"...Awesome Chart Shows Who The Most Conservative Candidate In Modern History..."

[LongTermGuy]

http://i.imgur.com/raS8Ufl.png

Quote:

<tbody>
"Sen. Ted Cruz officially threw his hat in the presidential ring on Monday. (Old news, I know.) Liberals are already calling him an anti-woman lunatic, but that will likely happen to all of the conservative candidates as they jump in the race.

But just how conservative are our likely contenders? This chart says it all, and I find it incredibly interesting.

The chart was complied by Five Thirty Eight. They took a series of factors into consideration, such as congressional voting records, fundraising ratings and public statements made by the individual.Quote:

<tbody>
http://chicksontheright.com/images/Red%20Dawn/583x920xscore.jpg.pagespeed.ic.bs-vZuSWuY.webp

</tbody>

It’s funny because the author is uses the chart to point out why Cruz is far too “extreme” and therefore not electable. (I’m not really sure when advocating constitutional principles and acknowledging the existence of God became “extreme,” but I repeat myself.)

Despite the author’s doubts about Cruz, the chart seems to be unbiased.

According to their data, Cruz is the most conservative candidate in modern history."


</tbody>


:cool:

[LongTermGuy]

`Here is the source,..................FiveThirtyEight Politics.`

Quote:

<tbody>

<tbody>
Let’s Be Serious About Ted Cruz From The Start: He’s Too Extreme And Too Disliked To Win (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/lets-be-serious-about-ted-cruz-from-the-start-hes-too-extreme-and-too-disliked-to-win/)

</tbody>


``Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s newly minted presidential campaign is the media equivalent of a juicy rib-eye that robbers use to distract a guard dog during a heist. He’ll get a ton of media attention, and he’ll get to spread his message — which may be all that Cruz is after — but Cruz almost certainly has no shot of winning the nomination, according to every indicator that predicts success in presidential primaries.

First, Cruz doesn’t have enough support from party bigwigs. To win the Republican or Democratic nomination, you need the backing of at least some of the party apparatus. At a minimum, your fellow party members shouldn’t hate you. Otherwise, you end up getting the Newt Gingrich 2012 treatment. That is, you get pounced on the moment you’re seen as a threat to win the nomination.

If we’re ever in a world where it looks like Cruz could win the nomination, you’ll very likely see such pouncing. You can read article after article about how Cruz has isolated himself in the Senate. It got so bad that he recently had to apologize to his Republican colleagues.

And the Cruz hatred doesn’t stop at the edges of the Senate cloakroom. Influential party actors dislike him, too. I can’t remember another Republican who united Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson, Jennifer Rubin and Thomas Sowell in opposition.``



</tbody>
:rolleyes:

[Kathianne]

I don't know what 'fundraising' has to do with the 'average.' What criteria are they using for 'public policy statements' in rating where they fall?

There's only 'Congressional voting record' that's objective and that only pertains to those that served in Congress.

[LongTermGuy]

I don't know what 'fundraising' has to do with the 'average.' What criteria are they using for 'public policy statements' in rating where they fall?

There's only 'Congressional voting record' that's objective and that only pertains to those that served in Congress.


......who do you like If I may ask?


*To me.....It's about time.

Ted Cruz just might be the next Ronald Reagan.

Just like Jimmy Carter was followed by Ronald Reagan....Barack Obama will be followed by Ted Cruz.....but then...we will see...`

[Kathianne]

It's too early for me to make up my mind. However I notice that Reagan is to the left of many, as is Nixon for that matter.

[LongTermGuy]

It's too early for me to make up my mind. However I notice that Reagan is to the left of many, as is Nixon for that matter.


`yup.. seen that also...check my second post of this page...for source...

[Kathianne]

`yup.. seen that also...check my second post of this page...for source...

I wasn't questioning your use of the source, rather the methodology.

[LongTermGuy]

I wasn't questioning your use of the source, rather the methodology.


yes I understand and know dear...I was just pointing it out for everyone...

[jimnyc]

I added photo to opening post...

[revelarts]

http://www.ontheissues.org

gives very good summaries on voting records and statements by issue area.

voting records tell the story, R's are not really that conservative.
and few have a record of action in the areas of abortion, civil liberties and social issues.

[Abbey Marie]

What definition of 'Conservative' are we using here? If it was social conservatism, I doubt the results would look anything like this chart.

[Kathianne]

What definition of 'Conservative' are we using here? If it was social conservatism, I doubt the results would look anything like this chart.
You bring up the point I did. :beer: