http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...se-sometimes-random-people-run-for-president/ Mark Everson enters the 2016 race, because sometimes random people run for president
Ok, so if we're making a bracket, he's a play-in. Who's actually going to get the nomination? Is there a top-3? From here it feels like Christie, Bush, and ?
I think Christie isn't a factor at all. It looks to me like 3 candidates will get serious consideration. Bush, Walker, and Paul.
I guess I thought Christie since he's been around these parts lately talking up pipelines and such. What's Scott Walker's deal? Edit: ok, a little of my own Google University work shows he is an unspectacular candidate who was unpopular in his own state. So it's Bush/Clinton again. Wonderful.
Walker is governor of Wisconsin. He wins elections in the teeth of the strength of democratic party onslaughts to defeat him. He's most famous for signing a bill that eliminates public unions' collective bargaining power in Wisconsin. Following that, the democrats spent vast sums of money and poured resources from out of the state into a failed recall election. He then won re-election. Wisconsin is the state that kept electing the socialist Russ Feingold to the senate. If republicans want to win, they need to nominate a governor who can be painted a success, IMO.
Rubio is currently rated high among oddsmakers. He's young and bright but I've not seen him to be much of a leader. I think when he's exposed to bright lights and cameras, he won't look ready (yet). Plus, it is really rare that Senators are elected president. Obama was one of 2 or 3 in history. The reason I put Paul, a senator, in the list I made is that he's actually engaging hispanics, youth, the black community, etc. Reaching beyond the republican voting blocs. if he can make it past the primaries, he has a real shot to score a lot of voters who'd normally blindly vote D.
Another Paul video, courtesy of C-SPAN: http://www.c-span.org/video/?324817-1/senator-rand-paul-rky-remarks-bowie-state-university
I think Bush is at the top of the polls today because many Republicans and most independents want a candidate nearly like a Democrat. That would be Bush and Christie. I don't have anything against Cruz, but he is most unlike the characteristic that makes Bush and Christie what they are, marginally conservative, almost progressives. It will be difficult for Cruz because he shows himself to be harder than he actual is. Walker has walked the walk, a Conservative and on my favorite list although, I think he might be a bit young and vulnerable to attack by the liberal hounds. Rubio, also may not be ready although I think he has the most charisma which seems to be the prime commodity required these days. But I think he may have ticked off too many conservatives with his immigration stance, then back water. Rand Paul is the top of my favorite list because of his conservative stances and his librarian bent. Although he did bother me when he advocated the US go to town on ISIS! The time is not right for that crap, but he still is my top prospect. Can he Win? uh, I don't know, charisma is a bit short, but I think he will draw the most independents and Hispanics. Then we have Romney, my real first choice. First because I think we need a real Capitalist in charge to get this nation back to work and back under control in the fiscal sense. But I am in the minority here and damned if I know why. So Rand Paul is where I look. However, I will vote for any of the above and others unnamed, before Clinton. I have voted for the dem twice, Kennedy because I never thought well of Eisenhower and I thought Nixon was a con man. Then I voted for Bill Clinton, bad mistake, just because I did not like Bush's tendency to come across like a preacher. The Lady Clinton proved without a shadow of doubt, she is not capable of being commander in chief. She bungled Benghazi badly then trotted out the bull shit about a video to cover for the fuck up. Looked us right in the face and lied, just like her cohort (Bill) had, with the same phony sincerity. I can't imagine anyone that ever served in the military would vote for her. The trading of bad dudes for a deserter will not help her case.
I think he's a shit stain. He's a coward and a two face. Seems like someones Marazul would want in office.
I read Paul's Wiki just now and was surprised to see, as a libertarian, he's against legalization, against any abortion, and against gay marriage. Are these concessions to his party?
He's not a Libertarian like his father is. He's a republican with libertarian leanings. Note my capitalization. That said, he's libertarian enough to keep the government out of abortion, gay marriage (either way). Legalization? http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._paul_cory_booker_and_kirsten_gillibrand.html Immigration? http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...migration-the-11-million-are-never-going-home
As I understand it, his views on abortion and gay marriage are much like mine. Against abortion but would not make it illegal or put people in jail for having one. I think the Federal government has no business in marriage and Paul has said exactly that in his news letter. It will be interesting to see if he holds to these principles though the campaign. I would like to see the Republican candidate refuse to discuss abortion this go around.
The short answer is (I need to get back to work) they both lack conviction in the Constitution. Bush is for common Core, common standards in schools. The Constitution does not carve out a nitch for the Federal government in education and rightly so. Given the chance I would place my money on one of 50 state coming up with a better education system that a single highly political Federal government. Bush was also in favor of his brothers prescription drug plan. I find it a ridiculous thing, forcing people to buy some damn worthless insurance. My wife is a good case, She is force to buy this stuff, the prescription drug insurance. It is available at not too high of cost by it's self from Humana but she also needs Medicare supplement such as a Medicare Advantage plan. Well the law is written such that you can not buy the stand alone prescription plan and an Advantage plan. You must buy both in one package. This then results in an inferior Healthcare plan to the one available without the prescription drug coverage, Which I have. Her plan covers less than mine and cost way more, seven times more. This is a prime example of the government making you stand while the insurance industry uses maybe abuses a person. Then when it come to the facts of the matter her prescriptions cost the same at Wall Mart or Fred Meyer with or without the insurance. Mine also but I am not force to buy the damn drug plan because of my VA coverage. Thank god they don't force me to buy everything from the VA, my prescription are 2.5 times more from the VA pharmacy as Freddie's. I have not heard a word about from Bush how he would fix any of this Healthcare mess, nor from the Democrats. That really puts them in the same box in my mind. Christie has no problem controlling your guns or more taxes here and there. He has done nothing like Walker in his state just more taxes and a little less spending. I found it rather sickening to watch him kissing Obama's ass after Sandy rolled through his neighborhood, and it did nothing good. I know some people that live on the Jersey shore, lost their house and they really have turned against him. Non flattering words they use like phony sob.... but I shouldn't repeat because I have no first hand knowledge, but I do detect, something is not right.
That sounds about right to me. One state better, 49 states worse. They'd be poorly educated, but at least they'd have their "freedom". barfo
Common Core standards were developed by governors and state education officials and voluntarily adopted by states, and the curriculum is set by state and local school officials.
Sound great does it? In any case, a Candidate for President should move on to matters appropriately the turf of the President. However, I personal don't agree that all students show be held to the same universal standard even within one state. But that would be a State choice and should have nothing to do with a Presidential candidates view. If common Core is about minimum standards then it is uninteresting. I personally think a persons talents and individual characteristics should be maximized to exploit advantages, not muted into a standard. This should begin in High School. Screw the well rounding, maximize the individuals talent, we will all be better for it. The best project teams come by building the team from complementary talents to fill out the whole needed to create the team. All members need not even be competent in the strength of anyone member. But I admit, I am very biased on this subject having studied the psychology for years and taught the team building classes world wide.