Skip to main content

My Updated GOP Candidate Rankings (down to 13...)

As I've done following every debate to this point in primary season, I thought I'd update my GOP candidate rankings. Last night was the fifth and final GOP debate of 2015, the second such debate aired on CNN, one which appeared to blur in with the rest. Missing from these debates was Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, who recently decided to opt out of the race. I had him ranked 13th out of 14 contenders a little over a month ago (http://thekind-heartedsmartaleck.blogspot.com/2015/11/my-updated-gop-candidate-rankings.html). Here now are my updated rankings:

13) Ted Cruz (up 1 spot): Out of the 13 remaining GOP candidates, this guy scares me the most. If it were up to him, we'd have no federal government, yet he's running for the highest office in the land, and poll number wise, he's risen to second, behind only Donald Trump.

12) Mike Huckabee (down 1 spot): The more I hear him speak, the more I think he's transformed from a likeable middle-aged man to someone who auditioned for one of the lead roles in the film Grumpy Old Men.

11) Marco Rubio (down 3 spots): It's only a matter of time before Senators Rubio and Cruz get into an actual pissing contest with one another. The tension between the two of them continues to escalate in each and every debate. Who knows? Maybe they're secretly gay and have the hots for each other. In any case, both men's seeming obsession with guns, bombs, and feeling the need to compensate for small penises gets to be a bit much at times.

10) Donald Trump (down 3 spots): The Donald may be progressive in some areas, but the man is such a complete and total a*shole, I don't think I'll be able to stand listening to him for much longer. If "being known as the world's biggest jerk" happened to be on his bucket list, I think he can cross it off now...

9) Carly Fiorina (up 1 spot): Like the four before-mentioned candidates, Ms. Fiorina's rhetoric is getting to be tiring. She lacks specifics, loves hyperbole, and can't seem to go ten seconds without blaming Hillary Clinton and/or Barack Obama for something. If one were to play a drinking game while listening to Ms. Fiorina speak, where he/she took a shot every time the businesswoman blamed the current president or former Secretary of State for something, they'd likely be passed out within 2 minutes.

8) Ben Carson (up 4 spots): The only reason for the former neurosurgeon to move up my board after last night's debate is because, compared to most everyone else, he remained quiet, and due to that, sounded like one of the more sane individuals on stage. Of course, he could have been sleeping throughout the duration of the debate, but that's neither here nor there. I also liked how he pronounced RNC Chair Reince Priebus' name - "Rinse Pubus."

7) Rick Santorum (up 2 spots): This concludes my bottom 7, as there's a vast difference between the bottom 7 and top 6 for me. Santorum's lightened up some on his anti-gay rhetoric, and economically, is fairly moderate compared to most other GOP candidates, which are the main reasons for him moving up to #7 on the list. Unless candidates 1-6 drop out before him, though, it's unlikely he'll be ranked any higher than this.

6) George Pataki (down 5 spots): While Pataki's debate performances leading up to last night's impressed me somewhat, I was anything but impressed with last night's performance from the former New York governor. He sounded rather nonpartisan and more about getting things done than attacking Democrats in the first few debates, but he appeared to look like just another GOP candidate last night, not going a few seconds without bashing Obama and Clinton, and playing the fear and paranoia cards like a teenager plays with himself.

5) Rand Paul (down 2 spots): I "stand with Rand" on some issues, but not too terribly many, and as each and every debate passes, it's becoming increasingly clear he's not suited to be president.

4) Jeb Bush (no change): Jeb's debate performance last night, like all of his performances to this point, was uneven. He did fight back for a change against Donald Trump's insults, which was nice to see. However, will that be enough to get his poll numbers going in the right direction again? I suppose it's possible, but I have a difficult time seeing him receive much of a boost, in the short-term anyway.

3) Chris Christie (up 3 spots): Chris Christie might be the John McCain ('08) and Mitt Romney ('12) of this election cycle, which, if history is any guide, would be bad news for Republicans. The man swings too drastically along the political spectrum for people to garner a clear sense of who he truly is and what he's about. There have been times when he's been criticized by Republicans and praised by Democrats, yet the very next day, he'll go on to try and reverse the words or actions which prompted these atypical responses, winds up angering liberals, pleasing conservatives, and confusing just about everybody in the process.

2) Lindsey Graham (up 3 spots): I'm not a fan of this guy's seeming obsession with war, but he's surprised me in a number of other areas, including on climate change, the Supreme Court's gay-marriage ruling, the 9/11 first responders, and in not being completely anti-science. The man often jokes about how average his level of intelligence is (that's being kind), but he appears to be fully aware of what he doesn't know, open to learning more, and open to surrounding himself with individuals who would help to educate and aid him in making the best possible decisions.

1) John Kasich (no change): The Ohio governor had a rather weak showing at the debate last night, so the gap may be closing some between #'s 2-4 and Kasich. Even with the poor showing, though, I still see him as the the Republican candidate with whom I'd be most comfortable having as our president.

My hopeful 2016 presidential election: Democrat Bernie Sanders vs. Republican John Kasich (same as before)

My predicted 2016 presidential election: Democrat Hillary Clinton vs. Republican Ted Cruz (since changed from Marco Rubio)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"