Lindsey Graham for president thread.

Is anyone excited about Lindsey Graham running for president? He seems to be more liberal than the other Republican candidates when it comes to domestic and social issues. He states he believes in man made global warming and that something needs to be done about it. He seems not to be hostile to the social safety net, saying that he is not a self made man and that he realizes sometimes people need government assistance to get back on their feet. The big problem I see with him is that he is running as having a lot of foreign policy experience. His solution to the problems of the Middle East, however, seems to be lets bomb everyone more and invade Iraq again. So what do you all think about his positions and his chances? I think he doesn’t have a chance at the nomination, but if I had to pick a Republican as the next POTUS, he seems like the best choice among the current candidates.

“If I’m president of the United States, and you’re thinking about joining Al Qaeda or ISIL — anybody thinking about that? — I’m not gonna call the judge, I’m gonna call the drone. And we will kill you.” -Lindsey Graham

His only solution to security threats, real or imagined, is authoritarianism that would make George III blush. No amount of insincere prattle about how he kind maybe believes in climate change is going to offset that.

He’s very unlikely to get the nomination. The party base thinks he’s weak on social issues (and many think he’s a closeted homosexual, making them hate him more) and there are other kill-crazy maniacs to choose from.

He’s probably not as insane as most of the others.

On the plus side, he says he’d welcome Caitlyn Jenner if she wanted to be a Republican.

Lobohan wrote: “He’s probably not as insane as most of the others.”

And there’s the bumper-sticker.

Seriously, if the Republicans couldn’t win with the real John McCain they sure won’t win with an ersatz one.

Graham gives the neocons a pretty face and soft tenor.

I’m not seeing how that is substantively different from Obama’s position. Can you elaborate? Maybe some context will help. Is he talking about “someone” in the US or “someone” in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, etc.

What I have a problem with is that he wants to go beyond drones and send ground troops into Iraq and possibly Syria.

Well, he was talking to a room full of Iowans. But even if you think he didn’t mean US citizens–and I wouldn’t give him that assumption since he regularly calls for doing things like throwing US citizens in Gitmo–it would still be a substantial departure from Obama’s already-quite-authoriatrian position to say that thinking about joining ISIS merits an extra-judicial assassination.

And I just picked that as his most recent insanity. There are dozens of others.

OK, NPR reports that as him taking a poke at Paul in a joking manner, so I’m not going to take that as an actual policy position.

But you’re right, he’s very, very hawkish and scary in his belief that the military is the solution to most foreign policy issues.

The joke was that his audience might be considering joining ISIS. I don’t understand why you’d think he was otherwise joking.

Lindsey is welcoming Republican Caitlyn Jenner to the Republican big tent. I wonder what his intentions are with Miss Caitlyn.

I’m just echoing what the reporter, who actually was there, reported.

Well, no, you’re not. The cited article doesn’t support your interpretation over mine.

But more importantly, the reporter has no specialized knowledge here. The audio is online. Give it a listen. Knowing his other positions, it’s certainly not clear that he’s joking.

A better defense would be that he was using loose language about the “thinking about joining” part.

Wrasslin?

OTOH, there’s “if you’re tired of war, don’t vote for me.

Note the tenor of the writer and the top comments. Note that this is a conservative website. (Though, granted, not all dislike him BECAUSE of the comment, especially not for the same reason as liberals.)

He said Republicans should man up and deal if SCOTUS strikes down SSM bans. That’s a point in his favor, though I guess it says something about today’s Republican Party if respect for the rule of law is something of a fringe position.

Graham is this cycle’s John Huntsman. I think it’s important to have someone like him in the primary. He’s a more inclusive candidate, and he’s respected by Democrats in the Senate. No Republican President will face a Congress more willing to work with him if that sort of thing matters to you.

I wish I could share such a positive view about Senator Graham. I certainly don’t get the impression he’s respected by anyone other than John McCain.

Cooperativeness in doing evil things is not better than gridlock, no.

It is also hardly necessary to assume GOP control of the Senate will continue, in fact, the opposite is a better bet. Gerrymandering in the House may be too strong to overcome at this time.

ETA: If “this cycle’s Jon Huntsman” means “candidate nobody cared about or even heard about or will remember”, that’s not a compliment.

Wouldn’t that be George Pataki?