Who Should Be the Republican Nominee?

administrator's picture
Submitted by administrator on Tue, 2015-04-07 23:16
Rand Paul
27% (6 votes)
Scott Walker
0% (0 votes)
Jeb Bush
5% (1 vote)
Ted Cruz
18% (4 votes)
Marco Rubio
5% (1 vote)
Ronald Reagan
9% (2 votes)
Other—please specify
9% (2 votes)
Donald Trump
27% (6 votes)
Total votes: 22

I just switched my vote ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... to Cruz. I just now saw Trump on Hannity capitulating to Planned Parenthood, on the grounds that the "good parts" of what they do deserve taxpayer support (contrary to his statement pre-debate that he'd shut down the govt if that's what it took to de-fund them). Obviously advisers and consultants, of whom he said he takes no notice, have got to him after the spat with Megyn about her period, that he has to redeem himself with women. Problem is, the creatures at Planned Parenthood are neither men nor women, they are monsters—and even if they weren't, what part of "conservatism" or libertarianism says they should get taxpayer money? And how exactly is he going to block Japanese- and Mexican-made cars? For all his bluster, alas, it's clear that Trump is no more principled than the rest of 'em. He's done a great service in lighting a fire under the Establishment, but his *anti*-Establishment credentials just evaporated. Cruz/Carly!! Or Cruz/Carson!! Or Carson/Carly!! Or any configuration of the above!!

The Republican ticket....

Olivia's picture

should be Trump & Cruz. A strong mix of aggression and philosophical principles on the table.... and with the Middle East boiling over tumultuously, that mix is sorely needed. If I were the leader of a foreign country, I would certainly think twice before fucking with Trump as Commander in Chief, to say nothing of the beastly lone-wolf beheaders and bombers becoming a daily feature in American life.

The other thing I LOVE about Trump is that he is as close to a secular conservative as that party is ever going to get. Paul, , Rubio, Walker, Carson et al go on and on about God to a point that is hard to respect. No highly intelligent/civilised mind can really swallow all that nonsense. I fully expect Trump to hat-tip in that direction from a loosely based Presbyterian rectitude, but he is probably a Deist at worst. If a man like that can truly end up unifying the Republican party into something powerful by giving domestic and foreign enemies the brunt of his disgust, he could be utterly phenomenal. He certainly has the guts and a lot to lose, which is important.

When I think about Reagan's speech back in the 80s; “We're at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it's been said if we lose that war, and in so doing lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening.”

Trump, with bluster and quirks galore (plus his chronic habit of repeating himself four times in one sentence), has answered that call because he knows he has more to lose than most men - and he desperately loves that country. His spirit is formidable as well as commendable.

I'm pissed off with his comments toward Geller, and this is where philosophically he will need a running mate like Cruz, but his concern was toward the hundreds of people who "could" have been harmed at that contest, but because of one competent cop (thanks to Geller), were not. That's understandable, because I think the man is fiercely protective by nature and he saw her provocation as irresponsible. I hope those two get to work together one day because ultimately they would be great allies toward the same cause. Protecting America.


Shane Pleasance's picture

members needed all round, it seems.


Lindsay Perigo's picture

Now that KASS is seemingly becoming, in airhead-speak, "cool" again, thanks to the Donald, we might perhaps see an "uptake" (more airhead-speak) in new participants. I'm not holding my breath, but spread the word anyway: Big Balls Are Back! Limp Dicks Are Rubbish! SOLO = Trumpectivism!

Recruit the Passionate Objectivists!

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

It's a shame that only 11 people have voted on this poll. Solo Passion needs more members!

Now I see ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... Trump has got all the cowardly PC wimps in headless chook mode again with his wholly accurate comments about the ghastly McCain, whose campaign against Obama in 2008 was equalled in insipidness only by Romney's in 2012. Only Cruz has refused to join the baying mob. Trump/Cruz for 2016!

Thank You

mfgreaves's picture

Mr. Perigo,

Thank you for adding Trump to your poll.
I was surprised and delighted to find that you had.
I just logged-in and voted for him, here.

The minions of the MSM can't seem to take him seriously.
I do; I just can't take them seriously...
Let's see if the American voter does, next year.

He sometimes seems a buffoon, but he is a genuine American.
Unlike the current president, who is American by law only.


Frank and Ballsy, But Seemingly Shallow

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Lindsay -- Honesty, courage, and integrity are great -- and Trump is surprising me with how much he may have of them -- but philosophy mostly rules the world. A weak-speaking Rand Paul or Ted Cruz may still be better for America because their philosophy is more solidly libertarian. Trump has superior common sense and horse sense, evidently, but his basic political philosophy seems pretty non-existent, weak, contradictory, and non-libertarian.

I agree

Tore's picture

Trump is the best choice, and he actually stands a chance, being as popular as ass in prison among the public, and getting tons of media attention already. Let us all hope that Trump trumps tr(i)umphantly.

Trump trumps the weasels and cowards!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

We just added Trump to the list, and I transferred my vote from Ronald to Donald. I'm impressed that he's sticking by his comments re trash from Mexico in the face of the PC hand-wringing-fest, the tut-tutting and boycotting that followed, including the disgraceful whining by Rubio that Trump's comments are "offensive" and "divisive." As soon as someone says something is "offensive" and "divisive" you know, these days, that means it's true, and the person doing the whining is contemptible. I used to think Rubio was one of the good guys, but it was noticeable after he announced his candidacy that he started sounding just like Romney, a despicable RINO, who also has come out against Trump. Ugh! Bravo Trump, and bravo Cruz for standing by him. A Trump/Cruz ticket? Interestingly, Trump has now moved to the head of the pack in the polls! Might there be a market for plain speaking after all, notwithstanding the gelatinous platitudes of marketing oleaginites?!

Might we co-opt the pair into OrgOism, to give it some backbone?

My one big reservation is that Trump attacked Pam Geller as something akin to "offensive" and "divisive" during the Mohammed cartoon competition episode.

the context of reality

Tore's picture

rp would be my first choice for president as well, if i had it my way. alas, i live in the real world, and have to view everything within the context of reality. and in that context, two things comes to mind. 1 - election is two years away, a long time from now. why ponder about this, and why now? 2. rp will not be gops candidate. he is popular among a niche (young intelligent males), and that is about it. ted cruz will not be the candidate, either. as zantonavitch very correctly observes, he's a religious nutcase.

bear in mind that i know next to nothing about the candidates at all. i heard a bit about them, and it made me not want to hear the rest. i have stopped caring about the politics of this world. for my own sanitys sake.

Always Stand With Rand

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Cautious, thoughtful, moderate Rand Paul seems best. Slightly overzealous, religious nutjob Ted Cruz seems next best.

reagan, of course

Tore's picture

I think the other candidates are scum. But what do i know? I am an idiot, in the arestotilian sense of the word. By choice, nontheless. Then again, if aristotle would be alive today, he would have reversed his definition of an idiot Smiling

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.