Image 01 Image 03

Pre-CPAC Reader Poll — Favorite Republican Candidates?

Pre-CPAC Reader Poll — Favorite Republican Candidates?

Let’s try to thin the herd.


In my column yesterday at The Daily Caller, I asked: Will CPAC Thin Or Expand The Republican Presidential Herd?

I gave a quick take on those I perceive as real, likely candidates, and how a CPAC appearance could help/hurt them: Jeb Bush, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, Scott Walker, Rand Paul, and Carly Fiorina.

Here’s my take on Bobby Jindal:

Bobby Jindal needs to show he’s not just a policy wonk, and can excite people. He may be auditioning for VP, whether he knows it or not.

Head over to the link for my take on the other candidates.

And now, for the first Legal Insurrection Reader Poll on Republican Presidential Candidates: Who is your favorite?

You can pick UP TO THREE (3) CANDIDATES  so we get a sense of how the field spreads out.

Poll open until Sunday Night, February 22, at midnight Pacific Time.


[Note: The post was changed after publication]


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Look who’s running last, lol.

It will be interesting to see not just the headline results, but also the individual preference groups (e.g. do Huckabee voters also like Perry and Walker).

As a libertarian, I picked Walker and Paul.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to wcvarones. | February 20, 2015 at 11:36 am

    Honest question from a fellow Walker supporter: Do you find much company among libertarians in supporting Walker? I hope you’re not an outlier.

      I haven’t talked to other libertarians about it but think he should have appeal as long as he focuses on economic issues and doesn’t get social-con preachy.

      Speaking not for doctrinaire “libertarians” but for the libertarianish mainstream masses of independents, Republicans, and open-minded Democrats, it’s OK to BE a social conservative as long as you’re not always getting up in people’s faces about it. Be a Reagan, not a Santorum or Huckabee.

      Walker seems to know this and has a good chance of reaching fiscally-conservative independents.

        weenchit in reply to wcvarones. | February 20, 2015 at 12:52 pm

        That might be true for the primary but in the general election, Walker will be destroyed by the media as an uneducated fundamentalist creationist and it will sink his campaign. I like him but I don’t think he will survive that.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to weenchit. | February 20, 2015 at 1:15 pm

          That’s how they’ll treat the GOP nominee no matter who it is.

          We need a candidate who’s smart enough not to fall into the media’s traps. Scott Walker has a lot of experience going head-to-head with the Left and their media enablers, and so far he’s come out in front.

          gasper in reply to weenchit. | February 20, 2015 at 5:22 pm

          “They” have tried to destroy him in three elections and have failed. He has been tested and tried – viciously – and surviced. He will not wilt or waver like the others.

        Henry Hawkins in reply to wcvarones. | February 20, 2015 at 2:08 pm

        I think Walker is smart enough to stick with what brought him to this point – fiscal conservatism. I’ve been following him since reading his positions statement for his first run for governor and I’ve never heard him say anything remotely Huckabee/Santorum-ish or preachy at all.

        Thanks for replying. I’d hoped Walker would appeal to libertarians.

    Ragspierre in reply to wcvarones. | February 20, 2015 at 12:52 pm

    Rand disqualified himself this cycle with his Pander Bare Tour respecting Ferguson and Sharpton. Also his triangulation positionssssss.

    I wanna like him, but he won’t let me.

Why no Chris Christie? Not that I would have picked him.

Henry Hawkins | February 20, 2015 at 11:21 am
Look who’s running last, lol.

Jeb is surely the crafty one… he is going with the NASCAR strategy… falling so far behind the rest of the pack that it confuses people into thinking he is the leader when the rest of the field is about to lap him.

William A. Jacobson | February 20, 2015 at 12:20 pm


I voted for Cruz and Walker. No one else I would vote for in that list. I may like some of them, but not as prez.

Did not vote due to Dennis Lynch not being on the list and he is my first choice. Please add him to the list. Thank you.

Carly’s doing pretty well considering her name has just surfaced. California shot itself in the foot by not electing her instead of the execrable Barbara Boxer.

    MikeInCA in reply to JoAnne. | February 20, 2015 at 1:48 pm

    Carly has more votes than Jeb and Christie combined. Hehehe!!

    And no wonder the MSM keeps pushing Jeb: conservatives won’t vote for him — he’s the Dems’ dream candidate for the other side.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to MikeInCA. | February 20, 2015 at 2:48 pm

      Not to mention Jeb told conservatives to take a hike, he didn’t want or need our support. Well… okay then!

        This. I actually like Jeb, and wouldn’t mind having him as president, but if he disdains my support then why should he have it? (I’ve been tentatively supporting and promoting Walker for the last three years, but I haven’t signed a contract with him, and Jeb could have wooed me away; but if he won’t bother then forget him. If he gets the nomination I’ll vote for him, but until then he doesn’t exist for me.)

Insufficiently Sensitive | February 20, 2015 at 12:40 pm

Ted Cruz is a superb Constitutionalist, but his skills of organization and governance are not much better than Senator Obama’s were. He’s way premature.

    He needs to stay in the Senate and become a star there, eventually majority leader, and help President Walker get their joint agenda through. Then move on to the Supreme Court when there’s a vacancy.

You missed the dark horse professor. Nigel Farage.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | February 20, 2015 at 1:33 pm

All I know is that whoever I choose will not be nominated. I’ve been disappointed every cycle since ’88, when even a blind monkey could see that Kemp was the natural ideological successor needed to further advance the Reagan Revolution. It’s been all downhill ever since.

Ask Estragon or Capt Keough who they voted for in the poll and that’s your likely nominee.

The most important characteristic of the GOP nominee is capacity to serve as commander in chief. Obama has failed in every aspect of the job, but the commander-in-chief function is the most pressing.

Since all the Paul votes will end up going to Walker, he’s the prohibitive favorite.

These results are much more inline with what I am seeing than what the TV / media polls are telling us. I believe that Walker is at or near the top, not Bush, Christie and Huckabee . Not scientific I know, but more to what I see right now. I hope the new RNC rules allow for a people’s choice instead of the media driven “huge war chest candidates” they are pushing because they want a chunk of that money spent during media buys.

Chris Christie and Rick Santorum tied for last at the moment, followed by Mike Huckabee and Jeb Bush. The two most ardent social cons are out; as are the two most blatant RINOs. Interesting results!

IMHO Governor Perry is the most qualified. He served in the United States Air Force and has a clear understanding of foreign policy as well as domestic policy.

The reality is that the wolves are at our door, and the door has been left open and unguarded for at least 30 years. For motives of which I cannot be certain, our “leaders” have decided preservation of America for Americans isn’t acceptable, and we Americans, are being offered up as sacrifices to foreign nationals from dozens of other countries. Our lives, our culture, our taxes, all are on the alter.

When evaluating candidates, I ask if that person not only rejects American suicide, but recognizes blood is being lost. Is he able to stand firm as a rock against the crashing waves of political correctness and media mendacity? Is he willing to name the cause of the blood loss?

Scott Walker is a good governor, but he seems unaware America is dying. His comments on amnesty have been utterly dissatisfying.

I don’t believe Rand Paul really believes in a border. I don’t think the acorn fell far from the tree in his case.

Jeb Bush married a Mexican and is forever in thrall to the idea of Mexicans as wonderful. His ardor is an insufficient reason to dismantle America.

Hillary Clinton: She failed the 3 a.m. call she told us might come. Ambassador Stevens is unable to vote for her, and I find that compelling.

Ben Carson is an outstanding American, and I’m wonderfully proud he IS an American. But I don’t think he has the political background to put it all together to run.

Rick Santorum was my candidate in 2012. He got a bad rap out of Iowa, winning but not receiving credit for it at the beginning, when he needed that to pick up momentum. He also had the very unfortunate experience Newt Gingrich had, that Romney decided to carpet bomb him with negative ads. I was really astonished that Romney took that tack.

Anyone who doesn’t support Santorum because he’s a “social conservative” gives the lamestream media a heckler’s veto: it’s people like Stephanopoulos that ask those questions and focus on them with Santorum. He was talking jobs, and the media wanted to talk contraceptives. You have to be smarter than the people trying to play you. Santorum has legislative experience and was one of the sponsors of the welfare reform that Clinton vetoed 3 times in the 90s. He gets results. He also understands – which I am beginning to believe some here don’t – that the family is the fundamental building block of our society, and it has been shredded and needs support and restoration.

Ted Cruz can stand firm while all around him are losing their heads. Does he recognize America is bleeding to death? I’m unsure.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Karen Sacandy. | February 20, 2015 at 11:43 pm

    Santorum is a Big Government social conservative. That’s frightening.

      “Frightening.” I don’t find Rick Santorum nearly as frightening as I do the mosque builders in Minnesota, who are using their police to intimidate Christians at their festivals.

      I don’t find a man who championed reducing welfare benefits a “big government” type. Romney gave us Obamacare. Santorum was opposed to it. So, who is really the big government type?

      As far as being a “social conservative,” what is “frightening” about that? He doesn’t want unborn children to die by vivisection? Is that frightening? I find it far more frightening – far more devastating – that under the auspices of the sexual revolution, we’ve hung women out to dry. Sure, have sexual relations with men, without commitment, and when you become pregnant and the man is disinterested in forming a family with you, either abort, or run to Uncle Sam. Our culture has a moral obligation which we’ve abdicated, to our young, to explain to them how the world really works, and to guide and protect them. The alternative is fractured families, babies vivisected, big government, a low birth rate, and the substitution of Americans by imported foreigners by our leaders.

      I find all these results frightening. What are you afraid of ?

        “I find all these results frightening. What are you afraid of ?”

        Frankly, people like you who believe it is OK for the government to tell us what to do as long as they agree with you. Your social morals may be a good way for us to lead our lives, when freely chosen. When forced upon us they are no different than the lefts version.

        I find that frightening. Individual liberty is what this country was based upon and prospered under.

        Fiftycaltx in reply to Karen Sacandy. | February 23, 2015 at 2:47 pm

        If Santorum were running for pope, I wouldn’t care. But the “anti-abortion” single issue is a LOSER! You want to “ban” abortion, go for it. The correct way to do it is with a constitutional amendment. But you can’t get that since the American people DON’T WANT IT! But various religious superstitious cults can’t let it go. And the cult leaders use it to keep raising money and living the high life. But keep it out of elected office.

Oh – and Rick Perry. Rick Perry said Americans who didn’t want to give amnesty were heartless.

He’s unworthy of responsibility for the fate of the truly greatest nation ever to exist in the history of mankind. Did Texas have job growth? Undoubtedly. But he believes it’s acceptable to risk the traits, the characteristics, that make America what she is, in order to humor foreigners. You don’t take the last best hope of mankind, and ruin it, to score a few votes.

    Fiftycaltx in reply to Karen Sacandy. | February 23, 2015 at 2:53 pm

    And that is a BALD FACED LIE! Perry never said any such thing. He SUPPORTS DEPORTATION! Do all biblethumpers lie? Just like a democrat.

      Karen Sacandy in reply to Fiftycaltx. | February 24, 2015 at 9:37 pm

      Is there tape of the first debate he was in?

      Perhaps I’ll go looking and provide it for you…. :^)))

      Karen Sacandy in reply to Fiftycaltx. | February 24, 2015 at 9:50 pm

      I can’t believe anyone called me a biblethumper. I was an atheist, and have converted to agnosticism. Just because I believe vivisection of living human babies is barbarism, doesn’t mean I’m religious.

      Regardless, here is an article from The Hill about Perry’s comments:

      By Joshua Altman – 09/23/11 02:04 AM EDT
      Texas Gov. Rick Perry continued his attack on former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in Thursday night’s Republican presidential debate, and this time the battleground was immigration policy.

      Perry, a border-state governor, defended his decision to pass a state-based DREAM Act in Texas, which allowed children in the country illegally to pay in-state tuition rates.

      “If you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they have been brought there by no fault of their own, I don’t think you have a heart,” Perry said.

      Earlier in the debate Romney said “it makes no sense” to give students in the country illegally a discount on state-funded education.

And I forgot another: Dennis Michael Lynch.

He falls into the same category as Ben Carson: he’d be very good, but I don’t think he has the ability to pull off a nationwide campaign.

But he fully understands America is bleeding to death, and he advocates deporting illegal aliens.

I will probably support him.

I also want to say, the most vicious wolf at the door is unquestionably islamic. They get a small foothold, and they are militant, and unyielding and dangerous.

We absolutely need a leader who will unhesitatingly declare that islamic practices will not be accepted in the United States for any reason in any venue. NO WHERE. No public foot washes, no alteration of dress codes for ragheads, and no mosques.

Dennis Lynch will say it.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Karen Sacandy. | February 20, 2015 at 11:47 pm

    Lynch can say it all day long. The one person on that list most likely to blow raghead s#!t out of the water is Rick Perry.

    We need a cowboy, not a talker.

      In the debates for 2012, almost the first thing out of Perry’s mouth was that Americans that wanted illegal aliens deported are heartless.

      That’s a cowboy unwilling to use his lasso.

How do you vote?

Checking back in I’m happy to see Cruz still in the lead with Walker right behind. My favorite pair…

My concern about Rick Perry is that he seems to be similar to GW in that he does not understand the nature of the threat this country is facing.

At this point, with very limited knowledge, I lean toward Cruz and Walker.

How is Sarah Palin not on the list?

Several are disqualified from ever receiving my vote because they support illegal immigration. Three are disqualified because they are not natural-born citizens.

Good that you allowed multiple votes. Very appropriate for this stage of the game.