GOP offers no real challenge to Democrats in 2016

Cpl Ivan Hicks, - Brother I hope you are right. I only see the left becoming stronger by the day. I see less and less people who believe in the America of our fore fathers. Sadly even my own has been poisoned by the left in college and all her friends.When it comes to polls I would not pay any attention to them. You can make a poll come out whatever way you want. As an example what if you knowingly poll people who will agree with you point of view? How are the questions asked? I also do not believe anyone is indepentant and not biased when taking polls, Just MHO

SFC James Sczymanski - I am sure the two party system is great for a lot of people, but not Constitutional conservatives. I hear people say all the time "well the republican is better than the democrat isn't he/she?" no not if they are the same as the democrat would be like in office. Again I can cite so many examples of McConnell, McCain, Boehner etc that vote right in line with the democrats. So my choice is to vote for someone who tells me he is not going to represent me or a guy who lies to me telling me he agrees with my beliefs but then screwing me just like the other guy.

If I have to throw away my vote I will choose someone who I agree with and he/she agrees with me.

CPL WAGNER SEMPER FI MY MARINE CORPS BROTHER I LIKE THE WAY YOU THINK...

I LIKES THAT VOTING ON ISSUES INSTEAD OF A PARTY, HOPE IT CATCHES ON....

Cpl Brett Wagner - I hear ya man!

CPL Wagner: MAJ Dews was not wrong. Romney won the GOP nomination partly by default because of the candidates that could not hold up in a national election. Santorum would be a great if it was the year 1868. Cain's 999 plan and lack of complete sentences did him in. Gingrich just imploded. All this in a very vulnerable year for an incumbent President. Speaking of nut jobs, the GOP actually had candidates for the Senate that believed that in legitimate rape events the women's body actually stopped pregnacies from happening if it was truly rape. If the country is dominated by a two party system at least have two parties on equal ground intelligence wise. I am tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. The GOP's total package is unbelievably chaotic.

LTC (Join to see), I agree with you on the Republican candidate idiots who said many, to be blunt, stupid things. There are quite a few candidates I could not support especially if I was in their respective state. There are also plenty of other very intelligent conservative/Republican candidates. My question to you is have the Democrats had idiotic candidates, who were they and did any Dems denounce them?

I believe the Dems have more stupid action/ indecent candidates like Weiner and the picture scandal. The media seems to gloss over the Dems actions and focus on the misspeaks of the Reps and magnifies their actions. I have no real data or research just going off memory. October before an election should bring all the skeletons out of the closet just in time for election day.

Yes Capt Schwager, I know he had a lot of people pressuring him to run, myself being one of them.

LTC West is the one in my book. Because he is polarizing and the liberals hate him. Capt Jeff S. is right on the mark they will attack the so called controversial retirement. But if they attack him they better not have any skeletons because he will kick their ass and take names. Just my humble opinion.

There's nothing controversial about his retirement. Military has rules and regulations, if you violate them, accept the consequences. This is what makes us a professional military instead of some mercenaries out for hire; we have standards and codes, and in this case the Geneva Convention. There was no controversy about it, he was wrong.

It's not looking good for a Romney run and Anne Romney pretty much said that but the door isn't closed completely. I think they will see who throws their hat in the ring and then decide what to do based on that. If they feel there's no strong Conservative candidate from GOP, don't count Romney out.

SSG (Join to see) I agree with you. Sadly, none of have a paddle either.

SSG (Join to see) and LCpl Steve Wininger , I agree with both of you. Romney, Christie and Bush are all RINOS. So are both Pauls and several others. Ted Cruz and Ben Carson are two potentials but I want to hear more about their specific stances.

SSG (Join to see) Maybe Ted Cruz can go read Green Eggs and Ham to ISIS.

Yes, the Establishment GOP and Dems will see to that. : (

Ditto to both of you guys.

That's your opinion. Massachusetts is a Blue State. As a Republican governor he did the best he could to give the people what they wanted, working with what he had to work with.

Yes, what I mean by that is you only need to be one millimeter to the right of Lenin, Stalin or Mao to be considered conservative in Massachusetts. Example of the other extreme would be being a liberal in Texas you only need to be one millimeter to the of Reagan. What is considered a conservative in New England, NY & NJ I would consider a liberal/progressive.

JFK would be considered a Republican by todays left and right measurements. BTW, I despise the idea of left and right. When I read the Constitution, I read it straight down the center.

That's the entire purpose for this discussion -- to right the lawlessness that is plaguing DC and return to the Constitution and the constitutional principles and vision of our Founding Fathers.

CPT Zachary Brooks, I can see it either way too. If it's those two on the ticket, regardless of the order, they will get my vote. I do think they would make for a great team.

Even better:
Condelezza Rice / Ben Carson. I would love to see the Democrats and their supporters squirm on that. Its also two people I could really get behind.

CPT Zachary Brooks I love them both and they scare the nefarious liberals who would do anything and I mean anything, to get their way.

I agree, I think Cruz and Carson at least get us going back in the right direction.

In our Senate election going on here in NC I hear many complaints such as: I dislike candidate A so I will be voting for candidate B, even though they aren't that great either.

I feel like people refuse to educate themselves on third parties and support them, as well as our system being designed to make it more difficult for third parties to run.

Do you know a solid third party candidate running in the upcoming election sir?

I know they won't win when I vote for them. I vote third party to send the message that I got off my butt and voted, it wasn't for your guy and here is why. I usually vote Libertarian or Constitution Party in those cases.

MAJ Jason Miller and CPT Zachary Brooks - I have written the GOP many times to let them know how I and others like me feel about the candidates they put forward. I have told them that I will no longer throw my vote away on the "liberals" that put up as a choice against the liberal democrat candidate. If I have to throw away my vote I will at least do it for someone I can believe in and would represent me. I think until we have a massive amount of voters write the same kind of letters (and vote 3rd party against them) we will never see a change in the GOP.

LTC (Join to see) , this might interest you as well:

http://www.veteranspartyofamerica.org/

Sir, They also swear an oath to us as well. The are a paid public servant above the fact they are CIC. Too often us as military members we are encouraged to vote but it also seems we do not have the freedom to hold them accountable. Yes, they are our Commander's-in-Chief but they are also, and in more instances supposed to be our President too. It used to be in the military where you could comment on the President without it affecting your role as a military member under the Command of the CIC. Now we are forced not to be able to separate the roles.

Accountability is what you do at the ballot box.

We know who cuts our funding and who supports us

MAJ Dews, your assertion above about the House and Senate is false. If the Senate is more reasonable then why has Harry Reid not allowed a budget to pass in the last 6 years? Why did the Senate stymie the House's attempts to pass a CRA last year?

Just to be clear, this is exactly what happened in the "government shutdown" fiasco last year. The House presents to the Senate a CR that completely defunds the ACA but the Senate votes and totally rejects the House CR. Okay, got it. Then the House sends another CR but this time funds the ACA yet removes the medical device tax and delayed the individual mandate. Yet the Senate totally tables it and doesn’t even vote on the bill. Then the House submits a third CR that still funds the ACA, doesn’t remove the medical device tax but requests that EVERYONE is treated the same: regular people AND Congress, yet AGAIN the Senate doesn’t even look at it. So it seems to me the Republicans in the House were willing to compromise but the Senate refused to meet them at the table. It’s either “Give us everything we are demanding, or we blame the shutdown on you.”

SSG Redondo, the reason that the Senate seems more reasonable is because it was not what Senator Reid wanted, it was about the fact that the majority of Americans wanted a clean CR, and did not want either side ransoming the function of the government to get there way on issues that have been resolved. If you wonder why democrats continue to stick around it is because they continue to push the more popular idea. Further the American public blames the Republicans for the shutdown; they said they would through polling before it happened, and all the Democrats wanted was clean CR. If their ideas were that good, or that popular they wouldn't require a hostage.

Also I have read the PPACA cover to cover (I do not suggest it), and these broad exemptions everybody speak of do not exist.

CPL Rice, how is Senator Reid not getting what he wanted equivalent to him being reasonable? That makes no sense. A reasonable person is willing to compromise. HE did not. The majority of Americans, both Dem and Repub and everything in between, wanted a decent honest budget to be passed. As I stated earlier, NO budget has been passed because of Reid. A CR is NOT a budget. The House continually passes budgets but the Senate sits on it. How is THAT reasonable? Logically, it is not. If it were the other way around, I would be saying the same thing about the House, even if it was the current House. It's NOT right. The Dems were the ones holding the country hostage, not the Republicans especially not the conservatives. As I stated above, multiple bills to fund the government, including the military, were passed by the House yet the Senate refused all of them simply because their pet project wasn't "fully" funded. THAT is holding the country hostage. They are basically saying they want it all or they won't play. Juvenile and petty.

Yes, some people do blame the Republicans, some also blame the Democrats. Honestly, I can't tell you what the exact percentage is since it's impossible to poll every single person. I know I blame BOTH parties although I place more blame on the Dems for their pettiness. I mostly blame the people though for continuously electing these elitists who keep dividing the people. Instead of getting good honest people to represent us in Congress, the bulk of the people are squabbling over the crumbs that are tossed our way. Ridiculous!!!

BTW, I too have read the PPACA. I have it as well as the original. I also have an extensive folder full of PDFs on various laws and other things. I do quite a bit of research and reading.

SSG (Join to see)
"If the Senate is more reasonable then why has Harry Reid not allowed a budget to pass in the last 6 years?"

The senate just passed a budget last year.