[US Election 2016] Republican Primary Megathread

[Zurkerx]

I wouldn't consider all of them clowns per say, there are a few serious ones but, most are clowns and won't go anywhere.

The ones that aren't Bozos still have some freak show ideas. Such as SSM ruling must be overturned by a constitutional amendment. Really?
Walker is on the record for that one, as well as clown Cruz.

Yeah, half of them at least have called for it though others want to move on to an extent I guess.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Well, I think it's safe to say that Hillary's won. No one in her own party seems to have a shot at beating her, and the Republican candidates are a joke. All the GOP is missing for their primary is Sarah Palin and Clint Eastwood.

Maybe Arnold too.

C'mon, we all know Trump is gonna sweep the elections.

[Castille de Italia]

Well, I think it's safe to say that Hillary's won. No one in her own party seems to have a shot at beating her.

This CNN report seems to contradict your assumptions.

[New Bierstaat]

Why is Trump in second what the hell is happening to our party?

That did scare me to say the least but, it will be short live. Trump speaking his own mind will be the reason he won't go far. A better question to ask is whether or not the party will change (IE go with Paul or the bat looney Trump), choose another established candidate (IE Bush), or go with social conservative (IE Santorum).

I do not see them doing well if they pick the latter, especially with the recent SCOTUS ruling.

Each candidate gets a bounce after announcing. People will come back to the Big Three (Jeb, Walker, Rubio) after a while.

Even if Trump manages to win New Hampshire, he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell in taking Iowa or South Carolina. All he can really do by winning New Hampshire is deny the nomination to Bush, and without winning one of the other early states (Walker is a prohibitive favorite in Iowa, and Bush and Rubio as well as native son Lindsey Graham will dominate South Carolina), he won't have a prayer for the nomination. There is nothing he can do to earn my vote (except perhaps buy it).

Which is good, because to a general electorate, he'll be a meaner, richer, non-religious, more self-righteous Mitt Romney, and now, you can add "racist" to the list.

[The Nuclear Fist]

So what's been the GOP's reaction to the SSM ruling?

[New Bierstaat]

So what's been the GOP's reaction to the SSM ruling?

Pretty poor. Two candidates (Rubio and Bush) were eviscerated by the far right for accepting the ruling while the rest called for constitutional amendments or said nothing at all.

[Zurkerx]

So what's been the GOP's reaction to the SSM ruling?

Pretty poor. Two candidates (Rubio and Bush) were eviscerated by the far right for accepting the ruling while the rest called for constitutional amendments or said nothing at all.

It wasn't poor: it was horrific and terrible. Rand Paul was the only one that didn't say anything, which I think he doesn't want to focus on the issue at all. Kasich said the same thing as Bush and Rubio. Just like S.E. Cupp has said to the GOP, "You’re going to be a relic. You’re going to be left behind if you don’t come to terms with the fact that this is our future."

[Laerod]

Well, I think it's safe to say that Hillary's won. No one in her own party seems to have a shot at beating her.

This CNN report seems to contradict your assumptions.

Not really. Consider that that's only New Hampshire and candidates can lead in primaries only to end up not taking the ticket. See Santorum vs. Romney, for example.

[Marylandonia]

This CNN report seems to contradict your assumptions.

Not really. Consider that that's only New Hampshire and candidates can lead in primaries only to end up not taking the ticket. See Santorum vs. Romney, for example.

The following is the last paragraph in the CNN piece:
Republican Support:
The CNN/WMUR New Hampshire Primary Poll was conducted by telephone by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center from June 18-24 among 1,010 adult residents of New Hampshire. Of those, 360 said they plan to vote in the Democratic presidential primary. Results among likely Democratic primary voters have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5.2 percentage points.

So 36% of the Republicans in this poll say they will skip the Republican Primary and crossover to the Democratic side and vote. Hmmm? Is this to slow down Hillary's momentum? It might explain some of the positive numbers for Bernie versus polling around the rest of the country where Hillary has a huge margin. I think so.

[Ashmoria]

Not really. Consider that that's only New Hampshire and candidates can lead in primaries only to end up not taking the ticket. See Santorum vs. Romney, for example.

The following is the last paragraph in the CNN piece:
Republican Support:
The CNN/WMUR New Hampshire Primary Poll was conducted by telephone by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center from June 18-24 among 1,010 adult residents of New Hampshire. Of those, 360 said they plan to vote in the Democratic presidential primary. Results among likely Democratic primary voters have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5.2 percentage points.

So 36% of the Republicans in this poll say they will skip the Republican Primary and crossover to the Democratic side and vote. Hmmm? Is this to slow down Hillary's momentum? It might explain some of the positive numbers for Bernie versus polling around the rest of the country where Hillary has a huge margin. I think so.

where do you get that they are republicans?

polls are meaningless at this point. important for both campaigns to keep an eye on but it is far too early to make a prediction based on them.

[The Black Forrest]

Not really. Consider that that's only New Hampshire and candidates can lead in primaries only to end up not taking the ticket. See Santorum vs. Romney, for example.

The following is the last paragraph in the CNN piece:
Republican Support:
The CNN/WMUR New Hampshire Primary Poll was conducted by telephone by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center from June 18-24 among 1,010 adult residents of New Hampshire. Of those, 360 said they plan to vote in the Democratic presidential primary. Results among likely Democratic primary voters have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5.2 percentage points.

So 36% of the Republicans in this poll say they will skip the Republican Primary and crossover to the Democratic side and vote. Hmmm? Is this to slow down Hillary's momentum? It might explain some of the positive numbers for Bernie versus polling around the rest of the country where Hillary has a huge margin. I think so.

Polls are rather meaningless this far out.

However, my cousin switch to democrat. He was a lifelong republican. He said he was looking for ideas for answers to the countries problems. Homosexuality isn't a problem for this country and that's all the Republicans seem to offer......

[Castille de Italia]

The following is the last paragraph in the CNN piece:
Republican Support:
The CNN/WMUR New Hampshire Primary Poll was conducted by telephone by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center from June 18-24 among 1,010 adult residents of New Hampshire. Of those, 360 said they plan to vote in the Democratic presidential primary. Results among likely Democratic primary voters have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5.2 percentage points.

So 36% of the Republicans in this poll say they will skip the Republican Primary and crossover to the Democratic side and vote. Hmmm? Is this to slow down Hillary's momentum? It might explain some of the positive numbers for Bernie versus polling around the rest of the country where Hillary has a huge margin. I think so.

Homosexuality isn't a problem for this country and that's all the Republicans seem to offer......

Not really. The GOP hasn't stressed their anti-gay marriage views until the Presidential elections come around, or up until the past few SCOTUS rulings. It's a relatively minor issue until it gets put in the spotlight. It'd be a damn good assumption that the GOP thinks Obamacare is more of an abomination then same-sex marriage.

[The Black Forrest]

Homosexuality isn't a problem for this country and that's all the Republicans seem to offer......

Not really. The GOP hasn't stressed their anti-gay marriage views until the Presidential elections come around, or up until the past few SCOTUS rulings. It's a relatively minor issue until it gets put in the spotlight. It'd be a damn good assumption that the GOP thinks Obamacare is more of an abomination then same-sex marriage.

Oh I know. That was his views.

It's amusing watching them trying to skirt the issue of gay marriage and yet sound like they are against it for the wackado legions they courted these past years.

Even Obamacare is failing them. They really don't have anything to offer.

[Oil exporting People]

So while doing some research with regards to voting trends, I find this very interesting tidbit from Cook Political Report:

In 2012, Obama carried the Philadelphia area by 63 percent, while Romney won the rest of the state by 55 percent. If Romney had gotten just 45 percent of the vote in Philadelphia--and still carried the rest of the state by 55 percent--he would have won the state. In other words, if a Republican could lose Philadelphia by the same percentage they win the rest of the state, they could turn the state red.

The Romney campaign spent $8.9M on broadcast TV in Nevada during the general election to get 46 percent of the vote. In Pennsylvania, the Romney campaign spent a paltry $2.4M and got 47 percent. In other words, Team Romney spent four times as much in Nevada as they did in Pennsylvania, to get essentially the same percentage of the vote. Now, imagine that the money invested in Pennsylvania came earlier--and more intensely.

So really, depending on the candidate that we Republicans nominate, the Keystone state is an entirely possible pickup if approached wisely.

[Wolfmanne]

I support Dwight Eisenhower.

But he's dead, you tell me. I'd rather have his gravestone than whoever else the Republican Party pick.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

So while doing some research with regards to voting trends, I find this very interesting tidbit from Cook Political Report:

In 2012, Obama carried the Philadelphia area by 63 percent, while Romney won the rest of the state by 55 percent. If Romney had gotten just 45 percent of the vote in Philadelphia--and still carried the rest of the state by 55 percent--he would have won the state. In other words, if a Republican could lose Philadelphia by the same percentage they win the rest of the state, they could turn the state red.

The Romney campaign spent $8.9M on broadcast TV in Nevada during the general election to get 46 percent of the vote. In Pennsylvania, the Romney campaign spent a paltry $2.4M and got 47 percent. In other words, Team Romney spent four times as much in Nevada as they did in Pennsylvania, to get essentially the same percentage of the vote. Now, imagine that the money invested in Pennsylvania came earlier--and more intensely.

So really, depending on the candidate that we Republicans nominate, the Keystone state is an entirely possible pickup if approached wisely.

A lot of this is to do with the electoral college though. When you have more Republican voters in New York getting 0 votes, compared to fewer Republican voters in Alaska, it starts to make no sense.

[Geilinor]

Well, I think it's safe to say that Hillary's won. No one in her own party seems to have a shot at beating her.

This CNN report seems to contradict your assumptions.

Biden polled third? The chances of him running are very low.

[Oil exporting People]

Well, I think it's safe to say that Hillary's won.

Not really, she's already peaked quite obviously as the polls show. Marco Rubio, for example, is leading her in places like Pennsylvania while other states like Michigan or Ohio seem him trailing by 2-3%. That means, if the margin of error is taken into account, its possibly neck and neck in several key states already. Several other GOP candidates are showing roughly similar performances, with Rand Paul being the first to come to mind.

[The Black Forrest]

Well, I think it's safe to say that Hillary's won.

Not really, she's already peaked quite obviously as the polls show. Marco Rubio, for example, is leading her in places like Pennsylvania while other states like Michigan or Ohio seem him trailing by 2-3%. That means, if the margin of error is taken into account, its possibly neck and neck in several key states already. Several other GOP candidates are showing roughly similar performances, with Rand Paul being the first to come to mind.

Oh really now. Rubio is a moron. Anyway. Where did you get your polling data?

I never pay attention to polls until it's close to voting time.....

[Diopolis]

Well, I think it's safe to say that Hillary's won.

Not really, she's already peaked quite obviously as the polls show. Marco Rubio, for example, is leading her in places like Pennsylvania while other states like Michigan or Ohio seem him trailing by 2-3%. That means, if the margin of error is taken into account, its possibly neck and neck in several key states already. Several other GOP candidates are showing roughly similar performances, with Rand Paul being the first to come to mind.

To be honest, the GOP could nominate someone who can win, or they can nominate another Romney. It all comes down to the primaries; I expect both parties will have exceptionally bloody ones.

[Oil exporting People]

To be honest, the GOP could nominate someone who can win, or they can nominate another Romney.

Which is something I really fear, especially when you look at the polls. The establishment is clearly pushing Jeb, when all the polls show people like Rubio or Paul are much more likely to win than Bush III. I'm really hoping we can get through the primaries peacefully, preferably with a Rubio/Kasich ticket. I really like Santorum, but the aforementioned ticket will lock in a close race at the least if not certain victory.

[Oil exporting People]

Oh really now. Rubio is a moron. Anyway. Where did you get your polling data?

Detroit News, Quinnipiac, and Public Policy Polling.

[Diopolis]

To be honest, the GOP could nominate someone who can win, or they can nominate another Romney.

Which is something I really fear, especially when you look at the polls. The establishment is clearly pushing Jeb, when all the polls show people like Rubio or Paul are much more likely to win than Bush III. I'm really hoping we can get through the primaries peacefully, preferably with a Rubio/Kasich ticket. I really like Santorum, but the aforementioned ticket will lock in a close race at the least if not certain victory.

If I vote in the republican primary, it'll be for either Rubio(for the person I want to win) or Huckabee(for my statement on where I want the party to move).
Really, the republicans should nominate either Walker or Rubio. Smart money's on Rubio, because he won't alienate the rust belt quite as much.

[The Black Forrest]

Not really, she's already peaked quite obviously as the polls show. Marco Rubio, for example, is leading her in places like Pennsylvania while other states like Michigan or Ohio seem him trailing by 2-3%. That means, if the margin of error is taken into account, its possibly neck and neck in several key states already. Several other GOP candidates are showing roughly similar performances, with Rand Paul being the first to come to mind.

To be honest, the GOP could nominate someone who can win, or they can nominate another Romney. It all comes down to the primaries; I expect both parties will have exceptionally bloody ones.

Another Romney? Seriously? About the only Romney who would be interesting would be his old man.

Platitudes and regurgitated ideas can only work for so long.

This batch is void of ideas for problem solving.

[Oil exporting People]

If I vote in the republican primary, it'll be for either Rubio(for the person I want to win) or Huckabee(for my statement on where I want the party to move). Really, the republicans should nominate either Walker or Rubio. Smart money's on Rubio, because he won't alienate the rust belt quite as much.

That's more or less exactly how I feel on the matter. My heart wants Huckabee or Santorum, but my brain knows it needs to be Rubio, Walker, or Paul to actually win this. I'm an extreme oddity for my age group (I was either born at the tail end of the Millennial generation or at the very start of Generation Z) in that I'm a staunch social conservative.