According to the stat heads at 538, he appears to be strikingly more conservative than the other candidates. In fact, he’s strikingly more conservative than any Republican candidate ever.
Interestingly, the only candidates with more conservative voting records are the Pauls. That could mean that the scale is wonky and defines libertarianism as conservatism (since they lean libertarian in public statements), or could mean that their “libertarian leaning” is just so much bs and that they are purely conservative.
Good one. A lot of Republicans would agree with you. But if you’re that worried about war and peace issues you might want to check out who one of his partners often was from about 2001-2008, voting with him nearly every time. It wasn’t Ted Cruz.
Aw, is that all it takes. She was also the main voice behind getting the administration to bomb Libya and has always taken the most hawkish position in internal administration debates. I guess her hawkishness is always smart hawkishness, while Graham’s is dumb, or something.
Hillary was wrong and admitted it. That’s a whole lot better than graham. Plus, I agree with her on a bunch of issues. It’s not about which candidate is great, none are. It’s about which is better. Graham is wrong and dumb on nearly everything.
On foreign policy, there’s very little disagreement between a mainstream Republican and Hillary Clinton. Cruz is less likely to get us involved in wars than Clinton or a mainstream Republican, so if that’s actually what is most important to you, then you’ll support Cruz. If other issues, like abortion or Social Security are more important, than by all means vote for Clinton. And frankly, despite their anti-war talk, I think most of the Democratic base cares more about economic issues. John Bolton is pro-gay marriage, which will get him perhaps two Democratic votes more than Jeb Bush would win. But as long as a Democrat checks the right boxes on economic and social justice issues, he can get away with a lot of unacceptable views. Witness “homosexuality is an abomination!” Robert Byrd, a progressive hero according to Daily Kos. War and social issues are secondary issues, which is why Clinton and Webb alike can strike out conservative views on those issues to try to win crossover votes, but would never stray on an issue like Social Security or health care or the minimum wage or taxes on the rich.
It’s not isolationist vs hawk, it’s dumb wars and dead soldiers for nothing vs diplomacy and reasonable engagement and occasional force. The republicans get an F-, the democrats get a D or a C-.
Graham as president means war wit Iran and thousands of dead Americans for nothing. Plus a guaranteed nuclear Iran in the long run, since we would never and could never occupy them indefinitely.
And an apology makes the record less relevant? Has she shown any sign of actually learning anything? Was Libya smart? I think it was. She was the main voice pushing for the bombing. And guess who in the Senate agreed with the Libya action, putting aside partisanship? Yep, John McCain and Lindsey Graham.
If Hillary Clinton is elected, Graham and McCain will be much more influential than they are now. If you wanted to marginalize them, electing Ted Cruz is a sure way to do it. Clinton, not so much.
And now Ted Cruz will be shopping for some Obamacare since his wife is on leave from her executive position at Goldman Sachs for his campaign and she has been providing their healthcare (through her employer).