Removed from table due to lack of public polling interest: Christie (20).
"... [A] conservative
typically adheres to principles of personal responsibility, moral
values, and limited government, agreeing with George Washington's
Farewell Address that "religion and morality are indispensable supports"
to political prosperity."
Clearly, there are different types of Conservatives; my guesses of which type the candidates are, are based on a presumed primary focus.
Types of Conservatives (until I know more about the candidates):
C : Conservative; RelC : Religious Conservative; SocC: Social Conservative.
HA: Heritage Action for America, Candidate questioning, in SC, September 18, 2015.
But, as we know, not all Republicans are (small government) Conservative. So, I add:
R: Establishment Republican
with Conservative views, but supports a larger government bureaucracy,
and is usually supported and protected by special interests: Bush;
Christie (McCain; Romney)
Never discussed but most important to be elected: Presidential
candidates must have Leadership skills (a vision for the future) first,
and Management skills (how to go about getting the vision done),
second, which could simply be to hire the best manager for each vision.
Examples of election failure: Romney was perceived to be a
good 'R' manager, not a leader. McCain had no vision for the future and
unknown 'R' management skills -- he was not perceived to be a leader.
Without an acceptable vision for the future neither candidate was
selected. Obama was elected because he was perceived to have an
agreeable vision for the future, not his management skills.
What is additionally critical about the next president is that he or
she will select at least 2 or perhaps even 4 members of the Supreme
Court.
Candidates on Issues: Voting Preferences of Republican Presidential Candidates with Sufficient Charisma and Gravitas to Win in 2016
ETHICAL AND SOCIAL ISSUES
Bush R
Carson RelC
Cruz (1) RelC
Fiorina R/C
Huckabee SocC
Rubio (2) R/C
Trump (3) C
ALERT: GOP Funding Super PACs to Split State Votes so Bush can Win the Nomination: (12) Or, are the GOP elites planning something more devious? See Brokered Convention in Note 1
Agree to Job Killing TPA-TPP NAFTA-like 'Free Trade' Policy? (Lowers prices but moves jobs overseas and increases welfare spending) See so-called 'Free-trade' in Conclusions and here.
Stop China BIT Trade Treaty
that allows companies to give away trade secrets for doing business
with China, allows China to buy US assets, which will also reduce US
employment, and increase welfare spending
Cruz on making the Gang of 8 legislation work:
he offered amendments to allow Illegals to come out of the shadows
(legalization) -- which he now strongly denies, then give them work
permits, but no path to citizenship. This would also legally obligate us
to support them and pay for their healthcare, if they couldn't find
work. See the greater problem here.
Heidi Cruz has been involved in the corruption of our economy and
sovereignty through trade policies, expanding immigration, promoting
global warming, sharing our electric grid with Mexico, and corrupting
our energy supply, on behalf of the CFR, the NAU and Goldman Sachs: why Senator Cruz should not get anywhere near the White House.
Why Ted Cruz is unfit to be president a citizen of the United States, or my friend or my neighbor: Video, Article. What an awful human being he is.
Eligibility: It is a fact that to be eligible to become President of the United States, a person must be a 'natural born' citizen. This means both parents
the FATHER must have been a US citizen (Note 1G) and the person must
have been born on US soil to insure allegiance to the USA. (Remember
Arnold Schwarzenegger saying that he thought about running for president
but learned he couldn't be elected because he wasn't eligible.)
President Obama must therefore have convinced the US Supreme Court that
his father was a US citizen and that he was born in Hawaii. Senator
Cruz will probably be disqualified
because he was born in Canada, and his father was not a US Citizen, when
it's finally revealed that Obama's real father was Frank Marshall Davis, a US citizen and Communist (although Obama was still born in Kenya). (Details A and B.)
This could be a Democrat disruption 'trump card' should he be
selected as the Republican nominee. It will be interesting to find out
what the Supreme Court' does should Cruz win the nomination and
Democrats stay quiet to protect Obama. It's safe to say that Senator
Cruz knows all this. This issue also puts his life in danger, more so
than the other candidates -- except for Mr. Trump -- because Mr. Obama
would not want this secret revealed. Mr. Trump is in the highest danger
because he is in a position to expose everyone, including the many
conspirators, and even his own party desperately wants to remove him.
Obama's reckoning to come on November 19! [2013*],
Klayman Calls for the Masses to Force Resignation of Convicted
President, by Larry Klayman. *The information was withheld by the MSM
so there was no mass uprising.
Note 1G: According to this analysis,
which is another of many, Mr. Obama is not eligible to become President
of the United States because his father was not a US Citizen, Senator
Cruz is not even a US Citizen (!), and Senator Rubio is a native born
citizen not a natural born citizen and therefore not eligible to become
president either.
2) Following the same logic and same references as in Note 1
regarding Senator Cruz -- 1) "It is a fact that to be eligible to become
President of the United States, a person must be a 'natural born' citizen.
This means both parents must have been US citizens and the person must
have been born on US soil to insure allegiance to the USA" -- Senator
Rubio is also not eligible to become President of the United States
because his parents were not US citizens at the time of his birth, but
four years later, which makes him at best 'native born' at birth, or a
citizen of Cuba, but not a 'natural born' citizen of the United States.
"Phyllis Schlafly Issues 15 PAGE ‘Rubio Betrayal Memo’ – Update."
"Phyllis Schlafly is a retired American constitutional lawyer,
conservative activist, author, and speaker and founder of the Eagle
Forum. ... Schlafly supports Donald Trump for President." This
endorsement flies in the face of Limbaugh's claim that Trump is not a
Conservative.
3) After watching three post first-debate videos of Trump on Hannity,
I am convinced that Trump is a viable candidate as he has some
business-savvy approaches to our problems. And he has an iconic
self-made-man determination to 'fix things'. He showed a temperament
that is acceptable, and he attributed the remarks that he is accused of
making toward women as having always been in response to personal
attacks by women. He needs to do some work on his 'gravitas,' but I
think he can and will do that because he clearly loves America, and
wants to be president. He reminds us that President Reagan also began as
a liberal Democrat, and says that he's made that transition himself and
now considers himself to be a Conservative. He also says that if he
had to, he would support another Conservative if he had been treated
fairly and liked that choice, for America. ( Interview by the Wall Street Journal ) . ( Endorsement ) . ( Ann Coulter ) . ( Latino Singer Songwriter Ruben Obed "Why I Support Trump" ) . ( USAF General Chuck Yeager endorses Donald J. Trump ). Conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly Endorses Trump.
"A blow for Establishment argument that Trump is not 'conservative'."
Sarah Palin endorsed Trump. Sheriff Joe Arpaio endorsed Trump. Even
John Wayne's daughter endorsed Trump!
4) Reporting the truth about the hardships of single women with children does not make Huckabee a sexist.
5) Governor Bush insists that the president has an important role in
education in America and supports Common Core. It would appear therefore
that Governor Bush does not accept that the president only has
authority over his employees and enforcing US laws, created by Congress,
and has no constitutional authority over states' rights. This type of
social-engineering supports big government and inevitably leads to the
creation of costly illegal rules and regulations, just like those of
President Obama.
6) I marked Governor Christie a No on states' right on Common Core
because he wanted it, but his State's' teachers and parents rejected it.
Which also means that he does not accept that the president only has
authority over his employees and enforcing US laws, created by Congress,
and has no constitutional authority over states' rights. This type of
social-engineering supports big government and inevitably leads to the
creation of costly illegal rules and regulations, just like those of
President Obama.
7) Bush 41 favored the New World Order (NWO); Bush 43 favored the
North American Union (NAU). Married to a Hispanic, and former illegal
immigrant, fluent in Spanish and acknowledging his favorable position on
illegal immigration, it's not hard to believe that Jeb Bush also favors
the NAU. Or, at the least, allowing all the illegal immigrants from
south of the border to stay in the US and receive green cards to work,
which will have a severe impact on US citizen and legal immigrant
employment. This means that he will put the problems of illegal
immigrants ahead of the problems of millions of jobless Americans and
legal immigrants, perpetuating the high cost of the welfare state and
its levels of despair, drugs and crime, because he has no economic
growth plan to mitigate these problems. Rubio's "New American Economy" immigration plan
mirrors these beliefs. In contrast, both Trump and Fiorina propose
solutions to deal with the problems associated with jobs being exported
to other countries, and jobs being lost to lower paid Visa holders.
Dealing with these problems effectively provides a way to reduce the
severity of both the jobs and green card issues.
8) How do those that support allowing illegal immigrants to stay and
get Green Cards, suggest that we deal with the unintended consequences
of illegal immigrants not having proper IDs, then using false IDs or
untraceable backgrounds, then skip out after they commit crimes, or
cause traffic accidents or worse? These real-life problems create a
strong argument for requiring proper immigration procedures.
9) Repeal Gramm–Leach–Bliley -- go back to Glass–Steagall. (End Mega-Banks)
We should not allow rich influential people to get richer by gambling
with our money while we absorb all the risks -- allowing Investment
brokerages to become banks places an enormous 'too big to fail' burden
on taxpayers, globally, that should never exist:
"C: Allowing Wall Street investment brokerages to become
Banks in 145 pages of Gramm–Leach–Bliley [5], by replacing 37 pages of
Glass–Steagall, which prevented this for good reason. [6] The greatest
danger being bad investments putting at risk the wealth of depositors at
a scale not found in traditional banks." (From my book, Left v Right)
"Rubin and his deputy Lawrence Summers also steered
through the 1999 repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act (1933), which had
separated investment banking from the retail side. It allowed the banks
to develop and sell the mortgage-backed instruments that became a
principal factor in the financial collapse. In September 2011, the UK
Independent Commission on Banking released a report in which it
recommended a separation of investment and retail banking to prevent a
repeat of the 2008 crisis.[19]" (Source)
10) The government should not be allowed to strangle companies with over-control:
"D: Allowing over-control of small and midsize public
corporations in 66 pages of regulations in Sarbanes-Oxley. [7] Fox
reports that the annual compliance costs have risen from about $91
thousand per year to over $3 million per year. [8]" (From my book, Left v
Right)
11) Part of the reason government gets bigger each year is because
Congress uses baseline-budgeting, which gives every department an
automatic increase from the previous year's budget. And when Congress
debates budgets it is usually only debating whether to change the size
of the automatic increase, so they are usually never talking about
'real' budget cuts, just smaller increases. You should also know that
all their projections are for ten years, not one. Which makes Jeb
Bush's economic-jobs plan almost silly.
12) Super PACs are the result of the Citizens United Supreme Court
Case. Originally thought to be good for Conservatives because they help
counter the influence of Unions, the GOP has found a way to marginalize
Conservatives by supporting lessor candidates to split votes away from
Conservatives so their preferred Republican candidate can win. Super
PACs may collect unlimited funds but these funds are for candidate
advocacy purposes only, and may not be given to or commingled with
candidate funds. And candidates may not direct their use -- they must
collect their own campaign funds.
While many of the 17 Republican candidates may enjoy having Super
PACs in their names funded by the Republican Party, a few Conservatives,
like Cruz, Fiorina and Huckabee, may not, simply because, as
Conservatives, they would not likely reciprocate with favors should they
win the nomination.
13)
a) GsHSA: Government-supported health savings accounts, with
competition for insurance across state lines. But the government would
still need to pay for those without these accounts, or funds in these
accounts, or they will end up in the emergency room.
b) INSur: National free-market Insurance plans. But the government
would still need to pay for those without the funds to pay for
insurance, or they will end up in the emergency room at very high cost.
c) NoInsBC: No insuranceBasicCare -- Not to be confused with state level plans that use insurance.
At the National Governors Association it was my
responsibility to testify about reforming the Medicaid system. The
nation's governors--all 50 of them--had worked for over 18 months to
carve out a bipartisan reform package that we commonly felt would
improve services without adding costs. Getting that many governors to
agree on 7 basic principles for reforming a very complicated program
like Medicaid was no easy task. It turned out to be even harder to
convince Congress. Why? They had to posture and pose to signal where
they stood on the political system."
"Our plan--proposed and signed by all the governors--would
save federal money & give the citizens in these states greater
coverage and the program greater flexibility; a plan that was
furthermore proposed as bipartisan to eliminate the normal divisions
that usually roadblocked such initiatives. Turns out that in Washington,
the goal is not solutions to problems, but using the issues to
pontificate party dogma and to denigrate the other side.
Source: Do The Right Thing, by Mike Huckabee, p.150-151 , Nov 18, 2008 " ( Source )
14) Senator Cruz's last NO vote to stop TPA was only based on a
political concern, he still favors free-trade --- see link in TiSA.
15) The US Constitution is without question the most protective set
of laws that humanity has ever had the good fortune to live under. It
should therefore be protected at all costs. The US Constitution was also
intended to endure, and not intended to permit its own destruction, so
those that are unwilling to accept its law should be deported. Period.
See suggested Amendments page for more information.
"A poll commissioned in May 2015 by the Center for
Security Policy showed that 51 percent [1.53 million] of American
Muslims preferred that they should have their own [medieval male-ruled]
Shariah courts outside of the legal system ruled by the U.S.
Constitution. And nearly a quarter believed the use of violent jihad was
justified in establishing Shariah." (Source with disturbing statements by CAIR. Additional reference.)
16) Clearly articulated in the 4th (FoxBusiness) debate -- illegal immigrants take jobs away from Americans and lower wages.
17) This answer was finally revealed in a video Q&A as Yes.
Until that moment, I thought it was No based on her other related
answers. Therefore, I no longer support her. Or Carson, for this and
other reasons.
18) Senator Cruz doesn't want to deport 25 million illegal
immigrants and he doesn't want to provide a path to citizenship, but if
they stay they will all be given green cards, and we all know that after
some 'penalty' amnesty will follow. So, Senator Cruz seems to be
trying to trick us into thinking he is hard on illegals but he is not.
For this reason, and because he supports free trade, I no longer support
him. We have also discover that his wife was for years active in the Counsel on Foreign Relations,
which is a globalist New World Order organization. And since married
couples mus share beliefs to stay together, it appears that he could be
guilty of this too.
19) A tax on currency trading would be most appropriate because that is where the anarchists make money.
20) Governor Christie is strong on protecting America, but shows no
leadership (visions) on our many domestic issues. So it's not clear why
he wants to be president. With very poor poll numbers, I removed him
from the chart.
21) Gov Huckabee is supporting Mr. Trump on these issues.
Conclusions
Along with the other concerns identified above, the US has three
significant problems that 'Americans' of all political persuasion are
very concerned about, and that Congress' past and present seem unwilling
to fix:
1) An 'invasion' by illegal immigrants created by Obama's
open border policies in violation of US law (without impeachment),
although our elected 'leaders' have been allowing this illegal migration for decades against the will of the people. (That's why I support Trump, even if he says he's a Martian (which he hasn't so far).)
2) A severe lack of jobs also caused by Obama as he
institutes virtual Communism through overbearing government regulations
(without impeachment).**
** A lesson in simple free-market capitalism (from an
expert --me): our economy is nothing more than Produce--Market--Sell:
people produce something, people market something, people sell
something. There is absolutely nothing more to it. Only government can
get in the way with regulations to slow it down. Hence, Obama should
have been impeached a long time ago. (That's why I support any
Conservative.)
3) A growing problem of jobs being exported (via trade
policies like NAFTA,TPA, TPP) and rules allowing the importing of lower
paid Visa holders (via trade policies like TiSA).
So-called free-trade policies allow nations to sell goods
and services without tariffs, but if a nation has higher prices due to
higher labor costs due to a higher standard of living, it doesn't export
much -- that's us, unless we have something the other nations want
because they haven't copied it yet. So we end up losing jobs, forcing
many Americans to take welfare (while creating a large national debt
that ultimately causes inflation) then forcing them to buy cheaper
imported goods because they cannot afford anything better. Is that the
kind of American you want to live in?
Free trade is really a form of welfare redistribution
to other countries via business' that we pay for in lost jobs, causing
the inability to afford the necessities of life, as well as homes or
automobiles, while creating misery, grief and national debt. And many of
our politicians seem unable to make those simple connection, or they do
but prefer instead to support business lobbies for personal gain. (aka
crony capitalism) (That's why I support Trump, even if he says he's a Martian (which he hasn't so far).)
Governor Bush is an establishment Republican with Conservative
views, as is Governor Christie. Neither has a plan to fix the shrinking
US jobs problem, and it's not yet clear to me how far they are willing
to go to fix the other two problems given their acceptance of illegal
immigration. Dr. Carson's willingness to give work permits to 20
million illegals takes him off my list as well, because those jobs
belong to Americans.
However, it needs to be clearly understood that few of their
solutions are possible without a Senate and House that agrees. So it is
important that we continue to elect Conservative Tea Party supporters
or it's unlikely that most of the proposed solutions would ever be
implemented.
During a general election, with voters of more secular interests, the
votes usually prefer traditional mainstream Conservatives because they
emphasize country first, rather than religion, social or moral issues.
This gives us Fiorina and Trump, with Cruz, Huckabee and Rubio a bit
less likely, assuming the GOP Super-PACs for Bush can be overcome. (
Might we help here by contacting each splitter / splinter / pawn and ask
they each drop out before their names are put on state ballets? )
My early Prediction (8-17-2015): Was all wrong due to lack of information about the candidates:
I picked Trump or Fiorina as the nominee, then just Trump. And I
picked Cruz, Fiorina or Huckabee as a running mate. I have reduced that
to just Huckabee now, if from the presidential candidate pool.
As for what the Democrats will do, because the party decides their ticket, not the voters
propaganda-blind followers: "There is only one person who controls
Hillary Clinton’s fate, and it isn’t Hillary Clinton. ... The Democratic
ticket will be Joe Biden-Elizabeth Warren. That’s what Mr. Obama wants.
And what Mr. Obama wants, Mr. Obama gets." ( Source )
Note A: Update November 12, 2015: Her pro-positions on illegal
immigrants (carefully unstated) changed my mind. And she cannot win as a
Conservative.