 2nd choice goes to Rubio and Fiorina.
It seems Ricochet members have mostly settled on Rubio or Cruz. Among those who supported Trump, their second choice goes to Cruz, which makes sense given the dynamics of the race.
I plotted the vote shares of these four candidates and you can see Trump’s rise. He’s still far back in the pack but last month Ricochet members saw something in this guy that made them want to select his box.
Lastly, I want to show a chart comparing Ricochet with the RCP average. This graphic gives a nice visual illustration of where Ricochet members diverge from the national primary GOP electorate.
The sample size was 357, which yields a sampling error of less than +/-5.2%.
Published in General
I certainly don’t want to dismiss out of hand charges of corruption against one of our pols – but at the same time, do you realize who the opponent is going to be? Hillary Clinton is a walking corruption scandal being just barely held together by the stitching of the dominant liberal establishment mass media.
The comparison between an elderly, fake Clinton and a Young, Vibrant Rubio with his beautiful family will be more than enough.
The Trumpkins in my estimation are the same sort of people who fell for Perot in ’92. If we can get them we should, but we shouldn’t lay down on the tracks for them either because they’re fickle at best.
Seven per cent for my team! We pledge not to drop out before the convention, but we will not commit to not running as a third party.
If you can’t see how big the amnesty issue is, then I can’t help you. Yes Reagan signed an amnesty bill, but what you guys always fail to mention is how the failure to enforce the security measures in that bill turned him away from it. From our very own Peter Robinson:
That’s the key to this current debate. I, and others like me, do not believe that Rubio or 95% of the people in DC actually WANT to secure the border and re-establish the rule of law.
Great post!
Here you go. This morning, from conservative Jen Rubin:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/12/09/sen-cruz-doesnt-get-it/?postshare=1441449672855296&tid=ss_tw
Rand Paul has been on the radio arguing that Marco Rubio was so locked into the Gang of eight bill that he worked to block conservative amendments. Paul seemed bitter that he could not strengthen the bill.
The comparison to Reagan does not work for many people. Yes Reagan signed amnesty in a bill that was meant to solve the immigration problem once and for all. Reagan had the best of intentions but it failed. Are we not supposed to learn from past mistakes?
I am not arguing for complete ideological purity, but I think there is some danger in underestimating the damage Rubio did to his record with the gang of eight. I have no idea what goes into an ACU rating, the rating means less to me knowing that you can be the Republican voice for the Senate immigration bill and still have a 98% rating.
I would vote for Rubio if he were the candidate, I think I would like him as the VP but at this point he would never be my first choice for President. I simply do not fully trust him.
I’m going to turn this around and assert you, and others like you apparently don’t have your thumb on the pulse of the country, being as you don’t grasp that your opinion on the matter is in a solid minority of all Americans and in the minority even among Republicans.
We can’t win national elections with stated positions which are purely hostile to immigrants and immigration. I’m sorry if you don’t grasp this and you need to be looking at more than a single issue – no matter how important you think it is.
I too am against “Amnesty” if amnesty means “giving people here illegally carte blanche and a pathway to citizenship.” What I am for is coming up with some means of providing better security at workplaces in tandem with penalties and a route to legality for those here illegally. And a Huge Wall to prevent the next wave.
Those are positions that enjoy solid support and have the advantage of being achievable.
Reagan was head of the Executive Branch. He had the power to enforce the border. Reagan (at least according to those pushing the immigration narrative) thus failed to enact his duties by controlling it as was is his duty. You can’t put that on Rubio.
Has disgraced himself with his conduct in this election cycle.
There’s no other way to put it. His presence on the stage in the Republican debates thus far has lent people the impression that we are the equivalent of a rhetorical toothache. Go back to Kentucky, Senator. Paul’s voice is an important one, but he certainly isn’t helping in this situation. He should drop out of the Presidential Election last month along with the other groundlings.
I don’t fully trust any of them. The question is: Which do I mistrust the least.
For Crying Out Loud! I listen to this kind of stuff and I could swear that we don’t waste this sort of linguistic excess on Obama and the Left! I mean, what, is that a little bit boring and passe? We now have to gaze at our own navels and complain about bills that didn’t even pass in order to avoid looking squarely at the bloated, festering pustule on the end of the body politic’s nose in the form of Donald J. Trump?
I feel like a kid whose siblings are throwing a huge party while the parents are out – the kid who is dumb enough to say “You know guys, eventually Mom and Dad are going to come home and then we’re going to get thrashed.”
Stop being those other kids, people!
“I simply do not fully trust him.”
Whaaaaaaa! This is so frustrating! Who do you “fully trust”? Trump? That snake that threatens every other day to throw a hissy fit and turn on the Republican Party if it’s “not nice to him”? Cruz? Go back and read today’s observations from Jen Rubin that I just posted. I dare you. Carson? He’s done. Jeb!? That’s cray cray. So who?
It’s not about trust at this point! It’s about winning the White House! Otherwise we’ll have someone you/we really can’t trust! And she will doom us all.
Polling on these issues tends to be all over the place. Depending on the poll and the question Republicans believe all kinds of things about immigration. CNN/ORC polling from February of this year showed 49% of all voters supporting a plan to legalize those who had a job while 49% wanted to develop a plan to stop the flow and deport those already here. In July on the same poll 63% of republicans wanted a plan to deport.
ABC/Washington Post polling showed 51% of Republicans felt that illegals should not be allowed to live or work here. 43% felt they should be allowed to stay if they met certain requirements.
http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
Yes. This whole thing is about “Winning Elections.” That is the antecedent activity that must precede all other considerations. You can have a nice, ideologically pure candidate who gets ceremonially slaughtered like a sheep each 4 years or you can concede the reality that politics involves forming coalitions with people who may not entirely buy into your program.
What is so difficult to understand about this?
Even Margaret Thatcher said that you can’t build a coalition and win elections without some wets. We can either be an ideologically narrow, regional, intermittent party or we can be a slightly (and I do mean SLIGHTLY) more open and broad, coalition and majority party.
The choice is ours but the results I think are obvious. If we choose the former over the latter we get more Obama; more Clinton. We can pretend that our true preferences actually are on the menu, but we do so at our peril.
Ideology is about ideas, politics is about winning elections. Wielding power can’t happen without doing the second part.
I don’t know what that means.
This was actually the 10th poll of the year.
We don’t win elections by only appealing to Republicans. That’s just how it is. Even if we got 100% of Republicans we still have to capture unaffiliated voters at a reasonable rate and hope that the Democrats don’t have a minority superstar like Obama at the top of the ticket.
Now, I have no issue with a stealth conservative candidate who craftily paints himself as a moderate in order to get elected and then promptly turns hard right in the White House – sort of a mirror image of Obama – but I don’t see anybody like that. In a certain sense, Rubio might be the closest. His mien is that of a soft moderate, but when you look at the actual record he’s practically Ted Cruz.
You realize that the only thing Jen Rubin said of substance in that article was that Trump mortifies her and Cruz should be just as mortified as she is.
A large majority of Americans are against the Comprehensive Amnesty legislation that Rubio helped Chuck Schumer pass in the senate and then Rubio worked as Schumer’s press agent to sell
I only saw one person voting Pataki.
Pataki’s a Ricochet member?
Well played, sir, haha. Well played.
One one in total?
It must’ve been a protest vote.
Where do we vote?
The vote takes place towards the end of each month. You’ll see it in the side bar to the right.
I notice the wall is last on your list, too. Until it’s the first item and given highest priority I won’t buy into any talk about amnesty or any other normalization for illegals. Get your priorities straight, please.
That’s petulant, Larry – but I’ll humor you.
Better now?
Am I wrong to infer that the wall is just in the mix of competing priorities for you?
This is how we lose. Everything is in a big bag of omnibus bills. The executive just picks and chooses what it wants and ignores the rest.
I think you fail to understand that for a lot of conservative folks, including a non-trivial number of Ricochetti, focusing on the next election has become a nonsensical waste of time. They want RESPECT, by God, screw “there’s always the next election.”
I don’t think society in general, and conservatives in particular, fully understands how truly dangerous that sentiment is.
Yes, we are. That’s the only thing that keeps amnestymongers like Rubio in the pack. Rubio is just a cuter ¡Jeb!. There’s not a dime’s worth of difference in them, policy-wise.
Reminded me of this clip.
Vote for Certified Pre-Owned Moderates™. They’re good for the environment, and okay for you.
You’ve put so many words into Robert McReynolds’ mouth that there’s little space left to respond. He did not say —
I didn’t have to put anything there that wasn’t first said, Ball.
RMR made the contention that Rubio is “only slightly better than Hillary.”
He can’t defend that gobsmackingly foolish statement, and if he thinks that then no candidate will be satisfactory to him.