Handicapping the possible 2016 Republican candidate pool

Apparently it’s never too early to start thinking about 2016. The Washington Examiner reports the Republican National Committee is in the process of conducting a 2016 presidential straw poll that included 32 potential candidates. The poll, which asks users to select their top three picks, includes Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX), Rand Paul (R-KY), former Alaska Governor Sara Palin, and New Jersey Governor Chis Christie among others. On radio this morning, Glenn, Pat, and Stu handicapped the 2016 pool.

“Well, the Washington Examiner has done is story on the 32-person GOP field for 2016, and we’re just looking at it,” Glenn said. “I have a big pen here, so lots of ink to scratch people off… Let’s start at the beginning.”

The guys went through the list name-by-name selecting who they are willing to consider for 2016 based on a loose assessment of the individual’s record.

This video is exclusive to TheBlaze TV subscribers – click here to watch

Below is the list of potential candidates as per the RNC straw poll:

– Sen. Kelly Ayotte, of New Hampshire

– Haley Barbour, former Mississippi governor

– John Bolton, former ambassador to the United Nations

– Jeb Bush, former Florida governor

– Herman Cain, a radio host

– Ben Carson, author and neurosurgeon

– Chris Christie, New Jersey governor

– Sen. Ted Cruz, of Texas

– Mitch Daniels, former Indiana governor

– Newt Gingrich, former House speaker

– Nikki Haley, South Carolina governor

– Mike Huckabee, former Arkansas governor

– Bobby Jindal, Louisiana governor

– John Kasich, Ohio governor

– Rep. Peter King, of New York

– Susana Martinez, New Mexico governor

– Sarah Palin, former Alaska governor

– Sen. Rand Paul, of Kentucky

– Former Rep. Ron Paul, of Texas

– Tim Pawlenty, former Minnesota governor

– Mike Pence, Indiana governor

– Rick Perry, Texas governor

– Sen. Rob Portman, of Ohio

– Condoleezza Rice, former secretary of state

– Sen. Marco Rubio, of Florida

– Rep. Paul Ryan, of Wisconsin

– Brian Sandoval, Nevada governor

– Rick Santorum, former Pennsylvania senator

– Sen. Tim Scott, of South Carolina

– Sen. John Thune, of South Dakota

– Scott Walker, Wisconsin governor

– Former Rep. Allen West, of Florida

When all was said and done, Glenn, Pat, and Stu were left with 19 names they were willing to consider. One of the reasons so many names remained on the list is because they decided it was best to further research the people they did not know much about.

Glenn then asked the group to narrow down the field even further to the individuals they would be willing to go to bat for immediately. Needless to say, Sen. Cruz topped everyone’s list. Pat also included former congressman Allen West, while Stu really likes Sen. Paul and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal.

If the elections were to be held tomorrow, Glenn’s dream ticket would include Senators Cruz and Paul. And believes they could be a very formidable opponent to a Democratic candidate like Hillary Clinton.

“I think a Rand Paul/Ted Cruz or Ted Cruz/Rand Paul, whatever, ticket would excite the conservative base,” Glenn said. “I think Rand Paul appeals to the younger libertarian voters, and I think that’s where you are going to get all of your fuel. You will get your fuel this time from people who are just like, ‘I don’t want the system anymore,’ and Rand Paul can give you that. I think that’s worth its weight in gold right now. And Ted Cruz can give you the real true conservative. You put those two together and I think it is dynamic because there’s not going to be passion [on the other side]. Who’s passionate for Hillary Clinton, really?”

You can take the RNC straw poll HERE.

  • Anonymous

    “Who’s passionate for Hillary Clinton, really?” Don’t ask Mr. Bill.

    • Jenny Rodriguez

      He was never passionate for her either.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8FvmesaxXg Sam Fisher

    I like the idea of Rand Paul.

    • melissa

      My first pick is Rand.

  • Debbie Allison Schreiber

    I like three of them. In order of my preference. Cruz, paul and west.

    • Mary Bystrom

      My choices also except the other way around. :-)

      • Laura Thompson

        Paul Fond has the right order. Rand Paul/Ted Cruz with Allen West as Secretary of Defense, Ben Carson in charge of HHS. The entire cabinet could be filled with some of the other people. Nicki Haley is a strong leader and doesn’t take crap off of people.

  • The Blue Tail Gadfly

    How about NONE OF THE ABOVE?

    Talk about a game of musical chairs. Does anyone seriously think by re-electing any of those choices to different political offices it will change anything?

    And why does everyone keep allowing the media to pick the candidates for them?

    BTW, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Bobby Jindal are not natural born Citizens and therefore ineligible to be President.

    • Flight Learnings
      • The Blue Tail Gadfly
        • Anonymous

          Stop regurgitating your disinformation because you like the taste of YOUR kool-aid. And learn to spell.

        • http://rickbulow1974.freesmfhosting.com/ Rick Bulow

          http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/is-ted-cruz-a-natural-born-citizen/ – Is Ted Cruz a Natural Born Citizen?
          http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2013/03/cruz_haley_jindal_rubio_flight_2016_cleared_for_takeoff.html – Cruz, Haley, Jindal, Rubio: Flight 2016 Cleared for Takeoff

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Do you ever try to comprehend what you read or do you always grab the first thing that “supports” you misguided opinions?

            Out of curiosity, do you also support the Balanced Budget Amendment and a Article V Constitutional Convention?

        • Patrick

          Mario Apuzzo and Publius Huldah are birthers, consequently liars.

          The Congressional Research Service has put out the facts as to what constitutes a natural born citizen. Since they’re the body that makes the laws, they must know.


          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            There you go again…

            “There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their
            government, from their carelessness and negligence.

            I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too
            implicit a confidence in their public servants, and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men, and become the instruments of their own undoing.” ~Daniel Webster

          • Patrick

            Interesting statement by Webster. Has nothing to do with my post, but whatever.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Not my fault you are ignorant, stop taking it out on me.

      • Robin Lambert

        UM…. NO

        • Anonymous


    • Anonymous

      Gadfly you are an idiot. Cruz was born to an American mother and qualifies as “natural born”; Jindal was born in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and Rubio was born in Miami.

      • The Blue Tail Gadfly

        Do you always call other people idiots when you don’t know what you are talking about or am I special?

        Emer de Vattel, The Law of Nations CHAPTER XIX § 212:

        The citizens are the members of the civil society: bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see, whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

        • Anonymous

          That would be still true, if not for the fact that Obama got a pass on that issue.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            If it was true then, it is still true now. Just because one person is breaking the law and currently getting away with it, doesn’t mean the law no longer applies. That is lawlessness, aka anarchy

            It should be noted that all the politicians on the list are people who have been quiet about Obama’s ineligibility, including Glenn Beck himself. Except Beck goes even further by attacking the people who bring this fact up.


          • Jonathon Howton

            Title 8 USC, Section 1401 provides this nation’s definition of the “natural-born citizen”.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            No it doesn’t.

          • Jonathon Howton

            I guess “The following shall be nationals and citizens
            of the United States at birth” doesn’t work for you. Thanks for the laugh.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            If it wasn’t so serious, I would be laughing at your ignorance.

            Where in that section does it address the defintion of NATURAL BORN CITIZEN?

          • Jonathon Howton

            The first statement of the Section addresses the term quite clearly, but I suppose “The following shall be…citizens…at birth,” is simply not acceptable to you, as it does not use your preferred term in verbatim fashion.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Do you realize how completely ignorant your reply is?

            ” as it does not use your preferred term in verbatim fashion.”

            When writing laws and interpreting them, you don’t generalize and assume that a word means something else than what’s written. Unless of course you are one of those, “living breathing Constitution” people that thinks it should be interpreted with the times instead of original intent.

            I have shown what the definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ is and was at the ratification of the Constitution.

            All you can do is point to codes that don’t say what you claim they do and are irrelevant to what the Constitution says.

          • Jonathon Howton

            I’m not generalizing or assuming anything. This law is written in straightforward fashion, and went into effect in 2012. It’s not as if I’m “interpreting” a 200 year old version of our current language. I’ll give you a hint: it means exactly what it says, and what it says is that a person is considered a citizen of this nation, at birth, (a natural-born citizen) if they meet any of the requirements given by the law. Your interpretation is outdated by this legislation, and does not apply. The law is what it is, and it isn’t what you want it to be. Too bad. Suck it up, admit that you are wrong since you have no real proof otherwise, and be thankful that I actually took the time to find the right answer for you. Your hostile antics are not doing you any favors. I didn’t share this information as an attempt to “win an argument” or to belittle your intelligence, but to educate you and anyone else who cares to read it. If you find that offensive, then go sit quietly in the basement and cry about it. Your opinion or interpretation of an opinion or interpretation is not rendered into law and codified in the U.S. Code. Vattel didn’t write our Constitution, and while his opinions may have influenced the use of the phrase that you’re arguing about here, Swiss law is not American law, and you are trying to interpret a two to three year old American law with an outdated Swiss lens. However, based upon the rest of your posts here, you will simply assume that I’m ignorant, and carry on with your arrogant fantasy of being the smartest guy in the room who cannot possibly be wrong. I should have simply left this with “I guess ‘The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth’ doesn’t work for you.” Again, thanks for the laughs.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Your arguments are contraindicating and therefore self-defeating.

            Nothing what you say refutes the evidence I have presented in this thread. You are grabbing at straws trying to defend the absurd position you have taken. In order to rebuke me, you have to first write the truth, which it looks like you are incapable of.

            In order to have a rational debate, the two parties must be rational and honest, you clearly are not so I see no further need in continuing with you.

            Have a nice day Chuckles.

          • Jonathon Howton

            I would be more impressed if you could actually prove any of your assertions, but apparently this is the best that you are capable of. It’s nice to know that I have been rational and honest, though you are correct about the rational debate requiring the same of both parties. I will have a nice day, Gadfly. As would be fitting, may your life be short and your annoyance to the rest of us be fleeting.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            The more things change the more they stay the same…

            For if you kill me you will not easily find another like me, who, if I may use such a ludicrous figure of speech, am a sort of gadfly, given to the state by the god; and the state is like a great and noble steed who is slow moving because of his great size, and requires to be stirred into life. I am the gadfly that the god has given the state, and all day long I am always fastening upon you, stirring you up, persuading and reproaching you. [31a] And as you will not easily find another like me, I advise you to spare me. I suppose that you may feel irritated at being suddenly awakened when you are caught napping, and you may think that if you were to strike me dead, as Anytus advises, then you would sleep in peace for the remainder of your lives, unless God in his care of you sends you another gadfly. ~Socrates, Plato’s Apology

          • Patrick

            Jonathan, EXCELLENT response. And you’re absolutely correct. I would also point out that according to Supreme Court decisions, such as Minor v. Happersett and United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the term “natural born” does not come from Vattel (and no English translation of Vattel used the term “natural born” until 1797, ten years after the Constitution was written), but from English common law.

          • Anonymous

            How apropos that you are calling everyone who disagrees (and that would be EVERYONE HERE) with your absolute nonsense.. names now. And you tried to pretend that you were above such horrid behavior!!!

            You’re losing boy! And losing BADLY!!!

          • Anonymous

            Let me see… how did you word it??? Hang on, I’ll be right back…….. Ok here we go:

            “Your post speaks volumes about your intellect. But that is what I have come to expect from..” (YOU).

            Yeah; I stole that from some smarmy, narcissistic dumbass who left a ton of snarky, know-it-all horse shit posts here tonight.

          • Patrick

            Yes, it does.

          • Marcus Adams

            McCain was born in Panama, he qualified just fine, so I think the fact that Ted Cruz was born of a Us citizen mother, qualifies him as a ‘Natural born’ citizen. The ‘law’ you quoted is not US law, as it isn’t anywhere in the constitution, the constitution never defines Natural born citizen, the point of the law was to prevent from outside influence in our president, a congressional report which was done in 2011 defines it as someone born in the United States OR born of a US citizen. It is someone entitled to US citizenship ‘by birth’ or ‘at birth.’ By birth means born of at least one US parent, at birth means born in the United States, even of foreign parents.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            So you think?

            Sorry, not interested in opinions. The Constitution can only be changed by Amendment, not by legislative verbicide. Your argument falls flat.

            That congressional report you mentioned does not change the facts. In fact, that report has been rebuked.


          • Marcus Adams

            The constitution doesn’t define natural born citizen, he is suggesting that citizens at birth if born outside the united states aren’t natural born citizens, the constitution doesn’t define that. McCain was born in Panama! He shouldn’t have been eligible by your standards.

          • Robin Lambert

            The reason it was never defined, is because they all understood ‘Nation of Laws’ version of ‘Natural Born Citizen’.

          • Patrick

            LOL. It’s “The Law of Nations,” not “Nation of Laws.” And the framers of the Constitution appropriated terminology from English common law, not “The Law of Nations.” They were all British subjects prior to the Declaration of Independence, and used common law terms throughout the Constitution.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            I didn’t know the Constitution was a dictionary that defined every word used in it. Interesting.

          • Marcus Adams

            I find interesting that you haven’t explained about McCain’s eligibility since he was born in the Panama. Which seems to contradict what you argue.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            It seems to contradict my argument? you mean like Obama being President contradicts my argument?

            Do you always base your opinions on what the federal government and the two major political parties decide?

            “Nothing will ruin the country if the people themselves will undertake
            its safety; and nothing can save it if they leave that safety in any
            hands but their own.”
            ~Daniel Webster

          • Anonymous

            And what did that quote do for your stupid argument, now?????? My gawd, you’re twice as dumb as I’d thought!!!

          • Marcus Adams

            Again not addressing anything I said, ignoring the fact that McCain was born outside the United States, and what does Obama have anything to do with your argument?

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            What does Obama have to do with the argument of natural born Citizen? Are you kidding me?

            To ease your troubled mind, the reason McCain was declared a natural born Citizen is because he was born to two U.S. Citizens while his father, being in the Navy, was stationed in Panama.

            According to what was presented, McCain was born on that US Naval Base which is the jurisdiction of the United States of America. Some have contested that he actually wasn’t born on base but at a local hospital nearby which then brings into question his eligibility.

          • Guest

            Bull Poop

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Your post speaks volumes about your intellect. But that is what I have come to expect from Glenn Beck’s Goon Squad.

          • Anonymous

            Pot meet kettle. Nice argument, ya got there, moron. What’s the matter? The wheels came off your bus?? I thought you were just slapping another poster around for attacking someone’s character/ intellect… if they didn’t agree??? HAHAHA!! What a hypocritical ass you turned out to be!! And I happened to see it INSTANTLY!!

          • Michael Benedict

            Blue tail is a blue dog democrat troll. Go back to your cave

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Michael Benedict is using the fallacy of an ‘appeal to emotion’.

            He cannot win on the merits of the argument so he tries to paint me as a blue dog democrat troll so everyone will automatically agree with him based on emotion instead of reason.

            He doesn’t know my political ideology and if he did then he would know that wasn’t true. Yet, that doesn’t stop Michael from putting forth his lies.

            Very deceitful and appears to be more projection then anything else based on his previous post to me.

          • Guest

            More of your Bull Poop

          • Anonymous

            Oh really? You’re pulling that trick, heh? Your BS is all opinion as well, you friggin retard. You have mis-interpreted the Constitution, fercrissakes!!! And the CRAP you’re puking out of your blowhole is NOT TRUE, so let me see… that would m,ake it also.. wait for it now…. an OPINION!!!! GTFO with your smartass rubbish. I just rebuked your trash. And let me tell you; that link is a pile of garbage/ mumbo-jumbo/ idiocy by a guy who lacks the intellect to put forth a cohesive argument, let alone thought. You are obviously a dick head who like to hear yourself talk; who thinks he’s MUCH more intelligent than you actually are. You must be smarter than a pig pissing!! STFU and go sit down. I’m not interested in your false opinions, either.

          • Jonathon Howton

            ^More opinions and interpretations of opinions and interpretations…

          • chefz774

            And five years of ignoring or shredding the Constitution, lying, engaging in illegal behavior at every chance he’s had is OK with you? His gun grabbing, right denying, little dictatorship attitude, seizing more and more power for himself at the expense of ignoring the checks and balances, is because he’s AFRAID OF THE CITIZENS! He’s doing all these things because he knows the American people are going to revolt sooner or later, and if they have no guns or rights after he’s taken all those things, how will they be able to fight BO’s storm troopers when they kick in your front door. Anarchy is coming, because that’s the only thing left to us to overthrow this petty, incompetent, 2 bit dictator! WAKE UP AMERICA, our current situation is a nightmare, but we can and will wake up from the coma we’ve been in, hopefully before it’s too late.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Re: “And five years of ignoring or shredding the Constitution, lying, engaging in illegal behavior at every chance he’s had is OK with you?”

            You know, you really shouldn’t assume. If you would have bothered reading all the comments instead of having a knee-jerk liberal reaction, you would have seen I have called Obama out for being ineligible.

            Re: “Anarchy is coming, because that’s the only thing left to us to overthrow this petty, incompetent, 2 bit dictator!”

            You use the law to counteract the lawlessness, not become the lawless yourself. You are playing into Obama’s hand with that strategy.

            If there is something I am missing in your logic, please explain.

          • chefz774

            I’m not using the law to counteract the lawlessness, what I am trying to say is that IF BO continues to grab all the power for himself, and declares martial law and uses the military against the American people AFTER confiscating all the guns, much like the Germans did to the Jews in WWII, to keep them cowed and unable to defend themselves. I’m NOT saying BO is our Hitler, and I’m not saying that any of this has or will happen, I’m merely looking at a worst case scenario, but bit by bit, the progressives have been slowly and steadily doing there very best to make it happen. Like the frog and the pot of boiling water. The water is getting hotter, but I’m going to get out BEFORE it boils.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Re: “The water is getting hotter, but I’m going to get out BEFORE it boils.”

            How precisely do you plan on getting out?

          • Anonymous

            See? There you go again; being a complete asshole. Calling him names because he disagrees with you!! Calling a staunch conservative a liberal isn’t making you look as though you have an ounce of intellect… or an ounce of decency. Pick one. Or pick ’em both. And you argument had NO legs to stand on!! A query in a debate is not an admission of assumption!! See? You’re only wishing you were half as intellectual as you keep meaning to impress. LMAO at the little toad.

          • Michael Benedict

            Because the birther movement was trumped up by Hillary and has only worked against us to make us look like racists and conspiracy theorists. I don’t think people really care about what a persons place of birth was anymore as much as where and how they lived the majority of their life.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Hillary didn’t write the Constitution so it could hardly be trumped up by her.

            News Flash! it doesn’t matter what you say, the democrats will always cry “racist” and “conspiracy theorist”. I love how you allow the democrats to set the agenda and decide what laws will and will not be enforced based on being called names. Funny you cry about the democrats calling names, when that is what you and your like-minded friends on this thread have been doing.

            Anyways, lets move on.

            So if people decide they don’t really care for part of the Constitution, it’s okay to ignore it?

            Conservatism believe in a nation of Laws, not men. Unless of course the law is unconstitutional. It seems you don’t agree?

          • Patrick

            It was NEVER true in the United States. “Natural born” comes from English common law, not Vattel.

        • james

          What is the law of nations? The constitution says natural born citizen, or citizen at the time of the adoption of this constitution. A child of an illegal alien if born in US is a natural born citizen and if child is 35 years of age and been a resident of the US for 14 years then that child would be eligible to be President. The 14th amendment defines who are citizens.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly


          • Anonymous

            Brilliant comeback, Aristotle.

          • Robin Lambert

            No a Born Citizen is just that a Born Citizen.

            A ‘Natural Born Citizen’ Must be born of a Citizen ‘FATHER’.

          • Anonymous

            Not true.

          • Patrick

            Not true. The citizenship of the parent doesn’t matter to a child born in the U.S. Doesn’t matter what citizenship the father is. Outside the U.S., yes, it does matter. A child needs at least one citizen parent who has lived in the U.S. for a total of at least five years, at least two of which were occurred after the parent’s fourteenth birthday.

        • Mark Elsasser

          Since when does a Swiss philosopher’s international legal commentary take precedent over Common Law and settled American Case law?

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Since he defined the term and it is in the US Constitution.

            Settled Case Law? LOL

          • chefz774

            Since when did Obowtome EVER give a royal rats ass about what’s in the Constitution? Almost everything he does is ignored or he makes an end run around it regardless what it says.

          • Guest

            He did not define the term as it is used in the Constitution, as much as you would like to think so.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            How is that faux conservative site of yours doing, the “Conservative” Push?

            Aptly titled since you and your cohorts spend all your time trying to pushing conservatives out of the party. Kind of like Karl Rove’s Conservative Crossroads.

            I really wish Glenn would take responsibility for his hacks.

          • Anonymous

            Oh you poor little thing!! Do you need a tissue? MOMMY! They HATE me over there!! Yeah; it might be because I was a snot-nosed know-it-all over there as well, but dammit mommy!!! I AM smarter than every one, right??? I mean I am, right?? Right mommy? …. mommy???

          • Guest

            I have no such website. You are confused – no surprise. But that isn’t the issue is it. You are diverting.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            You sure like to act like you know something, but every time you open your trap, you stick your foot in your mouth.

            Have you ever heard of David Ramsay? I didn’t think so.

            Anyways, Ramsay was a historian among many other things during the time of our Country’s founding.

            “The citizenship of no man could be previous to the declaration of independence, and, as a natural right, belongs to none but those who than have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776….” A Dissertation on Manner of Acquiring Character Privileges of Citizen of U.S., by David Ramsay 1789

            A natural right that belongs to none but those born of CITIZENS. Note the pluralization.

          • Anonymous

            “You sure like to act like you know something, but every time you open your trap, you stick your foot in your mouth”

            HAHAHA!! OMFREAKIN’G!!!! You cannot make this shit up!!! As I said above; “pot meet kettle”, you effing retard who only wished you had a brain!!

            And HEY!! You asked him a question, but before he had a chance to answer, you ASSUMED what his answer would be!! Isn’t that a tad bit obnoxious/ hypocritical, and STUPID????

          • Patrick

            It’s plural, you ignoramus, because it refers to “those [plural] who have been born of citizens.”

            Would you see a sign inside a fitness facility that said, “Children whose parents are members may use the pool” and assume that both parents have to be members? No, it means that any child with a parent who is a member of the facility may use the pool.

            Would you see a sign in an airport that say, “Children must be accompanied by their parents at all times” and assume that both parents have to be present to accompany their child? No, “parents” is plural because “children” is plural.


          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            “When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” ~Socrates

            I accept your concession

          • Patrick

            Uh, slander is spoken. Libel is written. Since my words are written, they can’t be slander.

            And it’s also very convenient how you indulge in name-calling, but claim victory when it’s done to you. I don’t think so. It only makes you a hypocrite.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Sorry, the principle still applies.

            Anyone who is interested in the truth can read this thread and determine who started the name-calling.

            “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ~John Adams

          • Patrick

            No, it does not. You don’t get to call names, then sob profusely when it’s done to you.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Are you done with your nonsense?

          • Patrick

            Are you done with your crying?

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Last time I looked, you were the one have an emotional break-down.

            Anyways, I have better things to do then to entertain people that are incapable of a rational discussions due to whatever reasons.

            Have fun posting your misinformation and disinformation.

            “When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.” ~Jonathan Swift

          • Patrick

            You have a distorted perception of reality. Perhaps you are, shall we say, of the “better living through chemistry” set?

            I came and saw patent disinformation which would claim that a perfectly viable candidate isn’t eligible for the Presidency. And I noticed you were the biggest disseminator of these lies. And I posted accurate information for the sake of those who might be actually be misled by your lies. And I noticed you weren’t being exactly kind to your opponents, so I figured I would give to you what you’re giving to everyone else.

            How was I to know that you would have a tantrum? I just sought to communicate with you in your own language, so to speak. I don’t need to insult. I just thought you’d appreciate my efforts to speak in the manner you’re so obviously accustomed.

            But to spell it out for everyone else (since you apparently would rather eat broken glass than admit you’re wrong), “natural born,” like many terms found in the Constitution, comes to us from English common law. And when the Supreme Court needs to determine the framers’ intent over a term used in the Constitution, they resort to English common law to ascertain the intent.

            Makes sense. The framers’ did not have a comprehensive body of law waiting in the wings that would take effect under the Constitution. So, the individual states (except Louisiana) adopted what are known as reception statutes. Which simply meant that the common law of England was in effect, EXCEPT in those areas in which it conflicts with the Constitution or the laws of the states. And the courts have long since drawn on the common law of England in their decisions. A good example would be the Supreme Court decision Van Ness v. Packard, which cited decisions in English courts as far back as King Henry VII, and even further.

            For another example, when the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Cummings v. Missouri, it drew upon the common law of England to determine what was meant by the term “Bill of Attainder.” And having established the nuances of the terms, they ruled that the Missouri State Constitution’s required oath for public servants was indeed a bill of attainder, and ordered it struck down as a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

            Other terms that the Constitution derives from common law include ex-post facto law, high crimes and misdemeanors, militia. habeas corpus, and yes, “natural born.”

            It simply makes no sense to believe that the Founding Fathers intended the English common law definition of all these terms, but intended “natural born” (it’s earliest recorded use in Calvin’s Case in 1608, 150 years before Vattel’s The Law of Nations was written), they were going to rely upon Vattel. (No translation of Vattel’s “The Law of Nations” used the term “natural born citizen” until 1797, ten years AFTER the Constitution was written.

            Vattel, incidentally, was a monarchist. His greatest contribution to the Founding Fathers was probably to give them ideas as to what they wanted to STAY AWAY FROM.

            Vattel’s The Law of Nations, as a matter of fact, not only argued that a monarchy was the best form of government, but also advocated for a state religion. Vattel did not believe in freedom of speech or the press; The Law of Nations criminalized any speech which criticizes the government or the state religion. He believed that only nobility and the military should have the right to bear arms. He did not believe in private ownership of property and that the state owned all land. And that the King should be head of the church. All of this is in The Law of Nations.

            The idea that the Founding Fathers were so profoundly influenced by Vattel is laughable.

            The only thing he could have given the Founding Fathers is a comprehensive look at what a monarchy should be like so that the Founding Fathers would know what to avoid.

            You have obviously never read Vattel. The treatise is REPUGNANT to the ideals that this nation was founded on.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Re: “The idea that the Founding Fathers were so profoundly influenced by Vattel is laughable.”

            “I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition
            of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a
            rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations.
            Accordingly that copy, which I kept, (after depositing one in our own
            public library here, and sending the other to the College of
            Massachusetts Bay, as you directed,) has been continually in the hands
            of the members of our Congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with
            your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for
            their author” ~Benjamin Franklin

          • Patrick

            And I see that you ignored the many points I raised in which Vattel, shall we say, differed from the Constitution, starting with the fact that he plainly stated that a monarchy is the best form of government. He further believed that the King is head of the church and he did NOT believe in freedom of religion, but a national religion. He criminalized any speech that criticized the government, or the state religion. He also didn’t believe that the individual (other than the nobility, which is another concept that the Founding Fathers didn’t believe in) had no right to be armed. He didn’t believe in private property ownership, etc.

            Gee, sure sounds like Vattel had a profound influence on the Constitution. You should be arguing that the government should be abolished and replaced with a King.

            To say nothing of the fact that the Supreme Court decisions are RIFE with cases which drew upon common law to determine the intent of the framers behind the terms in the Constitution that they didn’t define.

            All of that doesn’t mean anything, does it? Because Benjamin Franklin sent a nice thank-you note to someone who sent him a present.

            I don’t need to debate you on this point; you do so profoundly well at defeating yourself.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            LOL. After thinking about it, the longer I keep you here, the less disinformation you can spread elsewhere.

            “Vattel believed this, Vatell believed that…”

            Good grief man, stop with the fallacies and quit insisting they prove your irrational conclusions. Naturally, the more you deny the truth, the more absurd your arguments become.

            Your revisionism is pretty clumsy too.

          • Patrick

            Unlike you, I’ve actually READ Vattel’s “The Law of Nations.”

            And there is no revisionism. That is a lie, plain and simple. You have no more argument (you didn’t even try to raise one), but instead turned the discussion into personal attacks. By your own standards, you conceded your own defeat.

            Or is that only when people insult you? But not when you insult others?

            And have no worries about occupying me here. Very soon, a website will be going live, which explains that Ted Cruz is eligible. And since I wrote it, the points I raised here will be there, as well.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Re: “And since I wrote it, the points I raised here will be there, as well.”

            So what are you saying, you won’t have a valid argument there either?

            Re: “Unlike you, I’ve actually READ Vattel’s “The Law of Nations.”

            Obviously you didn’t comprehend any of it, if you indeed read it.


            Please send me a link to this new website, I would love to read this article of yours where you think you refute the truth.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Oh Patrick?

            While your at it, why don’t you write an article about Ted Cruz supporting the Trojan Horse, “The Balanced Budget Amendment”.


          • Patrick

            What Cruz may or may not have voted for is irrelevant. The question is, “Is he a natural born citizen?” The answer is yes.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            What Cruz supports is not relevant?

            And the answer to your question is, “No, he is not a natural born Citizen”.

            His father was a Cuban and he was born in Canada.

          • Patrick

            And his mother was an American citizen. That makes him a natural born citizen, regardless of where he was born.

          • Guest

            Your accusations and assumptions are baseless – they just make you feel good. “You sure like to act like you know something, ….” LOL Too bad what you think you know isn’t so.

            So, now you resort to quoting Ramsay. You’re pathetic.

          • Patrick

            Nope. According to the Supreme Court, “natural born” comes to us from common law, not Vattel.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            The Supreme Court also says that ObamaCare and abortion is constitutional, and by your reasoning, you must also.

            “To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest
            as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad
            jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time
            and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all
            the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.” ~Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820.

        • Guest

          Oh, you are special alright HAHAHAAAHHA!

          • Anonymous

            Yep. He rode here on a really short bus.

        • Patrick

          The Founding Fathers did not rely upon Vattel for any definition of natural born citizen (which was not used in English translations of Vattel until ten years AFTER the Constitution was written).

          The term “natural born” comes from English common law, not Vattel. This is according to the Supreme Court ruling, United States v. Wong Kim Ark.

      • Jenny Rodriguez

        The point being, for a President, to be natural born is that BOTH your parents must have been born in America (rules not apply to current person in the White House).

        • james

          Jenny that is just not rue, neither parent have to be citizens, being born here grants you citizenship that is why so many pregnant illegal alien’s come here to give birth, child becomes a citizen at birth according to the 14 amendment. It might be time to change it.

        • http://rickbulow1974.freesmfhosting.com/ Rick Bulow

          False. 8 USC 1401 spells it out for you.

    • Crassus

      Who’s your choice, Gadfly? Let’s hear it since you see the need to interject birfer nonsense into this thread. Come on, get off the pot.

      • The Blue Tail Gadfly

        It’s January 2014, two years away from the Presidential election. Why would I choose anyone now?

        • Crassus

          You won’t answer even a simple question which says what you are made of. Go back to Info Wars. That’s where you really belong.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Sure I did, you just don’t like my answer.

            Not to bright are you?

          • Mrs.Orcutt

            I think you mean *too

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Hello Mrs. Orcutt (By the way, there is supposed to be a space between ‘Mrs.’ and ‘Orcutt’.)

            I’m glad that my post inspired you to create a Disqus account in order to post that correction.

            Have a nice night. 😉

          • Anonymous

            All you have is snark and assumptions – every time you fail!! And BTW, she can design her moniker any way she’d like as her title on a blog. This isn’t grammar 101. Welcome to the internet, retard.

          • chefz774

            Refusing to answer on the grounds you don’t want to, is NOT a legitimate answer Troll.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Since you’re an irrational person, I’ll ignore your pathetic name calling.

          • Anonymous

            That’s what we should do every time you do the same, then?

          • Anonymous

            It’s “too” bright, you effing idiot. wow.

        • chefz774

          You can change your mind at anytime up to the day of the vote. Answer this then: Who would you like to seek the office of the President? No voting required, just name somebody who inspires you. Simple…

      • David Raineri-Maldonado

        I would choose Rand Paul, as he is the most popular TRUE CONSERVATIVE, if Gadfly’s reasoning is true.

    • Jenny Rodriguez

      Natural born is a requirement? Oh, maybe just a requirement for the RNC.

      • The Blue Tail Gadfly

        Section 1 of Article II of the Constitution of the United States of America says:

        No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

        • Anonymous

          And NOTHING in that paragraph even suggested a hint of support for your idiotic argument. Unbelievable.

    • Mark Elsasser

      Ummm…..Bobby Jindal was born in Baton Rouge….Rubio was born in Miami and his parents were naturalized citizens…and Cruz was born to American citizens which IS the definition of Natural Born Citizen…to be born with needing to become naturalized…

      • The Blue Tail Gadfly

        Ummm, you might want to do your homework more carefully.

        Rubio and Jindal’s parents were not naturalized until after Marco and Bobby were born.

        Ted Cruz’s father was a Cuban and Ted was born in Canada.

    • Anonymous

      Why do you not know what you are talking about????? Why have you latched onto the false narrative about these guys – that they aren’t eligible?? EVERY FRICKEN ONE OF THEM is eligible, you moron!!!!

  • Lucas Forde

    No Jonh Kasich voted on ban assault rifles in the US Congress

  • Lucas Forde

    No Susana Martinez, I am a resident of New Mexico, and she was ready to cave on gun restrictions, if not sheriffs standing against her

  • Lucas Forde

    Mike Pence you may want to look where he stands on illegal imagration.

  • landofaahs

    Anyone who thinks they know who the finals are just kidding themselves. I only know that I will only vote for a Tea Party type. There is no more hold my nose and vote for a RINO piece of crap.

    • fire lion

      Hillary 2016 thanks you for voting for a birther in the RNC primary.

      • Babylonandon

        It would be better if we had Hitlerina. The tyranny imposed by that stupid beatch would finally force the revolution this country so desperately needs.

        • Thomas Davenport

          Why wait tough guy? Start shooting!

      • Anonymous

        OMFG, do you mean the hillary who initiated the birther movement???? HAHAHAHA!!! You can’t even make this stuff up!! You retarded liberals don’t even know who started the birther stuff!! Unfreakinbelievable!!! And BTW, you idiot; none of those tea party people have given two seconds of their time to talking about this issue. Wow. Just fricken WOW.

      • landofaahs

        Thank you for proving that atheists are almost always libtards.

      • Michael Benedict

        That’s very funny lion, do you know who started the birther movement? Oh, that’s right. Yes, Hillary. Thanks for playing, another uninformed democrat.

        • Patrick

          Hillary questioned Obama’s citizenship when he first started running. She then found that Obama was a natural born citizen, and dropped the issue. (Phil Berg pursued this on his own.) Just because she raised a valid question and got the answer she sought, and a bunch of lunatics decided to run with it, doesn’t mean she started the birther movement.

    • icemate@yahoo.com

      Another one here to. I wll not vote for GOP lifers. If the candidate is not conservative, I will not vote. Get Boehner out.

  • VL123

    so many RINOS on this list. Hell no.

    • Charles DeAx

      Exactly ! Good post. Gowdy , ghomert , Poe.

      • Anonymous

        Gowdy just broke my heart when voting for the giant spending bill.

        PEOPLE!!!! Please look at these people’s votes!!!!! (and I love he and his wonderful com padres for other reasons; namely going after the crooks in the obozo admin over fast and furious, benghazi, irs, nsa, or whatever).

  • Crassus

    No ticket that contains Rand Paul on it will ever get my vote. Sonny Boy is just like Pop but with a smoother presentation. Right now, my dream ticket would be Ted Cruz/Scott Walker or Scott Walker/Ted Cruz. I don’t care what the birfer who posted below says.

    • The Blue Tail Gadfly

      Re: ” I don’t care what the birfer who posted below says.”

      It’s not what I say. it’s what the Constitution says. So what you are really saying is, “I don’t care what the Constitution says.”

      Thanks, it’s been noted.

      • Crassus

        Did Alex Jones tell you to say that, Birfer?

        • The Blue Tail Gadfly

          Did Barack Obama tell you to attack me?

      • Anonymous

        Got a guilty conscience? You sure are a good little troll.

    • Jenny Rodriguez

      I like Rand, but a combo of Cruz/Walker would be great!

  • G.Santos19

    short list.., jeb bush,rand paul,scott walker,john kasich

  • Shar

    Ben Carson!

    • chefz774

      There is a grass roots group working to draft Ben Carson for president. If you are as excited as I am about getting the best man for the office the worst man to ever hold that position, go to runbenrun.org and sign the petition, volunteer, donate and much more. Don’t let the blue blood, RINO, punk-azz GOP serve up yet another mediocre, milque-toast candidate like Romney, Christie, Newt, Dole, and so many others who don’t have a chance to win an election for dog catcher, let alone the presidency. We need REAL, CHARISMATIC, QUALIFIED LEADER who can not only stand up to, but actually be able to beat the pantsuit off of Shrillary. My dream ticket? Carson/West 2016

      • Tim Rowland

        Sorry, Dr. Carson is well-spoken and has a grasp of our medical care and economic principles, but I don’t trust him on 2nd Amendment issues.

        He stated when asked in an interview that he doesn’t see the need for anyone to own a semi-automatic rifle that lives in a city. He doesn’t understand the 2nd Amendment if he thinks only country folk have a right (need) to own an AR-15 or similar.

        • chefz774

          He understands the 2nd Amendment, I think he’s simply stating his belief that you don’t need an AR15 or anything else in the city, because there aren’t a lot of deer, squirrels, etc., He has NEVER said you CAN’T HAVE ONE or that he’ll take them from legal, law abiding. responsible gun owners like most of the libs want to, just that he didn’t see the need. And if that’s the only reason you’re rejecting him, well, good luck finding someone better.

          • Tim Rowland

            “It depends on where you live. I think if you live in the midst of a lot of people, and I’m afraid that that semi-automatic weapon is going to fall into the hands of a crazy person, I would rather you not have it.” Dr. Ben Carson (Glenn Beck Show, March 1, 2013)

            I’m not voting for a person who thinks my Constitutional Rights depend on where I live in America. I don’t want a President that says “I would rather you not have it,” when it comes to guns. Further, if you think guns are only for deer & squirrels, YOU don’t get the 2nd Amendment either, and I don’t care what your opinion is.

            And lastly, I’d take Cruz, Paul, or Palin before Dr. Carson. I’d love to see Dr. Ben Carson in charge of HHS, where he can do some good.

          • Anonymous

            Your problem is that you don’t trust him. I despise that statement that he made, but unlike most politicians, no matter the party, he is a straight shooter – who answers the damn question when asked.. and was simply being honest about his FEELINGS/ OPINION. I’ll also bet you 10 grand that if you talk to every single one of these people who may be a candidate – in depth, that every one of them would have at least one opinion that you disagree with. Many if not most people who are intelligent enough to hold elective office are also smart enough to stuff a HUGE percentage of their own personal FEELINGS and OPINIONS in a freakin’ lock-box during the election process. I would bet you 10 grand that Ben Carson would NEVER make a law through executive order or even promote any of his party operatives/ underlings/ congress-critters/ czars… to initiate such a piece of legislation or to ever even be considered. I can read these people. The very first time I saw this bill clinton dude, and barack obama, and I could name a hundred of them… I knew they were dishonest snakes!! And I can tell you that Carson is unfreakinbelievably trustworthy toward our constitution and bill of rights. || And after saying all that, he’s not my guy!! He would be over 90% of those mentioned, but John Kasich, Scott Walker, Jim DeMint are actually experienced in politics, are EXTREMELY decent men of honesty and integrity, are thinkers/ innovators (see Kasich’s accomplishments in the Senate and then as governor, and Walker’s as governor..), and proponents of our founders ideals. These men could actually lead our nation like Reagan did. (and correct the damage done the last 15 or so years!!!)

        • Biff Spiff

          Dr. Carson is a smart, well-spoken guy, and I like him. But he has no executive or governmental experience, and President is not an entry level job, as the current occupant of the White House demonstrates daily.

  • Anonymous

    – John Bolton, former ambassador to the United Nations – Yes

    – Jeb Bush, former Florida governor – NO

    – Herman Cain, a radio host – No

    – Ben Carson, author and neurosurgeon – YES

    – Chris Christie, New Jersey governor – HECK NO

    – Sen. Ted Cruz, of Texas – YES

    – Mitch Daniels, former Indiana governor – No

    – Newt Gingrich, former House speaker – NO

    – Nikki Haley, South Carolina governor – Yes

    – Mike Huckabee, former Arkansas governor – Maybe

    – Bobby Jindal, Louisiana governor – Yes

    – John Kasich, Ohio governor – No

    – Rep. Peter King, of New York – NO

    – Susana Martinez, New Mexico governor – No

    – Sarah Palin, former Alaska governor – No

    – Sen. Rand Paul, of Kentucky – No

    – Former Rep. Ron Paul, of Texas – No

    – Tim Pawlenty, former Minnesota governor – No

    – Mike Pence, Indiana governor – Yes

    – Rick Perry, Texas governor – No

    – Sen. Rob Portman, of Ohio – NO

    – Condoleezza Rice, former secretary of state – No

    – Sen. Marco Rubio, of Florida – No

    – Rep. Paul Ryan, of Wisconsin – No

    – Brian Sandoval, Nevada governor – No

    – Rick Santorum, former Pennsylvania senator – Yes

    – Sen. Tim Scott, of South Carolina – Yes

    – Sen. John Thune, of South Dakota – Yes

    – Scott Walker, Wisconsin governor – Yes

    – Former Rep. Allen West, of Florida – YES

  • Jenny Rodriguez

    What difference does it make????? Any of them are better than Hillary! Seriously, there are some good prospects on that list such as West, Walker, Cruz, Paul, Huckabee, Santorum, Jindal. Surprised Lee didn’t make the list. The stronger the conservative the better!

  • herb chef

    Still looking for a Gary Johnson and judge Napolitano

    • Anonymous

      Apparently you haven’t watched Johnson speak before, let alone perform in debates. He’s a friggin’ fruitcake.

  • islesfan

    I think a Cruz-Martinez ticket would be amazing!With room for Ben Carson in the cabinet to fix the healthcare debacle.

  • Lisa

    Ugh, PUHLEASE no to Haley Barbour. As a Mississippian, I can say he is Pappy O’Daniel straight out of Oh, Brother Where Art Thou. He is entrenched in the establishment and is a big fat RINO. Is you is or is you ain’t my constituens???

  • Kim

    I’m thinking Ted Cruz/Ben Carson for 2016 would be wonderful!!

  • Della Crenshaw

    I like Cruz, Paul and West!

  • Myles Garcia

    Ted Cruz is an illegal immigrant. He wasn’t born in the US. He cannot qualify for a presidential or a veep run.

    • james

      cruz’s mother was a US citizen, that makes him a citizen.

      • The Blue Tail Gadfly

        But not a natural born Citizen.

        • http://rickbulow1974.freesmfhosting.com/ Rick Bulow

          Yes it DOES make him a natural born citizen. Read 8 USC 1401 and see where you are wrong.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            No it doesn’t make him a natural born citizen

          • http://rickbulow1974.freesmfhosting.com/ Rick Bulow

            YES it does.

            His mother is a citizen, Therefore he is a natural born citizen/

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Here is Rep. John Bingham, the framer of the 14th Amendment that all the deniers claim support their argument.

            I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen -Rep. John Bingham, framer of the 14th Amendment, before The US House of Representatives, March 9, 1866

            Parents is plural. Just like it is in Vattel’s definition and David Ramsay’s.

            Think about the term natural born citizen. When a person is born of two citizen parents, the child is NATURALLY a citizen, no question about it because it is self-explanatory.

            But when a child is born of a citizen and an alien, one has to resort to man made laws to determine his citizenship status, thus he is naturalized citizen, but not natural.

            “I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation. In that sense alone it is the legitimate Constitution… What a metamorphosis would be produced in the code of law if all its ancient phraseology were to be taken in the modern sense.” ~James Madison (Chief architect of the Constitution)

          • http://rickbulow1974.freesmfhosting.com/ Rick Bulow

            Again, you are in error. 8 USC 1401 tops that in which Cruz is a natural born citizen on the basis of his mother being a citizen of the United states,. I had done the ACTUAL RESEARCH and have debunked and disproven birthers like you. Just. Stop Lying.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Now I know you are being dishonest because you haven’t debunked anything.

          • http://rickbulow1974.freesmfhosting.com/ Rick Bulow

            I got your debunked right here

            http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title8/html/USCODE-2011-title8-chap12-subchapIII-partI-sec1401.htm – 8 USC 1401 (Nationals and citizens of United States at birth

            read it and weep. THIS is the law. Like it or not

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Sorry, that does not even address natural born citizen nor can it.

            Your avatar suggests that you are part of the press, who do you write for?

            Or is that just to give a false impression?



          • http://rickbulow1974.freesmfhosting.com/ Rick Bulow

            Sorry, the links you had posted to are from birthers who have been debunked by REPUTABLE people. Puzo has been disabused many times by the good people over at Cafe Con Leche Republican who had dealt with his bull so often that he is a glutton for punishment.

            And I write for the NEW MEDIA, something you have no idea about.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            And the links you have posted are by deniers who have been debunked by rational and logical people. I question your definition and application of the term “REPUTABLE”.

            NEW MEDIA? How do you consider it new when you keep repeating the same disinformation as the OLD MEDIA?

          • Myles Garcia

            Don’t KID YOURSELF. It does NOT. “Natural born” means born on U.S. soil. Cruz was NOT born on U.S. soil. It disqualifies him from being President of the US (as well being in the VP role). Ask any Immigration lawyer and you will get your correct answer.

          • Myles Garcia

            Don’t KID YOURSELF. It does NOT. “Natural born” means “born on U.S. soil.” Cruz was NOT born on U.S. soil. It disqualifies him from being President of the US (as well being in the VP role). Ask any Immigration lawyer and you will get your correct answer.

          • Myles Garcia

            Don’t KID YOURSELF. It does NOT. “Natural born” means born on U.S. soil. Cruz was NOT born on U.S. soil. It disqualifies him from being President of the US (as well being in the VP role). Ask any Immigration lawyer and you will get your correct answer.

        • Patrick

          There is no such thing as a citizen at birth who is not a natural born citizen. That’s what the term means.

          • The Blue Tail Gadfly

            Talk to the hand because I’m not interested in your deluded opinions.

          • Patrick

            And I’m not interested in letting people spew disinformation about the laws of our land. You might think Cruz is not presidential material, so don’t vote for him. However, he is eligible to assume the office should he be elected.

            You don’t get to redefine terms to disqualify someone just because you don’t like them. If you don’t like Cruz, then argue against his voting record. But don’t seek to lie to people and tell them that he’s not eligible. He is.

    • http://rodericke.com/ Anonymous

      if Obama is in anyway considered a U.S. Citizen, Cruz easily is.

      • jdgalt

        Remember who controls the media and courts. Obama can get away with it. No republican can.

    • jdgalt

      Not illegal. But an immigrant and ineligible, yes.

  • Rob Base

    PAUL/PALIN 2016

    • LadybugJ

      As much as I like Palin, her time has passed. She wouldn’t be able to bring in the support needed.

  • Katie Keeton

    WRONG….Cruz and West are the winning ticket…with probably West being the front runner!

    • Thomas Davenport

      On behalf of all democrats…please please please please run West, oh please please please….

  • Kerry J. Young

    Don’t count out Ohio Governor John Kasich.

  • yellowduckie

    Surprised to not see Saxsby Chambliss name on the list. He could make a great candidate.

  • james

    huckabee and west would be a great ticket

  • Anonymous

    Honestly. What is the choice? Hillary Clinton and the Marxist judges she would put on the SCOTUS. And make no mistake. If she’s elected President, she will be able to pack that court with at least 3 exactly like her. That is the greatest danger of a Clinton or any other Democrat Presidency. The total destruction of the US Constitution and our individual rights. They will declare all of them null and void. I’ll take any one of the people on that list. They won’t put 3 Ruth Bader Ginsbergs on the Court and that people is the real danger here not what you would call “RINO’s. SCOTUS appointees stay until they die. 20+ years we’d have to endure the tyranny of a Clinton/democrat Court. So you fools better think twice about your purist BS.

  • Paul Fong

    My ticket is Rand Paul/Ted Cruz with Allen West as Secretary of Defense, Ben Carson in charge of HHS.

    • Rebecca Tharp Cornwell

      Not sure I want to loose Cruz in Congress just yet. Hard decision there. I like Paul for sure for prez. Wish Palin could get a prime cabinet spot. Something that would really make a difference.

      • Laura Thompson

        Of course if Cruz was on the ticket we could get Louie Gohmert to take his place in the senate, but we have plenty of conservative guys and gals here in Texas who could fill Gohmert’s place in the House. But we have to rid of Cornyn too so we are digging deep into Texas’s conservative pool. Forget anyone from Austin. It has turned into California (that’s where they all moved to when fleeing the high taxes in their homes state).

        • Alan Hanley

          Cornyn is gone, his campaign budget just doesn’t know it yet.

      • Anonymous

        Palin for Interior Sec.

    • Bonnie Somer

      i could c this i like dr carson and allen west also Ted Cruz would be great w/rand paul way 2 go

    • Biff Spiff

      I’d love to see Paul on the ticket, but I’d rather have a governor for president. Maybe Walker or Pence. Hell, even Perry would be better than Her Royal Clintoness.

  • Brian Moon

    What floors me is that people feel a candidate has to be controversial in order to be a contender. Anyone ever consider Senator John Barrasso from Wyoming?

  • Anonymous

    Palin/Cruz or Palin/West.

    Paul and Cruz wouldn’t be in the Senate if not for Sarah Palin’s endorsement.

    Ted Cruz said he wouldn’t be in the Senate if not for Sarah endorsing him.

  • http://rodericke.com/ Anonymous

    I don’t think any politician realizes how close this country is to civil war. http://rodericke.com/teaching-americanism-americans

    • Anonymous

      EXCELLENCE. Thanks for the link. (That was excellence as well)

      • http://rodericke.com/ Anonymous

        Glad you enjoyed. What will shock people is that when the civil war breaks out, it won’t be the so-called “RWNJ” that starts it, it will be a faction of the liberals. Which faction is anyone’s guess but it will be the conservatives that will have to re-stabilize this country after “hope and change” and other empty slogans throw it into chaos.

  • Vickie Romine Schott


  • Thomas F. McDonald

    the president has already been picked, we will find out who in 2016 after about 20 billion dollars changes hands.

  • Thomas F. McDonald

    how come the winner is not on the list, Hillary Clinton, that was decided months ago

  • Charles DeAx

    Sorry folks . The list is made up of politicians. We have too many of them .
    Poe & Gohmert of Tx. Gowdy of S.C. No others need apply. These are hardnosed men who do not give a damn about party politics and will do what is needed when called for .The media , especially Fox, and the Republican party have already anointed Christie as the candidate .Not happenin’ for me.

  • Whick


  • Beth Stevens

    My top three picks are Allen West, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz

  • Realwriter24

    My eye went immediately to the list looking for Trey Gowdy. If he were to run, he has my vote. If he doesn’t, i sure hope he becomes our next AG ! I like Cruz, Carson, West, Mike Lee…….they are probably my top tier folks so far……

  • David Hendrix
  • Anonymous

    Jim DeMint

    • Anonymous

      Now THIS is a very intelligent post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Ernie Thompson

    We need someone with a record of fixing think. Not just talking about it.

  • David

    Ted Cruz, Allen West, Mike Lee, maybe Carson.

  • http://www.lisagraas.com Lisa Graas

    Rick Santorum or bust.

  • Robert Massa

    Ben Carson/Allen West has my VOTE!!!

  • steve crane

    Write in, Ben Netanyahu…”He is the only one with the grit,intelligence, and stamina to withstand the liberal left’s barrage of attacks.”

  • Josh

    Rand Paul, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz are my top three. Yes I did say Rand Paul twice.

  • valsthewoman

    @glennbeck As a constitutional conservative I want a resume,experience, insight, a plan, a proven government reformer @RickSantorum

  • Anonymous

    Ben Carson, Herman Cain, Ted Cruz are the top choices. No particular order preferred so far.

  • Matt Howell

    paul /west ..

  • patriotmom61

    There is no one more comprehensively qualified, experienced, prepared, and ready to serve this nation as President of the United States and Commander In Chief of the U.S. military than Rick Santorum. NO one. His impeccable character, depth and breadth of his knowledge and wisdom that only comes from actual experience and God-give ability to discern, scrutinize, and make decisions with logic, reasoning, and faith set him miles apart from the rest of the field. Everyone else on that list is just a book cover (a few maybe the table of contents) but Rick is the ENTIRE book. He is not a blank slate. He requires no on the job training. He is a man of firm resolve who does not need an advisory board directing his every move. He is THE conservative culture warrior of our time who can and will take on and take down ANY Democrat that runs in ’16. Any of them. Each and every Democrat runs solely on social and cultural change. This is a FACT. You only beat a Marxist culture warrior with a bold, authentic, passionate, and articulate conservative culture warrior. The GOP establishment has denied what this nation desperately needs at the critical juncture in the survival of our nation, of our American culture: an epic battle of worldviews in the spotlight of a national election for ALL to see and hear. We always have the “me too” candidate, a Dem-lite put up against their Marxist warrior. ENOUGH! Time for a true battle for the real heart and soul of America. Rick is the Democrat Party’s worst nightmare. They don’t want this, to be exposed and unraveled for all America to see. Only Rick Santorum can do this. He fires up the base, interests the moderates who observe from the sidelines, and draws in the blue collar Reagan Democrats with his traditional family values and robust manufacturing revival economic plan. See his new book “Blue Collar Conservatives” due out in April. It wil be a landslide. Game ON!

    • The Blue Tail Gadfly

      RIck Santorum, the King of K-Street?

      • Anonymous

        Wow. I agreed with you…… once.

    • Anonymous

      OMG, aren’t you a friigin uninformed MORON!!! He is the biggest dirt-bag on the list!! Well, except Gingrich!! He is a super LIAR!! A FAKE!! A PHONY!! He pretended to be a constitutional conservative; tea party hero just because it was cool. Look up his votes, you idiot!!! And like Michelle Bachmann, he isn’t bright enough to leave his religious over-zealousnous in the freakin’ closet during the election process! The hard left already chewed the crap out of Bachmann for this stupid mistake!! Where the hell have you been?? What rock do you need to crawl out from being under?? AND!!!!! He attacked the ONLY viable candidate (JUST LIKE GINGRICH) we had when it was OBVIOUS that Romney was going to be the nominee!!! This gave the democrats even more fuel, you fool!!! Apparently you like a creep who in total desperation grabs a hold of everyone he can when he’s going down in flames. Helluva patriot you’ve fallen for.

      • Crassus

        Another reason to despise Little Ricky–it was his comments on birth control and abortion that gave the Dems ammo in their charges that the Republicans were conducting a war on women. Santy gave that to them on a silver platter.

  • Leah Fisher

    Rick Santorum is definitely my favorite candidate choice by far! The kid’s amazing, and I just love him! He is an incredible man of God, defender of freedom, and servant to the American people.

    • ₩ASP

      Ya, nice red eagled halo and everything

  • John Harding

    I think that if the ‘shackles’ could be lined with moose fur or something along those lines that a Palin/West ticket could be interesting

    • Sylvia Wingard

      I think they will destroy her again. She would be an awesome Senator. or as Secretary of Energy or whatever that postion is.

  • linda barnett

    Haley barbour is out. Remember the radio spam from “americans for a conservative direction?” A fake group of progressives pushing for amnesty. Barbour was behind it. Glenn, I cannot believe you did not know this.

  • joey

    what about u Glenn u need to run for president. i will vote for u

  • patriotmom61

    What really scares me is that anymore all you have to do is give a good speech and show some spine and suddenly you, yes you, should run for president! American Idol Syndrome has infected the GOP and the TEA Party in their vetting process for 2016. Sorry but idyllic rhetoric and a bold streak are not qualities indicitive of presidential capabilities. We have a small business and we wouldn’t hire a foreman this way. Experience matters. Actual acomplishments matter. Here we finally have some new-on-the-scene GOP senators actually doing their jobs and everyone wants to whisk them out of the Senate into the distraction of a presidential campaign for a job they are not prepared and experienced enough to take on. How do we win and maintain a majority in the Senate if all these freshmen Senators run for president? Control of Congress rests in numbers folks. Sheer numbers determine the balance of power and with that the ability to override, reverse, stop, impeach, whatever it takes to turn things around. May conservatives and TEA Party patriots snap out of this perpetual swoon induced by patriotic speechifying and talk a thon contests. It’s embarrassing to see we have so many conservative versions of Chris Matthews on our side. Let’s stop with the rock star adulation and apply principle and political smarts and use a deep and thorough vetting process in our candidate selection. Mind you also that a crowded field of conservatives is Karl Rove’s dream. Vet early. Vet thoroughly. I did that last year and have no reason to change my mind whatsoever.

  • Michael Moss

    Rand Paul all the way. Kick the RINO’s out.

  • Anonymous

    Ben Carson if you don’t know him you should take the time to look him up.
    He is not one of the current office holders. He is not corrupt. We need to throw everyone currently in office now out. They are all part of the problem, they have not stopped the destruction of our country.

  • Sylvia Wingard

    Paul/Cruz Cruz/ Paul West- sec of Defence Ben Carson- HHS
    Sarah Paylin- Energy

  • Anonymous

    Paul/Carson or Carson/Paul

  • LicketySplit

    Id happlly support a Crus/Paul ticket..i prefer Cruz for potus because Rand has waffled a bit here and there..but still a good candidate. If the GOP wants to win and its against Hillary…Ben Carson would get over 50% of the Black vote and would win running away. I would absolutely love to see Bolton as Sec State..guy has his mind in ther right place. Haley Barbour is a whore…money the main motivator…Ryan blew it earlier this year and i see no woman on the ticket i would vote for!

  • Colin McCann

    I saw 6 people on this list I would be interested in. So many are non starters. Some of the supposed leaders I wouldn’t even consider like Christie !

  • Colin McCann

    Any statement against the nd2 amendment put that person at the bottom of the list.

  • Darren Douglas Walriven

    Smartest most sincere Senator Trey Gowdy, wheres he at on the list?

  • Billie Linder

    I love that ticket! Cruz/ Paul 2016!

  • Leah Fisher

    From my friend, Alexandra: “I believe you are wrong on the Cruz/Paul ticket, Glenn. The passion for Cruz is a flash in the pan and Rand Paul is uninspiring IMHO. More importantly, they are NEEDED in the Senate! There are many good mentions on your list, but only one who can win – ESP in a race with Hillary. (God forbid she survives Benghazi to win the nomination.) because he has bested her before with Hillarycare and his answer to “It Takes a Village.” Maybe God has him hidden for His perfect timing, because smart conservatives like yourself don’t see it, but Rick Santorum is the guy for 2016! I beg you to interview him You have had excellent interviews with him in the past – you KNOW him, Glenn. He’s the real deal. At least listen to some of his recent speeches because he has not pandered or waffled on a single position and he is sharper than ever on foreign affairs and economic policy.”

  • NanW

    Alan West & Rick Perry

  • Sylvia Wingard

    Paul/Cruz..Cruz/Paul . West -Sec of Defense, Carson- HHS. Sarah Palin- Energy

  • Anonymous

    I FREAKIN’ love Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Louie Gohmert, Dr. Ben Carson and I think(?)(not really positive about their votes on some things…) Kelly Ayotte, Nikki Haley, and the presidency is – unfortunately like most positions in this stupid country.. a beauty contest, and if I was gay.. I mean.. you have to admit john Thune is holy fricken’ moly… handsome like JFK… heh! And Thaddeus McCotter is a friggin’ mega-genius, dry-witted and quick as lightning and HILARIOUS, and plays rock guitar in his own band!!!! … BUT!!! >>>>>

    John Kasich, Scott Walker, Jim DeMint and Mike Pence.. are actually experienced in
    politics, are a bit older; seen as MUCH more like wise men/ father figures, patriarchs… and are EXTREMELY decent men of honesty and integrity, are
    thinkers/ innovators (see Kasich’s amazing accomplishments in the Senate and
    then as governor, and Walker’s as governor..), and staunch proponents of our
    founders ideals. These men could actually lead our nation like Reagan
    did (and correct the damage done the last generation plus!!!). AND!!! These wise men have not blathered like fools all over the place; making themselves the center of attention, and.. giving the left a whole bunch of fuel to attack them with. They would have VERY low negatives!! I could envision Kasich especially winning in a landslide, perhaps Walker as well. Maybe all four of them, but I haven’t heard the latter three speak as much in debates on issues or in interviews with nut-bag libs.

  • Anonymous

    Check out the early life of Dr. Ben Carson. Forget his color and look at what this God loving man he is and what he did with his life.We have not had a candidate since Reagen .

  • Matt Mayer

    Glenn Beck in 2016

  • Michael Benedict

    Cruz and Paul would be a dynamite ticket, but from what I hear they don’t like each other. A shame if that’s true.

    • Crassus

      Sonny Boy hates Ted Cruz because Cruz has stolen his press, his thunder, and his presidential votes (hopefully).

  • Michael Benedict

    Paul and Cruz yes, but please no Palin. I like her as a personality but she has time and time again shown she is not willing to spend the time doing the research. I wish she would because she fires up the base, but she has been her own worse enemy.

  • noelleonjones@gmail.com

    Kind, gentle, compassionate, quite, Naw, Naw Naw, even Jesus showed His pissoffedness [sic] to the point that we all know about it 2000 years later. Besides, we need some of the other half (made up of sycophants) to win. They don’t vote on substance as proved by what’s in the White House now, they vote with the best “got chas” and sound bites.

    Sure a strategy wins elections, but how long shall we fail by following the respectful decorum while the other side calls us anarchists, arsonists, racists…etc? Today’s society don’t vote for nice, etiquette, and gentlemanly. That’s what progressives don’t get. The aggressive progressiveness of bush and company is why his reputation is still in the wimp column. Also, the forfeiting of PR is why the GOP is still blamed for the economic crash. In the face of all the evidence, not one republican set the record straight yet.

    Not one video of Frank, Meeks, Water, Raines impugning themselves on a jumbotron, in the McCain or Romney campaign. You can’t buy that kind of effectiveness anywhere. And it’s freaking free!!!

    Showmanship strategy wins elections in an ignorant, non thinking society. Presidential debates filled with the best humiliation of an opponent wins elections. But, its the socialist/communist that needs to be humiliated to win. How much better if the sound bites and gotchas are blatant truth?
    Therefore, I must go with the person that’s not afraid to use the words. liar, marxist leninist, communist, tyranny, traitor, iran enabler, hater of allies,…etc. That man is Newt Gingrich.

  • Crassus

    Here’s my handicapping of those on the list:

    Ayotte-GMAFB. Will be lucky to win re-election.
    Barbour-Time has long passed.
    Bolton-Would like him to run but doubt he will.
    Bush-Like it or not, he’s the favorite if he decides to run.
    Cain-Only ran in 2012 to get a radio syndication deal.
    Carson-No chance.
    Christie-Media fave but will probably collapse early.
    Cruz-Would support him but he might decide to wait.
    Daniels-Waited too long. Personal baggage would hurt.
    Gingrich-Makes good copy but ought to stay out of the race. Time has passed.
    Haley-No chance but might be a contender for Veep.
    Huckabee-It would be 2008 redux. He’d only be a spoiler.
    Jindal-Could be a contender but can he hit big league pitching?
    Kasich-Doubtful. Could be a major Veep contender though.
    King-GMAFB. No chance in hell.
    Martinez-See Nikki Haley.
    Palin-Too busy being Sarah Palin, Inc. to run for elected office.
    Sonny Boy Paul-He’d be a contender but probably not enough strength to win.
    Rube Paul-Good frigging grief!
    Pawlenty-Had his chance in 2012. Blew it.
    Pence-Don’t know much about him. Definite longshot.
    Perry-Looks like he wants to give it another try. Cruz appears to have stolen much of his thunder in the Lone Star State.
    Portman-No chance whatsoever.
    Rice-Needs to stay in academia.
    Rubio-It all depends on Jeb Bush. If Jeb stays out he’s one of the favorites.
    Ryan-Keeps shooting himself in the foot with conservative base. Could have been a contender but now back in the pack.
    Sandoval-Who? Know nothing about him and it’s probably just as well.
    Santorum-See Mike Huckabee
    Scott-No chance but might get some Veep consideration.
    Thune-Small state conservative needs greater exposure. Probably not.
    Walker-Ought to be one of the favorites.
    West-No chance whatsoever.

  • The Man from Scene 24

    Paul/Carson would be an AWESOME ticket.

  • Jim Brewster

    I tend to believe a Governor makes a better candidate, though there are a few Senators I may support. But Newt ??? Really??? Leave that shipwreck on the rocks!!!

  • David Young

    I would take Ted Cruz for Pres. and Rand Paul for VP if I could have Allen West as Sec. of Defense, Ron Paul as Sec. of Treasury, Condoleezza Rice as Sec. of State, and Rush Limbaugh as Press Secretary.

  • Johnathan Read

    Why is Louie Gohmert not on the list ?

    I think he would make a great President.

  • ₩ASP

    At this point in time I say Mickey Mouse for president. With Foghorn Leghorn a close second. It just don’t effin matter. They all lie and make BS promises they can’t or won’t keep. The scum is too entrenched in D.C. for anything of substance to materialize no matter who is in office. Succession or bust. D.C. has become an all encompassing, runaway communist nightmare. I see no one on that list, with the exception of Sarah Palin, that would actually SHOOT, or have SHOT, communist POS ” elected representatives of the people” holding office in D.C.
    That would be my first question to any candidate. Who do you believe are communists bastards in congress? And if elected how many would you personally SHOOT IN THE FACE?!! Because I for one am done with effing BS !!!

    • ₩ASP

      Oh lets not forget Marvin the Martian at least he is trigger happy, the last great hope for the republic

  • Benjamin Dover

    Patriots and Citizens: Slice through the illusions conjured up by clowns like Bill Maher and Jon Stewart: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0094KY878

  • Anonymous

    Why vote? If the President is good and we still have what we have in Congress – we are still at the bottom of the out house.

    We have so many low information voters, people being given welfare, jobs and goodies to vote to maintain their plethora of goodies.

    We have kids in scnools with mamma’s having babies by who knows who to get more welfare money and they let inferior schools feed their kids and teach them nonsense!

    Where oh where is Sam Adams?

  • Anonymous

    Hey Glenn, you spelled Sarah Palin’s name wrong in the first paragraph of this article; I know, this is just a liberal attack, your not really responsible for what is on your website and me pointing this out is just a “web gotcha”, right? No, it is stupid people trying to like smart people. Hire a Democrat to do your proofreading from now on.

  • Anonymous

    I really think the Conservative wing of the Republican Party should run their own candidate because you know the RNC willl look for a compromise candidate with limited conservative credentials. This will give us a clear indication where the power lies in the Republican Party.

  • Anonymous

    Cruz-Paul — the Dems dream ticket — hope you guys do it! (But I am not worried that I will dissuade you 😉

The 411 From Glenn

Sign up for Glenn’s newsletter

In five minutes or less, keep track of the most important news of the day.