Posted on 03/12/2013 1:17:58 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul is leading an online poll being conducted by Contract From America as the conservative pick for president in 2016.
With 190,000 votes cast as of Monday morning, Paul leads, with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio rounding out the top three. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush are running in last place, ranked 32 and 31 respectively.
Contract From America (CFA) is a nonprofit conservative organization that promotes the “Contract From America” that was first drafted and embraced in 2010 by tea party Republicans.
CFA distributed the poll to tea party chapters and leaders, and conservative organizations across the country, and asked voters to choose their favorite candidate in 12 to 15 head-to-head match-ups featuring 32 possible candidates.
Rand Paul leads the poll, winning 80 percent of his match-ups, with Walker winning 76 percent and Rubio winning 73 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
At this point in time, I really couldn’t say-I like them both.
Nope. The Sunday shows were balls to the wall Jeb. Soros and the MSM have determined that we will be allowed to vote for him and nobody else. It's Jeb vs the Conservatives. We need to coalesce around one Conservative early - whether it's the flawed Rand, the flawed Gov. Walker, the flawed and eligibility challenged Rubio, the deeply hated by the left Palin, or the eligibility challenged Cruz.
Palin and Cruz are perhaps the only 100%ers for Conservatives. The rest are all 80 and 90% and leagues preferable to anyone the GOPe is pushing.
Good point and worth repeating. The base can have a voice and select the nom. but the old line “can he/she win” is very convincing to a lot of primary voters.
Several key races were lost due miscalculations. Either the candidate turns out to be an idiot/appears to an idiot and voters vote RAT...several senate races come to mind. Other times someone, like Rubio, Paul and a few others buck all the trends and wins...
Establishment Death Star that was turned on Newt, Rick, and Perry will be turned on Rand.
Rand Paul for President Woo! Woo!
Xxxx Xxxx for President Woo! Woo!
Xxxx Xxxx for President Woo! Woo!
Xxxx Xxxx for President Woo! Woo!
Xxxx Xxxx for President Woo! Woo!
Xxxx Xxxx for President Woo! Woo!
Xxxx Xxxx for President Woo! Woo!
Orin, is that you?
I like them both too but this might help you decide who is right for 2016, I taped this as he was running to defeat the sitting Gov. of his own party to win the nomination and the senate seat from FLA. He is a leader and communicator, I dare say, a great communicator. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wy36ZB0pgpw
I gotta point out that if Rand had voted against skerry, he would have been nominated anyway. IMHO, Rand was trying to be nice, knowing it didn't make any difference.
At 66:1 I might have to put 100 bucks on the jr sen from KY
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/novelty-betting/other-politics/us-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=791149
My humble opinion is that all this speculation is way premature. Best let the situation ripen a couple of years before picking up the conversation again - a lot of water is going under this dam.
NO! We need to get all the infighting out of our system WELL BEFORE the 2015/2016 primary season - unless you want another Romney that is (Jeb Bush).
-— My humble opinion is that all this speculation is way premature. Best let the situation ripen a couple of years before picking up the conversation again -—
No! The monied interests are already lining up behindBush. We can’t wait. We’ve been primaries this way since Reagan. Enough!
I’ll bite the bullet and support Paul or Rubio right now, but I’d prefer Cruz. Regardless, we have to start now.
This is an interesting theoretical debate.
Like: who was a better hitter? Roy Hobbs or Pedro Cerano.
bump
I can’t believe that so many forget stuff based on one speech or filibuster
“....I don’t fully agree with the votes but his explanation was reasonable.”
His explanation would have been reasonable only if the President, and the political party he leads were not bent upon destroying this country.
“Kerry and Hegel were bad but the alternatives were much worse.”
What alternatives do you speak of? Rice was s-canned for Kerry, and no others were put up as options that I can recall. Some were mentioned as possibilities by the MSM, but no others were mentioned by Obama.
“IMHO, Rand was trying to be nice, knowing it didn’t make any difference.”
Being “nice” to the enemy eh?
It’s NOT in our favor to be nice when we are fighting for our very existence. Obama, and his Leftist band of Marxist mischief makers are out to destroy that which many FReepers including myself put our lives on the line for.
Drinking Zambezi?
Shhhh - there's still too many with visions of sugarplum fairies and perfect candidates to allow someone to spout off such heresy. It's so much easier to keep aiding and abetting the destruction and then complaining about it than it is to come off one's "principles" and back/vote for a less than absolutely perfect candidate...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.