Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. Okay, So Sell Me On Your Guy

 

Now that Rand Paul is out if the race, I’m left with a big gaping hole. Not only in my heart, but in my ballot. Despite my disagreements with the man, I had intended to vote for him. But now that he’s thrown in the towel, I’ve got no Plan B, and the New York primary is in two months.

Ricochet member V the K asked what everyone’s big three issues were. Mine were:

  1. The police state
  2. War
  3. National debt

I consider our police state to be incompatible with liberty; war and national debt are the two things that tend to topple nations. The way I see it, Rand Paul was pretty good on two of those things, and poor, but not the worst, on one of them.

Now, I realize I’m swimming upstream here, but I don’t want it to ever be said that I’m inflexible, closed-minded, or unwilling to compromise. So now that I have an opening, I invite everyone who wishes to pitch their favorite candidate to me.

If you support Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, Christie, Trump, Bush, Fiorina, or, sure, what the heck, even Jim Gilmore, you’re welcome to try.

Please realize that I’m a very tough sell. I’ll listen, but I’m not guaranteed at all to buy what you’re selling. (Also, an argument that I should vote for an inanimate carbon rod with an R next to the name won’t fly with me.) But even if you don’t sell me — after all, I’m very stingy with my vote — maybe you’ll convince someone else reading your pitch.

There are 66 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Jamie Lockett Inactive

    That’s easy – Ted Cruz. He stood up for the sequester that helped reign in military spending, he’s been extraordinarily good on the national security state and he is one of the better fiscal Hawks in the party.

    • #1
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:15 PM PST
    • Like
  2. Roberto, Crusty Old Timer LLC Member
    Roberto, Crusty Old Timer LLC Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Look, if you had one shot, one opportunity
    To seize everything you ever wanted, one moment
    Would you capture it, or just let it slip? Yo

    His palms are sweaty, knees weak, arms are heavy
    There’s vodka on his breath already, Grey Goose
    He’s nervous, but on the surface he looks calm and ready
    To drop bombs, but he keeps on forgettin’
    What he wrote down, the whole crowd goes so loud
    He opens his mouth, but the words won’t come out
    He’s chokin’ how, everybody’s jokin’ now
    The clock’s run out, time’s up, over, BLOW!
    Snap back to reality, oh, there goes gravity
    Oh, there goes Gilmore, he choked, he’s so mad
    But he won’t give up that easy, no, he won’t have it
    He knows his whole back’s to these ropes
    It don’t matter, he’s dope
    He knows that, but he’s broke, he’s so stagnant that he knows
    When he goes back to his Virginia home, that’s when it’s
    Back to the lab again, yo, this whole rhapsody
    He better go capture this moment and hope it don’t colapse on him

    You better lose yourself in the rally, the moment
    You own it, you better never let it go
    You only get one shot, do not miss your chance to blow
    This opportunity comes once in a lifetime

    #StillStanding

    • #2
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:19 PM PST
    • Like
  3. Fred Cole Member
    Fred Cole

    You are invited to include links to support each of those assertions.

    That goes for everybody else too.

    • #3
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:19 PM PST
    • Like
  4. BrentB67 Inactive

    Ted Cruz is my default choice as of this writing, but I am not supporting him, sending money, etc.

    On the police state he has taken hits from Jeb!, Marco, Christie and the others whose position is that we need to surrender our 4A rights in the name of security. Ted Cruz supported Rand Paul during the drone vs. U.S. citizens filibuster. Of the remaining I think Ted Cruz is closest to Justice Scalia on the rights of U.S. citizens to be free from illegal search and seizure. Ted Cruz is the most originalist of the remaining candidates.

    War is less clear, but my perception based solely on some of the attacks he endured in the debates is that he is not a full throttle NeoCon. Going back to his Constitutional originalist roots I think he would be less inclined to abuse the war powers act and make Congress ratify a declaration of war before doing so. Congress would have a hard time doing so unless it was obvious and near unanimous. I think that is a good thing and a key feature of the Constitution. I think Ted Cruz would be similar.

    He is willing to shut it down over spending as a Senator, will he be similarly strict as President? I am not sure though if anyone is actually going to try to eliminate or reduce something he is the only candidate that appears serious. His tax plan sucks, but will raise a lot of $.

    • #4
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:21 PM PST
    • Like
  5. BrentB67 Inactive

    FWIW, Rand Paul was my got 2nd choice in the monthly Rico poll.

    • #5
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:24 PM PST
    • Like
  6. Mr. Dart Inactive

    Gary Johnson will be on the ballot in November so you’re all set.

    • #6
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:25 PM PST
    • Like
  7. Guruforhire Member

    If you have to choose:

    Just as a thought outside of the LP candidate trump is the only guy who has said repeatedly that we can’t invade all the places.

    But I think you would find his domestic policies such as they are and rationally interpreted, would not be your cup of tea.

    The other candidates are various flavors of hawks and may be more likely to have opinions closer to yours of domestic policy.

    Debt is not reasonably going to be addressed by any candidate running, at least not with a default assumption of magic.

    Disclaimer: I am not a republican, I support no one, and I have no plans to take part in the primary.

    • #7
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:26 PM PST
    • Like
  8. Fred Cole Member
    Fred Cole

    Guruforhire:Debt is not reasonably going to be addressed by any candidate running, at least not with a default assumption of magic.

    Yeah, I know…

    A guy can dream, can’t he?

    • #8
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:28 PM PST
    • Like
  9. Eric Hines Inactive

    Jamie Lockett:That’s easy – Ted Cruz. He stood up for the sequester that helped reign in military spending, he’s been extraordinarily good on the national security state and he is one of the better fiscal Hawks in the party.

    To use Cruz’ logic, that disqualifies him, since by standing for the sequester he carefully aligned himself with Barack Obama, whose idea the sequester was.

    Eric Hines

    • #9
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:30 PM PST
    • Like
  10. Hoyacon Member

    I hear Hillary is readying to come out against the police state.

    • #10
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:32 PM PST
    • Like
  11. Eric Hines Inactive

    BrentB67: His tax plan sucks, but will raise a lot of $.

    His tax plan sucks, and will raise a lot of $. Or so some estimates indicate.

    However, he (along with the others whose plans increase revenue to the Federal government) has chosen not justify why the Federal government needs the added money.

    Eric Hines

    • #11
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:33 PM PST
    • Like
  12. Casey Inactive

    Doesn’t matter much. They’re all the same on the Republican side. The President operates in a pretty tight box. Most of the government is chugging along on its own.

    Any R will put less fuel in the train and any D more. To view this as anything else is goofy.

    • #12
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:40 PM PST
    • Like
  13. Fred Cole Member
    Fred Cole

    Hoyacon:I hear Hillary is readying to come out against the police state.

    I’ll believe that when I see it. Democrats as a whole (including the current administration) are heavily invested in the police state.

    And even if she did, she’s still be terrible on the other two issues.

    • #13
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:40 PM PST
    • Like
  14. Hoyacon Member

    Fred Cole:

    Hoyacon:I hear Hillary is readying to come out against the police state.

    I’ll believe that when I see it. Even if she did, she’s still be terrible on the other two issues.

    I wasn’t really serious on that one, but isn’t leading from behind in Libya and failing to fortify Benghazi the type of non-interventionism that appeals to libertarians? She’s also shown a keen eye for the purse, as the Clinton Foundation amply illustrates.

    • #14
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:47 PM PST
    • Like
  15. Misthiocracy held his nose and Member
    Misthiocracy held his nose and Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Mr. Dart:Gary Johnson will be on the ballot in November so you’re all set.

    You don’t think much of McAfee’s chances, eh?

    • #15
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:51 PM PST
    • Like
  16. Fred Cole Member
    Fred Cole

    Hoyacon:but isn’t leading from behind in Libya and failing to fortify Benghazi the type of non-interventionism that appeals to libertarians?

    No…

    Non-interventionism would be … not intervening in Libya’s civil war in the first place.

    Look, I know there’s this trope that Obama is some kind of peacenik or something, but from where I’m sitting, it looks like the man has never seen a war he didn’t want to get involved in.

    • #16
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:51 PM PST
    • Like
  17. Misthiocracy held his nose and Member
    Misthiocracy held his nose and Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Hoyacon:I hear Hillary is readying to come out against the police state…

    Are you sure that’s not “state police”?

    I’ll be hornswaggled if she includes federal agencies in her condemnation of “police”.

    • #17
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:53 PM PST
    • Like
  18. Hoyacon Member

    Misthiocracy:

    I’ll be hornswaggled if she includes federal agencies in her condemnation of “police”.

    Well, maybe the FBI, which is what I had in mind.

    • #18
    • February 3, 2016, at 4:58 PM PST
    • Like
  19. E. Kent Golding Member

    While you would tend to agree with Bernie on very very little, a vote for Bernie in the Demo’s Primary would tend to add to the confusion and drama.

    • #19
    • February 3, 2016, at 6:04 PM PST
    • Like
  20. Manfred Arcane Inactive

    Eric Hines:

    Jamie Lockett:That’s easy – Ted Cruz. He stood up for the sequester that helped reign in military spending, he’s been extraordinarily good on the national security state and he is one of the better fiscal Hawks in the party.

    To use Cruz’ logic, that disqualifies him, since by standing for the sequester he carefully aligned himself with Barack Obama, whose idea the sequester was.

    Eric Hines

    The sequester was a great idea. How else do you imagine spending cuts could be effected?

    • #20
    • February 3, 2016, at 6:09 PM PST
    • Like
  21. Mike H Coolidge

    I don’t know what my three big issues are, probably because I don’t expect any president to make too much of a difference either way. I do like how much Marco makes nativists squirm as if he was some sort of actual open borders proponent and not a strawman. But I guess Bush is probably the most likely to be pro-immigrant, as distasteful as his name and family legacy is.

    If I put my brain into pre-anarchism politics mode, I’d just be a run-of-the-mill conventional-wisdom Ricocheti, meaning Rubio all the way (though I never went through the Carly honeymoon).

    I have no real problem with Cruz, though I do think he’s less likely to win in November.

    • #21
    • February 3, 2016, at 6:15 PM PST
    • Like
  22. A-Squared Coolidge

    Fred Cole:Mine were:

    1. The police state

    2. War

    3. National debt

    Fred, I think you should vote for the sweet meteor of death.

    B7bc1vkCYAAVsX8

    Once the sweet meteor of death hits this country, the police state, war, and the national debt will be eliminated almost instantaneously.

    LXhpUUj

    • #22
    • February 3, 2016, at 6:51 PM PST
    • Like
  23. Austin Murrey Inactive

    A-Squared: Fred, I think you should vote for the sweet meteor of death.

    I second SMOD 2016. He promises an end to politics as usual – forever.

    • #23
    • February 3, 2016, at 7:07 PM PST
    • Like
  24. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    As often happens, Brent beats me to the punch (comment #4) and says what I would have said, only better.

    • #24
    • February 3, 2016, at 8:21 PM PST
    • Like
  25. Hammer, The Member

    I find points 1 and 2 to be difficult to address. Certainly, I’m not predisposed toward either “The Police State” or toward “War,” but I’m also not sure whether I’d disagree with specific policy proposals, because they really aren’t self-evident from the names.

    Does The Police State mean you don’t want the IRS to have its own police force? Or does it mean you want to de-criminalize drugs? Does it refer to seizure? Would it have implications on local police forces that deal with local crime? I think there is a lot of reform that I would support that falls under “policing,” but it’s hard to say without knowing more. It’s also hard to say whether any particular candidate would be more or less inclined to agree.

    Same goes for “War.” I certainly don’t want to get involved in every war that goes on in the world. I don’t consider us to be the “World’s Police,” so to speak. But I do think that global diplomacy needs to come with a serious threat of force – or at least without broadcasting our spinelessness even if we are extremely hesitant to act. So do I want a president who would rush into all sorts of wars without thinking about it? Of course not. Do I want a president who will broadcast his anti-war stance to all the world as an invitation to act against our interests? Well, we already have that with Obama, and I’m not a big fan.

    • #25
    • February 3, 2016, at 9:21 PM PST
    • Like
  26. Hammer, The Member

    As for point 3. Let’s call it entitlement reform, and I’m just as eager as you are to find out which candidate is most serious about it.

    • #26
    • February 3, 2016, at 9:22 PM PST
    • Like
  27. Hammer, The Member

    Mike H:I don’t know what my three big issues are, probably because I don’t expect any president to make too much of a difference either way. I do like how much Marco makes nativists squirm as if he was some sort of actual open borders proponent and not a strawman. But I guess Bush is probably the most likely to be pro-immigrant, as distasteful as his name and family legacy is.

    If I put my brain into pre-anarchism politics mode, I’d just be a run-of-the-mill conventional-wisdom Ricocheti, meaning Rubio all the way (though I never went through the Carly honeymoon).

    I have no real problem with Cruz, though I do think he’s less likely to win in November.

    if you can marry pro-immigrant with anti-entitlement (and tackle the latter first), I think you’ve got something.

    We could also shoot for tort-reform… and insurance across state lines. Personally, I’m a fan of de-regulation and economic freedom. Immigration ranks pretty low on the list, but I see pro-immigrant as a positive thing once those other issues are addressed.

    • #27
    • February 3, 2016, at 9:25 PM PST
    • Like
  28. She Reagan
    She Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Eric Hines:

    Jamie Lockett:That’s easy – Ted Cruz. He stood up for the sequester that helped reign in military spending, he’s been extraordinarily good on the national security state and he is one of the better fiscal Hawks in the party.

    To use Cruz’ logic, that disqualifies him, since by standing for the sequester he carefully aligned himself with Barack Obama, whose idea the sequester was.

    Eric Hines

    Ted Cruz understands that the sequester was a ‘poison pill’ proposed by the White House and that passing it hoist the Obama administration in its own petard. The sequestration poison pill, which has been written about ad nauseam, and which everybody understands to have been such, was a total failure for the President.

    This widespread ability to understand and appreciate a ‘poison pill’ strategy doesn’t extend to the Ted Cruz version dealing with immigration, in which he proposed a ban on illegal immigrants ever obtaining citizenship, betting that it would go down to defeat. It did. But because in doing so it ruffled the feathers of the Washington establishment on all sides, who had been pretending that none of the Gang of Eight bill was about creating millions of new citizen voters. So we must all loathe Ted Cruz, because he played the game and won.

    I would call it, Ted Cruz, 1; Obama Administration 0, in the battle of the poison pills.

    • #28
    • February 4, 2016, at 4:17 AM PST
    • Like
  29. Blue State Curmudgeon Inactive

    If you can’t see that Rubio is the most electable conservative then there’s no use trying to convince you.

    • #29
    • February 4, 2016, at 4:39 AM PST
    • Like
  30. A-Squared Coolidge

    ^^^^^^

    Please, let’s not accuse Fred of being concerned about electability.

    After all, he was hoping Rand would stay in the race long enough to vote for him in the primary.

    • #30
    • February 4, 2016, at 4:42 AM PST
    • Like

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.