Lindsey Graham Mulling White House Run

[willwash]

Romney and McCain won't run again. Once you win the primary, that's your shot. That's why you never saw Bob Dole or John Kerry again either.

 

[CaptUSA]

I think I know what he is up to here....


If he runs hard then drops out after losing IA/NH but just before the SC primary, he can give all of his weight to Jeb thus helping Jeb win SC and blocking Rand from taking it. That's my guess.

A HA! And then his warmongering lesbo girlfriend Hillary will be guaranteed the White House and Lindsey can sleep on the floor of the Lincoln bedroom!

 

[Mr.NoSmile]

my loss is more for the electorate.

Exactly. In the end, we lose and this list just further paints the GOP as already out-of-touch morons that are just crawling on top of one another to talk about how much they're just opposite the President without offering anything substantive in response.

 

[jmdrake]

While libertarians fight amongst themselves over having a single candidate, the neoconservatives love to stack the deck and fill the stage.

^This. That said I hope this moron runs. I'd love to see Rand wipe the floor with him on foreign policy. "Hey Lindsey. You want to rethink that whole arm the rebels in Syria strategy now that we know the rebels we armed sold an American journalist to be beheaded?"

 

[Natural Citizen]

^This. That said I hope this moron runs. I'd love to see Rand wipe the floor with him on foreign policy. "Hey Lindsey. You want to rethink that whole arm the rebels in Syria strategy now that we know the rebels we armed sold an American journalist to be beheaded?"

I don't think that between the two of them you'd get any kind of debate on foreign policy beyond the old war on terrorism gag. Seriously. Foreign policy is more than that. Way more. It's really annoying that none of these politicians will discuss foreign policy out of context of conflict in the middle east. And this is where I'd agree with Gunny Freedom with regard to the electorate. They don't force any kind of broader debate by asking anything of these representatives with regard to foreign policy beyond the terrorvision that they're fed by media 24/7. So when it's all said and done, the people will get what they ask for. Which would be absolutely nothing save more of the same. Is unfortunate given the fact that the country really does need leadership across the geo-political board. It is lacking at the moment. The only way that they'll get that kind of leadership is if prospective representatives are forced out of the luxury of their political comfort zones and put into a position where they are expected to answer questions outside of the media driven narrative that is 24/7 war incorporated. "We ask, you decide" and all of that happy nonsense.

 

[osan]

Lindsey Graham? Really? No... really?!

The world goes more deeply surreal every day.

Why not just run a Stalin/Mao ticket?

 

[GunnyFreedom]

^This. That said I hope this moron runs. I'd love to see Rand wipe the floor with him on foreign policy. "Hey Lindsey. You want to rethink that whole arm the rebels in Syria strategy now that we know the rebels we armed sold an American journalist to be beheaded?"

Well, one things for sure, if Rand keeps on going the way he is going, then he won't be relegated to just 30 seconds worth of time over a 2 hour debate.

 

[Carlybee]

^This. That said I hope this moron runs. I'd love to see Rand wipe the floor with him on foreign policy. "Hey Lindsey. You want to rethink that whole arm the rebels in Syria strategy now that we know the rebels we armed sold an American journalist to be beheaded?"

You forget that the debate moderators can just not call on Rand. They can ask the foreign policy questions to the hawks.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

You forget that the debate moderators can just not call on Rand. They can ask the foreign policy questions to the hawks.

Too much popular support, they wouldn't get away with it like they did with Ron. Too many zombies would be up in arms that 'the guy they like' didn't get to speak. Unlike Ron, who only had a tiny base of support, the much broader appeal of Rand would make the 'ignore' strategy backfire badly.

Remember how pissed we were when they denied Ron? It made us double down on support. Our little 5%-7% meant that doubling down on our support didn't matter. Rand will be walking onto the stage with maybe only 25% first choice but close to 50% second choice. Ignore him and a lot of that 50% will switch to 'first choice.'

The can try the 'ignore him' routine with Rand like they did with Ron, but if they do it will backfire and strengthen Rand's support, because he already has 10-fold the GOP base support that Ron had.

 

[Matt Collins]

^This. That said I hope this moron runs. I'd love to see Rand wipe the floor with him on foreign policy. "Hey Lindsey. You want to rethink that whole arm the rebels in Syria strategy now that we know the rebels we armed sold an American journalist to be beheaded?"

The problem is that Lindsey's entrance into the race wouldn't be about messaging or philosophy or policy as much as it would be about strategically affecting the outcome of the SC primary and thus potentially the nominee.

 

[surf]

if this happens i'll be pulling for the fence-jumpers.

edit: he's not even listed among the potential candidates in the betting markets http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/republican-candidate

 

[CPUd]

I don't think that between the two of them you'd get any kind of debate on foreign policy beyond the old war on terrorism gag. Seriously. Foreign policy is more than that. Way more. It's really annoying that none of these politicians will discuss foreign policy out of context of conflict in the middle east. And this is where I'd agree with Gunny Freedom with regard to the electorate. They don't force any kind of broader debate by asking anything of these representatives with regard to foreign policy beyond the terrorvision that they're fed by media 24/7. So when it's all said and done, the people will get what they ask for. Which would be absolutely nothing save more of the same. Is unfortunate given the fact that the country really does need leadership across the geo-political board. It is lacking at the moment. The only way that they'll get that kind of leadership is if prospective representatives are forced out of the luxury of their political comfort zones and put into a position where they are expected to answer questions outside of the media driven narrative that is 24/7 war incorporated. "We ask, you decide" and all of that happy nonsense.

You are right- just look at RPFs' "Foreign Policy" section:

 

[Carlybee]

I can't imagine Graham having broad based support. He comes off as unlikeable to me but the zombies may like him. Ultimately whomever the GOP wants to get the nomination is who will get it.

 

[jjdoyle]

Too much popular support, they wouldn't get away with it like they did with Ron. Too many zombies would be up in arms that 'the guy they like' didn't get to speak. Unlike Ron, who only had a tiny base of support, the much broader appeal of Rand would make the 'ignore' strategy backfire badly.

Remember how pissed we were when they denied Ron? It made us double down on support. Our little 5%-7% meant that doubling down on our support didn't matter. Rand will be walking onto the stage with maybe only 25% first choice but close to 50% second choice. Ignore him and a lot of that 50% will switch to 'first choice.'

The can try the 'ignore him' routine with Rand like they did with Ron, but if they do it will backfire and strengthen Rand's support, because he already has 10-fold the GOP base support that Ron had.

They can/will ignore him if they want. Just like they have done for multiple Republican and Democrat candidates in debates over the years (Mike Gravel comes to mind), and few of the typical brainwashed GOP voters will care. They don't think, they do as instructed.
When the attack ads start against Rand in the southern states, I think he will lose most of those, just based on the history of those voters and which Republican candidates have/haven't done well in them in the past.

Which is why I have said I think he needs a path to the White House and GOP nomination outside of South Carolina, Iowa, and Florida. If he wins New Hampshire, that's a start. I guess Maine would be next, but I'm not sure where he would go after that.

 

[Jackie Moon]

The hawkish Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina says he is thinking about running for president in 2016.

Please Santa, I promise to be good if you give me this one gift.

Imagine how great Rand will look standing next to Lindsey on the debate stage.

And it will add so much more entertainment to the campaign/debate season.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

They can/will ignore him if they want. Just like they have done for multiple Republican and Democrat candidates in debates over the years (Mike Gravel comes to mind), and few of the typical brainwashed GOP voters will care. They don't think, they do as instructed.
When the attack ads start against Rand in the southern states, I think he will lose most of those, just based on the history of those voters and which Republican candidates have/haven't done well in them in the past.

Which is why I have said I think he needs a path to the White House and GOP nomination outside of South Carolina, Iowa, and Florida. If he wins New Hampshire, that's a start. I guess Maine would be next, but I'm not sure where he would go after that.

You...really think Mike Gravel had anywhere near the kind of support Rand has? He was the Dems version of Ron Paul, and he had LESS support than Ron Paul.

 

[jjdoyle]

You...really think Mike Gravel had anywhere near the kind of support Rand has? He was the Dems version of Ron Paul, and he had LESS support than Ron Paul.

No, but that was just an example of them ignoring people, and him calling them out on it and nobody caring. They were promoting Barack, Hillary, and John (Edwards) at the time.

And if Rand supposedly has 10-fold the GOP base support Ron had though, I don't think he would be polling at 7% in Iowa (in any poll), or placing behind someone like Rick Santorum in the Value Voters Summit straw poll.

The media can, and will, ignore candidates as they see fit. They will also use some candidates to simply help their ratings.

And on this, I don't see Lindsey Graham endorsing someone else in South Carolina as causing Rand to lose the state. I don't see Rand winning South Carolina, with/without Lindsey Graham.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

No, but that was just an example of them ignoring people, and him calling them out on it and nobody caring. They were promoting Barack, Hillary, and John (Edwards) at the time.

And if Rand supposedly has 10-fold the GOP base support Ron had though, I don't think he would be polling at 7% in Iowa (in any poll), or placing behind someone like Rick Santorum in the Value Voters Summit straw poll.

The media can, and will, ignore candidates as they see fit. They will also use some candidates to simply help their ratings.

And on this, I don't see Lindsey Graham endorsing someone else in South Carolina as causing Rand to lose the state. I don't see Rand winning South Carolina, with/without Lindsey Graham.

Well then, by offering the counterexample of Mike Gravel, knowing that he was less popular than Ron, you weren't paying attention to my original argument. Also, by stating that Rand does not have tenfold the support from the GOP Base that Ron had, it demonstrates to me that you are not actively engaging Republicans out in the real world, where the difference would be blatant and obvious.

 

[jjdoyle]

Well then, by offering the counterexample of Mike Gravel, knowing that he was less popular than Ron, you weren't paying attention to my original argument. Also, by stating that Rand does not have tenfold the support from the GOP Base that Ron had, it demonstrates to me that you are not actively engaging Republicans out in the real world, where the difference would be blatant and obvious.

The Republicans I know, the deep South Republicans, do not care for Rand. They will not vote for Rand, and he will only, always, be their "2nd" choice. If that. I'm not trying, or hoping, for a job with Rand in 2016. I state what I see, from the Republicans I know and interact with. Rand has no chance at South Carolina, from what I see and know.
Michele Bachmann was said to be "top tier" at one point, and then ignored in debates and came off as annoying when she tried to pipe in on points, repeatedly. Who cared? Her base of supporters that went to Rick Santorum in Iowa? Doubt it.

My point, again, is the media will promote and ignore candidates as they are instructed:
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/i...corn-polled-edition---ron-paul---the-top-tier

Rand can be ignored, just as he ignores requests to do interviews with certain people now. And then, the shoe will fit and they can play that card if called out on it. "We invited Senator Paul on multiple times, and he turned down those requests."

 

[GunnyFreedom]

The Republicans I know, the deep South Republicans, do not care for Rand. They will not vote for Rand, and he will only, always, be their "2nd" choice. If that. I'm not trying, or hoping, for a job with Rand in 2016. I state what I see, from the Republicans I know and interact with. Rand has no chance at South Carolina, from what I see and know.
Michele Bachmann was said to be "top tier" at one point, and then ignored in debates and came off as annoying when she tried to pipe in on points, repeatedly. Who cared? Her base of supporters that went to Rick Santorum in Iowa? Doubt it.

My point, again, is the media will promote and ignore candidates as they are instructed:
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/i...corn-polled-edition---ron-paul---the-top-tier

Rand can be ignored, just as he ignores requests to do interviews with certain people now. And then, the shoe will fit and they can play that card if called out on it. "We invited Senator Paul on multiple times, and he turned down those requests."

In North Carolina, Rand Paul is quite popular with mainstream Republican activists across the board, the ones who attend monthly County and District GOP meetings, and the conventions, as well as the Republican activists who interface with the Municipal Boards, County Commissions, and the State Legislature.

Where exactly are you meeting these Republicans who don't like Rand Paul?