Scott Walker- the most serious GOP candidate!

[JoeB131]

If the GOP had a brain between them, they'd probably nominate Scott Walker instead of seeing if the country is dumb enough to put a third Bush in the White House.

Let's look at Walker's strengths.

1) He took on the Public Sector Unions and won. No one really likes the Public Sector unions. Anyone who has had to go to a government office and waste half your day waiting for someone who just doesn't care about your problem, and makes more than you do, has little sympathy for these guys. Walker took on these people and won, despite threats to his family and an attempted recall.

2) He has Working Class Street Cred- Unlike Romney who bragged about how he liked to fire people and had car elevators and dressage horses, Walker comes from a middle class background and worked for everything he has.

3) He checks all the boxes. The problem with the GOP is that it's a lot of smaller groups that are only united by one thing - Their irrational hatred of President Obama. Walker is the only guy who appeals to all these factions- Establishment, Tea Party, Religious Right, Second Amendment.

4) He's willing to fight for what he believes in - Unlike Jeb Bush, who is really ready to throw in the towel on Common Core and Immigration, Walker actually takes a stand and fights for it.

5) He can compete in the Midwest - The GOP can only win if they can get the Great Lakes States to flip into the Red column. Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Ohio. These are achievable with the right candidate, one who can attract what used to be called "Reagan Democrats".

 

[Anathema]

Nominating Walker would be a great START for getting Conservatives like myself to vote for a Republican in 2016. The other half of the ticket and their PLATFORM will also be major issues. Walker is a good place for the party to begin in bringing those of us on the Far Right back into the fold, but he won't be able to do it all by himself.

 

[Political Junky]

Nominating Walker would be a great START for getting Conservatives like myself to vote for a Republican in 2016. The other half of the ticket and their PLATFORM will also be major issues. Walker is a good place for the party to begin in bringing those of us on the Far Right back into the fold, but he won't be able to do it all by himself.

He has the Koch money behind him, he won't be doing anything "all by himself".

 

[JoeB131]

Is he obviously the Koch's pick?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

He's awesome and would make a great Coolidge type President

 

[jon_berzerk]

Nominating Walker would be a great START for getting Conservatives like myself to vote for a Republican in 2016. The other half of the ticket and their PLATFORM will also be major issues. Walker is a good place for the party to begin in bringing those of us on the Far Right back into the fold, but he won't be able to do it all by himself.

He has the Koch money behind him, he won't be doing anything "all by himself".

obama biden shcumer & hillary took "koch" money

 

[Political Junky]

Is he obviously the Koch's pick?

A while back someone called him pretending to be one of the Koch Brothers and he seemed very impressed. Later he learned it was a hoax.

 

[Anathema]

He has the Koch money behind him, he won't be doing anything "all by himself".

That's not what I'm talking about. What I was suggesting is that Walker himself is not a sufficient "gift" to those of us on the Conservative end of the political spectrum from the Republicans to make us vote for the GOP in 2016. There would/will need to be more, including actual CONSERVATIVE agendas pushed in the next 20 months and a platform/plan that actually promontes CONSERVATIVE ideals by Walker, his running mate, and the party at large.

 

[Nyvin]

Walker generally doesn't think for himself, if he wins it's basically a confirmation we've turned into an oligarchy and the super rich have won. He'll be very little more then a puppet.

 

[Anathema]

Walker generally doesn't think for himself, if he wins it's basically a confirmation we've turned into an oligarchy and the super rich have won. He'll be very little more then a puppet.

Honestly, it's not the job of politicians to think so far as I'm concerned. It's their job to follow the rules laid down for them by the US Constitution. Nothing more. Nothing less.

 

[Nyvin]

Walker generally doesn't think for himself, if he wins it's basically a confirmation we've turned into an oligarchy and the super rich have won. He'll be very little more then a puppet.

Honestly, it's not the job of politicians to think so far as I'm concerned. It's their job to follow the rules laid down for them by the US Constitution. Nothing more. Nothing less.

The US Constitution is unbelievable broad and vague, and that's intentional. You can't handle foreign affairs or domestic spending just by reading the Constitution.

 

[Anathema]

The US Constitution is unbelievable broad and vague, and that's intentional. You can't handle foreign affairs or domestic spending just by reading the Constitution.

While the Constitution is somewhat vague on international affairs of a non - military nature it is quite precise on those military affairs and on all spending (domestic or otherwise).

 

[Wry Catcher]

Is he obviously the Koch's pick?

Is he opposed to all collective bargaining, or only the ability of government workers to form unions and be represented by professional negotiators?

 

[Nyvin]

The US Constitution is unbelievable broad and vague, and that's intentional. You can't handle foreign affairs or domestic spending just by reading the Constitution.

While the Constitution is somewhat vague on international affairs of a non - military nature it is quite precise on those military affairs and on all spending (domestic or otherwise).

No it isn't. It isn't precise about anything really, a lot of how the government operates today are just rules and customs that have arisen on their own. The Circuit Courts? never mentioned in the Constitution, Political Parties? Never mentioned. Senate or House rules? Never mentioned beyond the VERY basics like "Speaker of the House" and "Vice President will lead the Senate".

But that's all rather redundant because to be President you need to make decisions on literally every issue in the world. Knowing the Constitution should be like passing the first grade for the President, it's the very, very beginning.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The US Constitution is unbelievable broad and vague, and that's intentional. You can't handle foreign affairs or domestic spending just by reading the Constitution.

While the Constitution is somewhat vague on international affairs of a non - military nature it is quite precise on those military affairs and on all spending (domestic or otherwise).

No it's not. How is a militia defined, what does general Welfare really mean, what defines domestic tranquility and is the common defence, a defense against foreign nations only, and not about disease? What is the "Law of Nations", are "high crimes" felonies or do some felonies not equate to "high crimes"; are all misdemeanors impeachable offenses or only those wherein the H. of Rep. has a bone to pick with the POTUS.

How does the War Powers act comport with clause 11 of sec. 8 in art. 1? And most importantly, why are so many Supreme Court Decision split?

 

[martybegan]

Is he obviously the Koch's pick?

Is he opposed to all collective bargaining, or only the ability of government workers to form unions and be represented by professional negotiators?

He seems to only worry about government unions, kind of like FDR did decades ago.

Private unions are impacted by market forces, like private owners. Public unions don't have that issue, and in fact have willing accomplices in the politicians they help get into office to rob the government piggy bank and leave the bill with people decades later.

The problem is "decades later" is now, or at best right around the corner.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Is he obviously the Koch's pick?

Is he opposed to all collective bargaining, or only the ability of government workers to form unions and be represented by professional negotiators?

He seems to only worry about government unions, kind of like FDR did decades ago.

Private unions are impacted by market forces, like private owners. Public unions don't have that issue, and in fact have willing accomplices in the politicians they help get into office to rob the government piggy bank and leave the bill with people decades later.

The problem is "decades later" is now, or at best right around the corner.

Cool idea, so government employees would be paid and receive the same benefits as those in the private sector. I like it, my job responsibilities would have put me into upper management within one of those too big to fail firms, and the other great perk is I wouldn't have been held to a higher standard of deportment.

Wow, three Martini lunches, flying first class and being driven in a limo - I'm in.

 

[martybegan]

Is he obviously the Koch's pick?

Is he opposed to all collective bargaining, or only the ability of government workers to form unions and be represented by professional negotiators?

He seems to only worry about government unions, kind of like FDR did decades ago.

Private unions are impacted by market forces, like private owners. Public unions don't have that issue, and in fact have willing accomplices in the politicians they help get into office to rob the government piggy bank and leave the bill with people decades later.

The problem is "decades later" is now, or at best right around the corner.

Cool idea, so government employees would be paid and receive the same benefits as those in the private sector. I like it, my job responsibilities would have put me into upper management within one of those too big to fail firms, and the other great perk is I wouldn't have been held to a higher standard of deportment.

Wow, three Martini lunches, flying first class and being driven in a limo - I'm in.

The late 80's called. it wants its Business stereotypes back.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Is he obviously the Koch's pick?

Is he opposed to all collective bargaining, or only the ability of government workers to form unions and be represented by professional negotiators?

He seems to only worry about government unions, kind of like FDR did decades ago.

Private unions are impacted by market forces, like private owners. Public unions don't have that issue, and in fact have willing accomplices in the politicians they help get into office to rob the government piggy bank and leave the bill with people decades later.

The problem is "decades later" is now, or at best right around the corner.

Cool idea, so government employees would be paid and receive the same benefits as those in the private sector. I like it, my job responsibilities would have put me into upper management within one of those too big to fail firms, and the other great perk is I wouldn't have been held to a higher standard of deportment.

Wow, three Martini lunches, flying first class and being driven in a limo - I'm in.

The late 80's called. it wants its Business stereotypes back.

One must infer it took a Democratic Administration to reign in such perks, if you are correct. No one I worked with ever flew Business Class, let alone First Class, and beer better not be on the recieipts required for reimbursement. Who does fly first class, or are the CEO's, CFO's, Kochs and Waltons flying in the company jet nowadays?

 

[martybegan]

Is he obviously the Koch's pick?

Is he opposed to all collective bargaining, or only the ability of government workers to form unions and be represented by professional negotiators?

He seems to only worry about government unions, kind of like FDR did decades ago.

Private unions are impacted by market forces, like private owners. Public unions don't have that issue, and in fact have willing accomplices in the politicians they help get into office to rob the government piggy bank and leave the bill with people decades later.

The problem is "decades later" is now, or at best right around the corner.

Cool idea, so government employees would be paid and receive the same benefits as those in the private sector. I like it, my job responsibilities would have put me into upper management within one of those too big to fail firms, and the other great perk is I wouldn't have been held to a higher standard of deportment.

Wow, three Martini lunches, flying first class and being driven in a limo - I'm in.

The late 80's called. it wants its Business stereotypes back.

One must infer it took a Democratic Administration to reign in such perks, if you are correct. No one I worked with ever flew Business Class, let alone First Class, and beer better not be on the recieipts required for reimbursement. Who does fly first class, or are the CEO's, CFO's, Kochs and Waltons flying in the company jet nowadays?

Are you off your meds?

What does this have to do with the topic or your question?