Apostolic Friends Forum - GOP Candidates 2016

Apostolic Friends Forum (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)

- Political Talk (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=55)

- - GOP Candidates 2016 (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=48242)

GOP Candidates 2016

The newest ABC Poll has Trump on top with 24%. It should be noted, this poll was mostly conducted before Trump's statement against McCain, and the pollsters noted a significant drop the final day of the poll.

The ABC/WashPo Poll 7/16-19:
Trump - 24%
Walker - 13%
Bush - 12%
Huckabee - 8%
Rubio - 7%
Carson - 6%
Paul - 6%
Cruz - 4%

FoxNews Poll 7/13-15:
Trump - 18%
Walker - 15%
Bush - 14%
Paul - 8%
Rubio - 7%
Carson - 6%
Cruz - 4%

Monmouth University Poll 7/9-12:
Bush - 15%
Trump - 13%
Cruz - 9%
Huckabee - 7%
Walker - 7%
Carson - 6%
Paul - 6%
Rubio - 6%

PollingReport

RealClearPolitics Poll 7/9-19:
Trump - 18%
Bush - 13%
Walker - 10%
Rubio - 6%
Paul - 6%
Huckabee - 6%
Cruz - 6%

RCP Poll

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Thus far, if the debate threshold remains at a candidate having to poll at 10% and if these numbers hold, the debates will only have three candidates: Trump, Bush and Walker.

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

And the polling that got it wrong for Greece, Britain, Israel, etc.

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by n david (Post 1384347)

Thus far, if the debate threshold remains at a candidate having to poll at 10% and if these numbers hold, the debates will only have three candidates: Trump, Bush and Walker.

The polling will reflect who they want on the stage. Ted Cruz has raised more hard money than the other candidates. $14.3 to Jeb's $11.4. Ted will be on the stage.

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 1384348)

And the polling that got it wrong for Greece, Britain, Israel, etc.

I agree that polls get it wrong. A lot. IIRC, the polls had Romney winning in a landslide against obama.

The only problem is this will be the first year the polls will have a significant impact on the debates. Even if the polls are wrong, if the debates only allows those polling at 10% or more, Cruz, Paul and others are out. Hard to conduct a campaign, let alone win a race when your kept in the background and out of the debates.

I understand the GOP doesn't want another year like 2012, where there were 20 candidates on stage, but I don't like this.

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by n david (Post 1384350)

Fox News (capping out at 10 candidates) is determining the top 10 on the debate stage as those listed in the top 5 polls. All those listed in your polls are going to be the top 10.

It is worse than 2012. I see hardly any support for Jeb Bush, yet the polling has him on top.

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 1384353)

Oh, okay. I misunderstood. I thought it was those polling over 10%. This is better then, although 10 candidates are a lot to have on one stage.

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by n david (Post 1384355)

Oh, okay. I misunderstood. I thought it was those polling over 10%. This is better then, although 10 candidates are a lot to have on one stage.

Yes, it is a lot. It is quite a diverse group. The Dems have only white, rich people. Aren't they a gas after framing the narrative that the GOP is full of old, white racists? :heeheehee

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

BTW, John Kaisch is announcing today that he is in the race. That brings the total of GOP candidates who cannot win to 12. :heeheehee

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 1384357)

BTW, John Kaisch is announcing today that he is in the race. That brings the total of GOP candidates who cannot win to 12. :heeheehee

Worked with Clinton to ban assault weapons? That J. Kasich?

Hey I wonder what these others feel about assault rifles?

Hey PO what is Cruz's voting history on assault rifles?

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa (Post 1384389)

Worked with Clinton to ban assault weapons? That J. Kasich?

Hey I wonder what these others feel about assault rifles?

Hey PO what is Cruz's voting history on assault rifles?

I'm sure you don't really care one way or the other, but for the record, and for those reading the thread, Sen. Ted Cruz knows what the law states and he is very in favor of our 2A rights.

When the Democrats were trying to pass gun control, after Sandy Hook, Senator Ted Cruz corrected Sen. Dianne Feinstein, “Washington politicians shouldn’t be taking advantage of recent tragedy to try to push an aggressive gun control agenda. Real assault weapons—machine guns—are already functionally illegal, and they have been since 1934. This proposal would have done nothing to prevent the terrible murders in Newtown, but it would limit the constitutional liberties of law-abiding citizens.”

Quote:

Opposes unreasonable and burdensome gun restrictions
Ted Cruz has led the way in defense of our right to keep and bear arms.

Authored a brief on behalf of 31 states supporting the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms
Argued against unreasonable and burdensome gun restrictions
Honored by a 2008 resolution passed by the National Board of the NRA, thanking Ted for leading the States before the Supreme Court in the DC gun case, and noting that his "efforts made this victory for the American people possible."

Source: Campaign website, www.tedcruz.org, "Issues" , Jul 17, 2011

Voted NO on banning high-capacity magazines of over 10 bullets.
Congressional Summary:

The term 'large capacity ammunition feeding device' means a magazine or similar device that has an overall capacity of more than 10 rounds of ammunition
It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
Shall not apply to the possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed before 2013.
Shall not apply to qualified or retired law enforcement officers.

Oppose the United Nations' Arms Trade Treaty.
Cruz signed Letter to Pres. Obama from 50 Senators

Dear President Obama:

We write to express our concern and regret at your decision to sign the United Nations' Arms Trade Treaty. For the following reasons, we cannot give our advice and consent to this treaty:

The treaty violates a 2009 red line laid down by your own administration: "the rule of consensus decision-making." In April 2013, after the treaty failed to achieve consensus, it was adopted by majority vote in the UN General Assembly.
The treaty allows amendments by a 3/4 majority vote. When amended, it will become a source of political and legal pressure on the US to comply in practice with amendments it was unwilling to accept.
The treaty includes only a weak, non-binding reference to the lawful ownership and use of firearms, and recognizes none of these activities, much less individual self-defense, as fundamental individual rights. It encourages governments to collect the identities of individual end users of imported firearms at the national level, which would constitute the core of a national gun registry
The State Department has acknowledged that the treaty is "ambiguous." By becoming party to the treaty, the US would therefore be accepting commitments that are inherently unclear.
The criteria at the heart of the treaty are vague and easily politicized. They will steadily subject the US to the influence of internationally-defined norms, a process that would impinge on our national sovereignty.
The treaty criteria as established could hinder the US in fulfilling its strategic, legal, and moral commitments to provide arms to key allies such as Taiwan and Israel.

We urge you to notify the treaty depository that the US does not intend to ratify the Arms Trade Treaty, and is therefore not bound by its obligations. As members of the Senate, we pledge to oppose the ratification of this treaty, and we give notice that we do not regard the US as bound to uphold its object and purpose.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/...un_Control.htm

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 1384390)

I'm sure you don't really care one way or the other

Then I guess the better question would be, why do you think I asked you in the first place?

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa (Post 1384394)

Then I guess the better question would be, why do you think I asked you in the first place?

Probably because you wanted to know if Sen. Ted Cruz understood the truth of "assault weapons". And you hoped that I would not give you a sufficient, factual response so that you could do your little Harley drive-by insult. Did I get that right? :heeheehee

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 1384395)

I wouldn't insult you.

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

Debates? When was the last time we had a genuine presidential debate? An actual debate, I mean, not a series of one-offs and sound bite advertisements (pronounced the British way, ad-VER-tuz-munts)?

Re: GOP Candidates 2016

I think Walker is too far right of center for the average American voter.

I still have no idea who I will vote for.