[Zakeet]

Quick summary of their list:

1. Change Agents (Conservatives): Carson, Cruz, Huckabee, Jindal, Santorum, Paul and Trump

2. Reformers (Business more or less as usual): Fiorina, Perry, Rubio, Walker

3. Progressives (Rino's): Jeb, Christie, Graham, Kasich

Bottom Line: Cruz or lose!

[afraidfortherepublic]

You need a 4th catagory: Bomb throwers — Trump and Paul

[Vigilanteman]

Suckabee is no change agent and no conservative. Aside from solidly pro-life views, he is with the GOPe on everything else.

[afraidfortherepublic]

And Walker surely belongs with the Conservative change agents.

1) Rolled back union influence statewide

2) Right to work

3) Protected “pain capable” pre-borns

4) Balanced budget

5) Reduced taxes

6) Instituted concealed carry

7) Armed the National Guard

8) Voter photo ID

9) Outlawed teacher union monopoly on insurance

And that’s just the tip of the iceburg.

[DLfromthedesert]

There was no business as usual with Walker as governor in Wisconsin.

[mrsmith]

Interesting but there are only two distinct groups.
Both of the 2 second groups should be combined and labeled “media patsies”.

We’ll either have the President the media want- again, or one we want. What’s best for the media: high government spending and debt and ‘identity politics’, is not what’s best for the country.

[Amendment10]

"Change Agents (Conservatives): Carson, Cruz, Huckabee, Jindal, Santorum, Paul and Trump"

Conservative does not necessarily mean respect for the Constitution, particularly the federal government’s constitutionally limited powers and associated limited power to lay taxes.

[rarestia]

Let’s remember, folks, the President is there to represent the executive branch. Laws will still be passed by Congress. The public gets so wrapped around the axle with the presidential elections that they forget how our system works. Or doesn’t work, I guess.

[Erik Latranyi]

Compare Walker’s record as governor with Huckabee and Jindal and you will see the LIE in this entire article.

[x]

Three categories, sure, but his names for them don't work. As labels, "change agents" "reformers" and "progressives" aren't that different -- they all relate to change of one sort or another. I get that he's thinking that some of the candidates represent real conservative change and others simply go with the flow in the direction that liberals are taking the country, but still somebody could come up with better labels.

For one thing Huckabee or Jindal or Santorum is a "change agent" in a different sense that Cruz is, and Cruz is a different sort of "change agent" than Paul. Perhaps Walker may turn out to be more conservative on some economic issues than "visionary" social conservative "change agents" than Huckabee or Santorum or Jindal.

What's become the standard division of Republican candidates over the past few cycles -- social conservatives, economic conservatives, moderate conservatives, and moderates (or something of that sort) -- works better than Deacey's categories, IMHO. Plus he ought to consider changing his own name. When I read the article, I thought it was by Fox News's morning guy.

[Resolute Conservative]

Huckabee, Paul, and Trump are not conservatives, not even close.

[trisham]

"We are seeing a great awakening.
A national movement of We the People, brought together by what unites us -
a shared love of liberty, and an understanding of
the unlimited potential of free men and free women."

Ted Cruz

[WayneS]

The 3 Categories of 2016 Candidates

For the most part, I think the categories are:

Tweedle Dumb

Tweedle Dumber

Tweedle Dumbest

[The Sons of Liberty]

WHO told Graham and Kasich that it would be a good idea for them to enter the race? It's certainly not like there was a national groundswell for them to become candidates. Who is funding them?

Maybe this is crazy conspiracy theory, but I can't help but believe that someone is orchestrating a lot of this.

[CincyRichieRich]

Real Conservatives: Cruz
A little off, not quite 100% conservative: Jindal, Walker

I am sending up a trial balloon, however...I believe 0bama near the election will call in whatever order or blackmail he has on Yellen, and will have her raise rates 2 or 3% over a 48 hr period and cause chaos, suspend election...possible martial law (all called something else, and her doing and of course Rush’ theorem as he won’t have any blame)...remember his database in Utah...then they’ll need the data to reassign us to the right place after the chaos - and the reassignment will be needed to help stop the chaos. Yep, call me crazy, but this is what I see happening.