Ray Rider wrote:I agree that Paul had a great night as well, and sometimes gave the impression of being the only adult the room. This was emphasized by his position juxtaposed against Christie's warmongering rhetoric against Russia, which was ridiculous. I don't understand why Paul doesn't have more support; I would expect him to gain all the old Ron Paul supports while adding to that because he's young and talks coherently rather sounding like an old grandpa on a rant (no offense to Ron Paul).
I don't understand this either. I guess I would explain it away as follows:
(1) Less people like his brand of conservative (i.e. the real brand) now than in prior years.
(2) He has more appeal in the mainstream (e.g. black lives matter) than with conservative Republicans.
(3) He's soft on terror.
I'm also not convinced that the majority of Republicans actually like intelligent sounding people. "I don't trust him. Sounds like he went to one of them Ivy League schools." I would put Jon Huntsman in that group too.
In terms of image, Rubio is the best easily. Cruz is too smarmy for me too; not sure why I feel that way, but I do. If I had to rank them (based on my personal taste), I'd go:
(1) Paul (closest to libertarian)
(2) Rubio (his immigration plan is the closest of the Republicans to my immigration plan and I like his plan for ISIS)
(3) Cruz (he's fiscally conservative, more so than Rubio I think, but I don't like his immigration plan or his "war" plan)
Ultimately I think Cruz wins the nomination. I don't think any of the other candidates will be his running mate, although if a guy wins he really should think about Fiorina to add some shield for Clinton attacks.