Without checking, I would have thrown Al Franken into the mix–but could be easily dissuaded. How has he been doing?
+1 for DeFazio - the guy is as honest as our springs are rainy. He was my Rep when I lived in Eugene, and was almost universally well-regarded. Contrast this with David Wu who has been my Rep since I moved up near Portland. Creepy tiger-suit photos aside, I’ve always gotten a bit of a career-politician vibe from him - he spoke at my work a few years ago, and he just seemed like a fill-in-the-blanks Democrat.
I agree about Kucinich, too - while I feel he’s on the fringes sometimes, he always seemed like a very straight shooter.
Jonathan Chance. Merciless on ignorance.
I disagree with all who have said Chris Christie. From what I can tell, he is a typical politician that lies when he thinks it’s expedient or he can get away with it. I believe his campaign statements followed by actions in the opposite direction with regard to public pensions show this. He also didn’t seem at all honest in the Race to the Top business though I’m not sure it was proven that he lied. If I tried hard enough, I could probably find some other things showing he is not at all honest or “no BS”. That’s just the image he promotes, similar to the infamous Straight Talk Express. The more he promotes the image, the more I’ll think he is full of shit.
Saw the thread title and clicked it to post Anthony Weiner. Not only does he tell the truth, he refuses to allow rightwingers to blather on lies unchallenged.
Very well. He is the guy fighting the loss of net neutrality and telecom mergers. He can not win because the telecoms have the money, control the message and have captured the regulators. but he is fighting the good fight.
Arguing with a crazy person isn’t hard, it’s just that those listening can’t tell the difference.
Jerry Brown is probably the quickest, smartest, best-educated person I’ve ever met. But he is prepared to be completely full of shit if it advances the cause of Jerry Brown. It is a higher, better reasoned and more coherent class of bullshit than you will encounter with any other politician, but it is still bullshit, the same way a Ferrari is still a car.
This thread would be a lot more interesting if it were specified that people only nominate pols they don’t agree with.
Course, it’d be a lot shorter, too.
There are LOADS of honest politicians who say exactly what they think- provided they live in districts where the vast majority of the voters thinks as they do.
Barney Frank can say whatever he wants precisely BECAUSE he represents an extremely liberal district where there’s no chance he’ll ever be voted out of office.
In the same way, a far right Republican with a safe Senate seat can and will say whatever he thinks.
It’s only the guys in purple states/districts who really have to hedge.
Maybe Carl Levin or Anthony Weiner.
I think Ron Paul is relatively honest as well but I think he’d be a disaster in the white house. He’d shut down government and let it stay shut.
Absolutely - he’s the real deal (thank you, Oregon voters).
Bernie Sanders. Bar none.
So hey mate, I got this hot property on my hands and I’m moving out of the city for my job and I gotta sell it fast so I’ll make it real cheap for ya my friend, 'cause you look like a good guy and I like you already. It’s in Brooklyn, ya can’t miss it, great view on the river, little windy but it’s got sturdy stone foundations and it’s a really unique piece of real estate.
I’d say Trump, but he’s not in yet. So, Ron Paul. 
So far as I know, Trump has never claimed that Obama was born in Kenya.
And that cite does not prove that he did.
And not only does it not prove what you claim it proves, it doesn’t even prove what it does claim to prove, which is that Trump used the alleged 2 million dollars that Obama spent keeping the document secret as “evidence that Obama was born in Kenya”. What Trump did was suggest that Obama spent 2 million dollars trying to keep the original birth document secret. If true, there could be any number of reasons why Obama might do that.
Is Trump’s behavior not sufficiently criticizable on its own, that people have to resort to false claims in an effort to discredit him?
edit: nevermind.