Quote:I don't know how much I agree on O'Malley being the guy who'll open up the Hillary History book on her unless he's within striking distance come primary season. If he's a distant second, I expect him to revert to being a friendly "competitor" with an eye on the VP job. Right now, Bernie Sanders is O'Malley's best friend. O'Malley will pull centrist Democratic votes, and if Sanders can take away enough of Hillary's far left supporters, O'Malley has a real shot at the nomination. If we're to have a Democrat in the White House again, I'd rather it be O'Malley than anyone else in the field. I'll admit that I haven't really looked at his history in any great detail yet, but he does seem to have a very Bill Clinton-esque "moderate" feel to him. If you put the Lewinsky scandal aside, it's, imo, hard to argue that Bill Clinton wasn't, along with Ronald Reagan, one of the better Presidents of the 20th century, and imo better than guy before him and the last two guys who've held the office.

 

Sanders doesn't remind me of Hitler in his speeches. He strikes me as one of two candidates, along with Trump, who feels like he has nothing to lose and is speaking straight from the heart. I don't know who I'd compare his speaking style to, but it certainly wouldn't be Hitler. Everything Hitler said was a carefully-crafted political message, delivered with two ounces of hellfire, a half cup of brimstone, and a pound of racist crap. Side note: the Nazis were about as "socialist" as the Stalin-era Soviet Union was. Both were much closer to fascist regimes, and many historical scholars agree that there was nothing socialist about the National Socialist Party. I don't think you were making the comparison between Socialism and Nazism, but others have, and it's just patently wrong.

 

I'm not sure how much Bush's speeches in particular are from the heart. Bush is a groomed dynasty politician, with a brother and father no doubt giving him loads of advice on getting into the White House and staying there. Rubio seems to be speaking from the heart, but one need only look at his voting record, particularly on immigration, to question how much is him being genuine and how much is him wanting to be President. With Cruz, it's impossible to tell. I'm certain he believes a lot of what he says, but I'm also certain that he's a skilled politician who recognizes how to play to the emotions of his voting base while making it seem like he's solely talking issues.

 

Regarding the part in bold.  Bill Clinton wasn't necessarily a bad president in my opinion, but I certainly wouldn't put him at the same level as Ronald Reagan.  One thing that is interesting regarding Clinton's presidency is remember, he had a Congress led by republicans.  I like to do a lot of reading, and one book that I found interesting is called The Pact by Steven M. Gillon  .  It talks about the contrasts and the relationship between President Clinton, and then Speaker of The House Newt Gingrich.  It's a pretty good read.

 

Regarding Bernie Sanders, I used Hitler as an example of his speaking style.  Most of his speeches seem very "angry", "authoritarian" and "demanding".  I am in no way comparing Bernie Sanders and Hitler regarding political points of view, and I am not comparing socialism to nazism.  Regarding some of his political views, there are a couple of things that I actually agree with him on when it comes to identifying the issues.  I just don't like his solutions.

 

Regarding Jeb Bush - In all honesty, I haven't listen to him as much as some of the other candidates, and I don't have a "concrete" opinion of him just yet.  That being said though, I view him as an establishment candidate which is a huge red flag to me.  Establishment means "more of the same" whether it's a democrat or republican candidate.  I must say though, I think he did a very good job as Governor of Florida, and I think that he could do a good job as President.

 

Regarding Marco Rubio, at this point he is still my first choice, though I'm starting to perhaps reconsider him as my first choice.  I like that he seems to speak from the heart and really wants to do good.  That being said, I look at his history and read his autobiography and one thing that comes to mind regarding him, he has always had political aspirations (read career politician).  He is still not a member of the establishment, but I wonder if he could eventually go that way.

 

As far as Marco Rubio's voting record, I don't fault him as much as many on the right for some of his votes.  As far as the immigration issue, I do think that he has common sense ideas regarding a reasonable way to solve the problem.  His supposed "flip-flop" regarding the issue is that he finally came to realize that it can't happen with one huge, sweeping bill, rather it must be done a step at a time.  That makes sense to me, especially considering the way that things work in Washington D.C..

 

As far as Ted Cruz goes, he is clearly my second choice though he may actually win my vote in the primary.  Unlike Marco Rubio, he wasn't/isn't as much of a "career politician".  Yes he is a lawyer, but his experience makes sense.  He has worked not only for The Supreme Court as a clerk for Chief Justice William Rehnquist, but also worked in both the public and private sectors litigating cases before The Supreme Court.  He also has experience as a Senator, though not as much, and has stood firm regarding what he told his constituents when he campaigned for the position.  That tells me that he is honest, and will do what he tells you that he will do.  He has a very well-rounded resume having worked in two branches of government, and he is by no means an establishment candidate.

---