I like this Cruz fella.

[RickN]

Straight from Wikipedia:



His voting record (because... you know... that's what should make up our opinions on his politics... which is his job...):
http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/135705/ted-cruz#.UYLXSjkrqfg

Better record then Rand Paul.

 

[p238shooter]

Lets keep an eye on him. He is talking the talk and seems to be trying to walk the walk. Better than some we have lieing the talk and expecting us to bending over at the walk. I do not agree with all my wife does, but she is still my wife. May be he can get along while making his walk work.

 

[RickN]

Lets keep an eye on him. He is talking the talk and seems to be trying to walk the walk. Better than some we have lieing the talk and expecting us to bending over at the walk. I do not agree with all my wife does, but she is still my wife. May be he can get along while making his walk work.

That is all you can do, and never expect to agree with them on all points. If you do you will never find someone you can support.

 

[Walrus]

Lets keep an eye on him. He is talking the talk and seems to be trying to walk the walk. Better than some we have lieing the talk and expecting us to bending over at the walk. I do not agree with all my wife does, but she is still my wife. May be he can get along while making his walk work.

It could be worse. you could be Mary Matalin's husband. That's always been a weird match that wasn't even worth the time it'd take to figure it out.

 

[rebel-son]

He is a damn good man with class, faith, and character. Sadly that is something most politicians on both sides are missing.

I like him and Rand Paul. The problem with Paul is that for awhile he was buying into this amnesty stuff not realizing that republicans wont get more votes out of it. It will just mean 11 million more votes for liberals who hand out the free stuff.

 

[ez bake]

Better record then Rand Paul.

Every discussion about the Pauls brings RickN out to bash and historically, every time you're asked to post any substantial proof as to why they suck, you post what they'll probably do (or that they're politicians) all the while you were sacrificing on the alter of Romney during the last election.

I'm not sure if logic really applies in the Twi-Rick Zone.

 

[RickN]

Every discussion about the Pauls brings RickN out to bash and historically, every time you're asked to post any substantial proof as to why they suck, you post what they'll probably do (or that they're politicians) all the while you were sacrificing on the alter of Romney during the last election.

I'm not sure if logic really applies in the Twi-Rick Zone.

Compare their voting records yourself. Identical except for one vote where Paul caved to the establishment after twice voting against the nominee. And as I said many times, Romney was not my first choice but he was better then the other candidates and defiantly better then wasting my vote on someone who had no chance EVER of winning because he only has the support of a small group and will never have more then that.

 

[TedKennedy]

Lesser of two evils - you still end up voting for evil.

 

[dutchwrangler]

Lesser of two evils - you still end up voting for evil.

Exactly.

"Suffrage is equally powerless and unreliable. It can be exercised only periodically; and the tyranny must at least be borne until the time for suffrage comes. Besides, when the suffrage is exercised, it gives no guaranty for the repeal of existing laws that are oppressive, and no security against the enactment of new ones that are equally so. The second body of legislators are liable and likely to be just as tyrannical as the first."~ Lysander Spooner, Trial by Jury

 

[ez bake]

Compare their voting records yourself. Identical except for one vote where Paul caved to the establishment after twice voting against the nominee. And as I said many times, Romney was not my first choice but he was better then the other candidates and defiantly better then wasting my vote on someone who had no chance EVER of winning because he only has the support of a small group and will never have more then that.

So the fact that their voting records are identical is bad or compared to other Republicans?

The ironic thing is that you don't show up in threads to bash other Republicans, just the ones with seemingly better voting records...