With more than 60,000 ballots cast, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) was the clear winner with 43% of the vote. U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) finished second with 18%. Here are the results:
- Sen. Ted Cruz (TX) - 42.67% (26,114)
- Sen. Rand Paul (KY) - 18.00% (11,018)
- Gov. Scott Walker (WI) - 10.05% (6,153)
- Other: (write-in candidates) - 6.85% (4,192)
- Fmr. Gov. Mike Huckabee (AR) - 6.15% (3,765)
- Gov. Rick Perry (TX) - 4.15% (2,540)
- Sen. Marco Rubio (FL) - 2.41% (1,478)
- Fmr. Gov. Jeb Bush (FL) - 2.18% (1,333)
- Gov. Chris Christie (NJ) - 1.83% (1,122)
- Rep. Paul Ryan (WI) - 1.64% (1,006)
- Gov. Bobby Jindal (LA) - 1.24% (760)
- Fmr. Sen. Rick Santorum (PA) - 1.02% (627)
- Gov. John Kasich (OH) - 0.65% (398)
- Gov. Mike Pence (IN) - 0.45% (273)
- Gov. Nikki Haley (SC) - 0.39% (240)
- Gov. Susana Martinez (NM) - 0.31% (187)
Whew!! What a lineup of right wing radicals. I wonder if the Koch Brothers will even want to waste their money on any of them.
ReplyDeleteIs this the RNC straw poll? I clicked on it but in order to see the results you have to give them your e-mail address so they can hit you up for donations, so I declined. With the super pacs in control, giving your money to any politician is like throwing it to the wind.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.gop.com/act/presidential-straw-poll
DeleteIt's a conservative straw poll of the radical right it means nothing William. Know why?. Because America is a centrist country. Sometimes we a right of center and sometimes we are left of center. But never do we go to the far right or that far left. Moderates William will carry the day. Christie Bush maybe Huckabee middle of the road guys with a chance to be a winner. Far right radicals are not going to make it. 15 candidates. I can't wait for next years clown show to start. William which one do you figure can beat Hilary? Answer: None of the above.
DeleteI thought it interesting that 60,000 conservatives who aren't afraid to give their email addresses gave 2% to Jeb and Christie. I guess the media darhlings don't have serious support after all.
DeleteSo ric last week we were extremists and this week we are a bunch of radicals.
DeleteLast year we were terrorists. So I guess we are gaining status.
1773-2009
Radical defined : favoring drastic political, economic, or social reforms: radical ideas; radical and anarchistic ideologues.
DeleteExtreme defined :
of a character or kind farthest removed from the ordinary or average: extreme measures.
utmost or exceedingly great in degree: extreme joy.
farthest from the center or middle;
farthest, utmost, or very far in any direction: an object at the extreme point of vision.
exceeding the bounds of moderation:
There you go Einstein Radical and Extreme are pretty much the same in the context of which I use them to define the Tea party folk. Never have I called the tea party terrorists. I think you made that one up.....again
Google Harry Reid, Tea Party terrorists Ricky.
DeleteReally William? 60,000 out of millions of voters. 60000 of the most conservative that there is. Oh I'm impressed.
ReplyDeleteIt's a poll. Most of the vaunted polls you refer to are taken from about 1,000 people. I've posted on this site many times that I believe the only poll that counts is the one on election day.
DeleteI stated above that's it was a conservative straw poll. I posted it to show where conservatives in the country are leaning. I posted it to show the headwinds that Christie and Jeb will face.
You've got so many bugs running around your brain ric that you can't see the forest from the trees.
I agree, the hundreds of polls should be taken with the proverbial grain of salt. Many, if not most, are designed to influence voters. The election day results are the only thing that matters.
DeleteMaybe William maybe but I do know that the correct statement is "Can't see the forest THROUGH the trees" so the bugs must be doing better then the wing nuts controlling your mind.
DeleteNow William your "straw poll" probably taken at the latest tea party clown down is not the leanings of the republican party but the leanings of the ultra conservative ,ah, Wing nuts. Give me the results of a real poll of the whole party and I will quit mocking you on this.
Ted Cruz is the last real hope. He's got the whole package. The libs from both parties will cry about him for decades and decades if the nation is lucky enough to get him in 2016.
ReplyDeleteAh, Ted Cruz lacks experience or is that only a consideration if you are democrat and oh yeah just happen to be black.
Delete
ReplyDeleteRick.
The colour question continues to occupy space in debates and the press. To an outsider this is passing strange as discrimination appears to be absent in legislation and Gov.Wallace and the divisions in the Deep South are now almost forgotten. Rosa Parks remains as a memory for some and the freedom busses have become part of folklore.
During an earlier period of my study of your history, I tried to get in contact with an Afro American who had the knowledge and understanding to teach me the “Black" perspective. I found plenty of white men eager to expound their views but those of the coloured people were not to be found.
Leaving aside political persuasions for the moment, I thought the election of the first Afro American president was a great step forward. It was disappointing in the extreme to hear the instant clamour from the group which became known as the “Birthers”. No matter what factual evidence was presented, the birthers refused to accept the facts. The dispute concerning the “long form” of the birth certificate went on for months and even today, I suspect there are some who dispute the eligibility of your president to hold office.
This entire preamble is leading to the obvious question, what will happen if Doctor Carson runs and secures the nomination? I have read some and listened some; the obvious conclusion, at least to me, is that this is a viable candidate to oppose Hilary Clinton. I am having a little trouble believing that the list in the article can be taken as a stick to wave at the Dems.Rather a limp reed at best and a paper tiger at worst perhaps.
Does anyone wish to talk about this possibility?
Cheers from Aussie
King, I couldn't care less where BO was born but two questions have to be asked. Why did it take so long for a questionable certificate to be produced, and why haven't Obama's Columbia and Harvard transcripts been made available?
DeleteAs far as 2016 it has become apparent that Hillary will wait until after the 2014 mid terms to make her decision. I think that if the Repubs show unusual strength the Hill may bow out. After all what type of historical figure would have been blown out of one nomination, and crushed in another general election. November will be the canary in the coal mine for the Hill's future.
King my first comment would be that Ben Carson lacks the experience to hold the office of president. I say this because he has never held any kind of public office. He also lacks name recognition for a national race. You or I could run around the country espousing our views on any number of topics, appealing to a group of voters. But because our views appeal to some does not make us ready to assume the office of the most powerful person in the world. It takes more then having the proper views to a certain constituency to run our country. Contrary to the beliefs of most that post here Obama did have more experience then just being a community organizer. That whole statement comes from the talking heads on conservative radio and TV. BO had served 7 years in the Illinois senate and 4 Years as a US Senator. And contrary to the popular beliefs of the right he did hold a real job two in fact , one as a lecturer at the U of Chicago law school, 12 years teaching Constitutional Law, and he Spent 3 years at the law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill, and Galland.
ReplyDeleteCarson gained notice when he gave a conservative talking points speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, a misnomer as it is a day of meetings and luncheons sponsored by the conservative Christian, Fellowship Foundation. Another of the endless conservative powwows that happen throughout the year. He again spoke at the conservative values voters summit late last year. What the right won't tell you is that Carson's total qualifications for office is that he is pro gun (with conditions), Anti-Obamacare, anti gay rights and anti evolution. Carson has never stated his ambition to be president. It is a concocted campaign by those on the right to enlist him to run. He has no public experience but has the absolutely correct talking points for the ultra conservative right tea party. But amazingly King the fact that he has absolutely no public office experience and no experience running anything except one department at Johns Hopkins Hospital. But since he walks the walk and talks the talk that can suddenly be overlooked by the political right. Much like Ted Cruz all the sudden after 6+ years of dogging Obama on the experience question it no longer matters to that part of our electorate. It's no all about what you say and believe not that fact that you might not have the experience to do the job.
As for Hilary King I don't think that she is waiting to see what happens in the 2014 election. The biggest group elected in this cycle is the members of the house of representatives, 80% of which represent gerrymandered protected seat regardless of party. House elections in our country due to the excessive politically gerrymandering by both parties of the states have become somewhat of a joke because so many seats have been protected by the system.
We will have an interesting race here in the congressional district next to mine, one that I used to live in until Gerrymandering moved it 50 miles away. Tea Party rep Renee Ellmers will be pitted against singer Clay Akin an openly gay democratic activist. Should be interesting as the are close in the polls right now.
Ric and William; my thanks for the response.
ReplyDelete(If I may, I shall address each separately). For William, could you please tell me why the questions you pose need to be answered? I may have missed something during that long debate as to eligibility but is there a legal requirement for the pres to disclose his College grades and to make public the "questionable" certificate/.
Presumably your process for selection of a candidate ensures that the candidate complies with the requirements of the Constitution which have remained unchanged since Washington. If we accept that the Electoral College (? the supreme authority,) accepted the candidate, what point is there in pursuing other avenues in order to disbar or diminish the Presidency. This is the question which I have found most troubling.
Now to Ric.Unfortunately Ric, I approach this from a purely neutral perspective, my question as to what would occur if Dr Carson was nominated was an apolitical one. I linked it to the racial question as a comparison to the reaction to the election of Pres Obama. I was asking what reaction there would be, obviously the Dems would have plenty to say, just as the Repubs have had lots to say concerning Obama... Your piece rebutting Carson’s chances is interesting but does fail to answer the question,
For you both” Judging from the performance of recent holders of the office, I wonder if a background in Political office is such a good prerequisites. Colin Powell seemed to do well as Sec State with no previous political experience and Madeline Albright did well under a Democrat President. I was also impressed by Connie Rice.
Cheers from Aussie
King, Obama stated when he ran that his administration would be the most transparent in history. It took years of badgering to obtain a birth facsimile, and we are yet to know his grades. College football coaches are held to a higher standard.
DeleteBenghazi? A year and a half under "investigation", no transparency.
Fast and furious? Years under "investigation," transparency?
IRS scandal? Everyone taking the 5th? Transparency?
Our AG? Being held in contempt of congress, for what you ask? Failure to turn over subpoenaed documents.
Ask Obama if he had knowledge of any relevant delinquency?
See no evil, Hear no evil, Speak no evil.
I suppose it will all come out when they unseal the boxes 50 years from now. Hey call me a cynic.
@ King except for the experience issue no democrat would have a problem with Carson as president based on his race. He would be dogged like every other president on his policies.
Delete@ William. Just because the truthful answers for the above questions don't agree with what you think they should be does not make the issues non transparent. According to Transparency International in 2013 the United States ranked in the top 10 in government transparency. Of course as usual William you and the teas missed the entire point. Bush (et al) Cheney held secret meetings on energy policy, ran programs off budget to reflect a lower deficit then was actually there etc. That has all been ended. Transparency doesn't mean that every government issue is going to fully discussed in public. You have had your hearings. They are over. You were told what happened just because it doesn't jive with what you and the repub talking heads want to hear doesn't mean that there hasn't been sufficient transparency.
ReplyDeleteCommentator George F. Will thinks the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS joins Watergate and Iran-Contra as one of the three most serious presidential scandals of the past 40 years.
DeleteThe difference, Will said last night on Fox News’s “Special Report,” is that Republican presidents were part of those two other major scandals “involving the distortion and abuse of institutions” – Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, respectively – and those scandals were “ravenously covered” by the mainstream news media.
The IRS scandal under President Obama, a Democrat, however, has been the subject of relatively little in-depth investigative reporting.
“This is not being pursued, and the president knows that,” Will said. “Hence his sense of weariness and boredom as he discussed this with Bill O’Reilly.”
In an interview with O’Reilly aired by Fox before the Super Bowl, Obama said there is “not even a smidgen of corruption” evident in the targeting of Tea Party and other conservative groups by the IRS – despite the ouster of a top IRS official who had pleaded the Fifth Amendment in refusing to testify before Congress.
“We’ve reached the point that it was just [what Obama called] ‘bone-headed decisions,’ which, amazingly, seemed to affect primarily the president’s critics,” Will said last night.
" In less than 48 hours, ABC, CBS and NBC deluged viewers with coverage of Chris Christie's traffic jam scandal, devoting a staggering 88 minutes to the story. In comparison, these same news outlets over the last six months have allowed a scant two minutes for the latest on Barack Obama's Internal Revenue Service scandal. The disparity in less than two days is 44-to-one. [See a chart below.]
DeleteFrom Wednesday through Friday morning, the latest on Christie's Traffic-Gate led 11 out of 13 news programs. NBC PRODUCED THE HEAVIEST COVERAGE, OVER 34 MINUTES. CBS followed close behind with more than 30 minutes. ABC came in third with just under 23 minutes.
Over the last six months, NBC FEATURED A MEAGER FIVE SECONDS on IRS targeting of Tea Party organizations. CBS allowed a minute and 41 seconds. ABC MANAGED A MERE 22 seconds."
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2014/01/10/deluge-44-times-more-network-coverage-christies-traffic-scandal-last#ixzz2yafDtnzP
ric, your comments are laughable.
Your sources as usual are heavily bias. What's wrong with your theory on Traffic gate is that the leader in coverage was CNN. It was as all things CNN a developing story for about two weeks. All the major news agencies are in NYC. Traffic gate was a local thing. Many people were affected even some of the reporters possibly. IRS Scandal affected a relative few individuals who didn't know how to do the paper work they needed to complete to acquire the tax privileges they sought. Frankly William no political action deal should be tax exempt. Just more conservative bullshit.
Delete