No chance as long as millions of good people ignore the principles they claim to revere. When the GOP leadership chooses its own controllled candidate the door will open for Johnson to attract the millions of disillusioned conservatives.
The stage will be set for the miracle of 2016.

Very few voters engage in deep analysis of a candidate's policies, particularly any unintended consequences. The result is that campaign statements are reduced to bumper sticker quality. It goes beyond anti-intellectual to anti-thinking, and you can see people's eyes glaze over when you challenge them to think about their choices.

Governor Kasich a heartbeat away from being president? Terrible idea!
How about some links demonstrating the lying you keep referring to, please?
Serve up the dirt on Cruz!

Perhaps, but I was limiting my options to those from the major two parties. Unfortunately, Johnson has no chance whatsoever of becoming President. That said, I would vote for him if Trump becomes the nominee.

" I look at the current candidates and there is only one I believe will do that: Cruz."
I assume that you mean current GOP candidates.
Gary Johnson would fulfill that criterion, too.

Perhaps, but I think you'd agree with me that the current system is only representing at best 1/2 of the population. And that's all they need to retain power.

Your point on Trump IMO is an example of this. It isn't the social conservatives Trump is winning. In closed primaries restricted to just registered Republicans, Trump is losing. It is only in the open-primary states that Trump wins. Who does Trump appeal to? Those who were once called Blue Dog Democrats who have been abandoned by the Democrats as they have shifted further left/Progressive. There aren't any more "moderate" Democrats - those who worked with Reagan. The Democratic Party doesn't fund the re-election campaigns of those representatives who were once much more moderate - especially on fiscal issues.

Is Trump splitting the vote? I think there is a reasonable argument for that. The question is splitting it amongst whom? Since the Progressive/Democratic Party only represents about 25%-30% of the Nation, that leads another 70% which (foolishly) the Republicans assume they can appeal to. I believe that this is one of the reasons why they have been such a disaster - they haven't settled on a demographic to target so they try to appeal to everyone and unsurprisingly end up offending everyone.

You might enjoy Stockman's take on this. What Stockman ignores is the blatant, on tv, lying and cheating done by Cruz. This, to me, disqualifies Cruz from consideration for the Supreme Court.
http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com...

That comment is unworthy of you and completely inappropriate, Esceptico. Refute the comment; don't just insult the author.

I would look at his past. Did his religious convictions further Evangelical Christianity when he won cases in the Supreme Court protecting the First and Second Amendments? Did those convictions further his religion when acting as Senator? From all I can see, they did not, but I won't pretend to know everything about the man. Personally, I think his religious ties are over-hyped - probably because for the first time in decades we finally have a Presidential candidate who has principles he has never backed away from to placate an electorate.

The real question in my mind for President of the United States is not his religion or non-religion anyway. My primary concern is how that person executes the Office of the President in accordance with the Constitutional powers vested in that Office. I look at the current candidates and there is only one I believe will do that: Cruz.

I am sure if you keep smoking that stuff, you will remain in peace.

Under current circumstances, what is your suggestion as which of the candidates is best?

Well said.

imo. many who oppose Cruz do so in fear of how his religious convictions will affect his actions. Is there evidence that Cruz will keep the constitution as a higher priority in his decisions than his religious convictions when there is a conflict? (I have no bias for or against Cruz, just seeking information.)

If he can get equal time to deliver the message of liberty on the debate stage, he could do considerably better.

So that's the problem with the fed! They create plenty of money from nothing, but the banksters won't let it out of their grubby little paws.

I wish all GOP primary voters had that problem, John. They would be less biased and brainwashed. It's a tragedy to see so much potential for rational thinking destroyed.

The supreme court recently ruled in favor of eminent domain. That freedom has already been lost along with a lot of others why do you think trump would be worse than Hillary or Sanders? It's ? Obviously Hillary or Sanders would be a lot worse. If she is elected, you will c as she raises taxes

yes, it fits. . acerbic. -- j

p.s. ewv, could you name a subject area
where you find joy and happiness, which
makes you gush with warmth and friendliness?
.

That does not define what they mean when they say they want a brokered convention.

For the people who are threatened with it is a "big issue". It means everything. You keep telling us "not much will change on that in the next 4 yrs no matter who is in there". It isn't true. How many victims does it take before you start to care? How many "wonderful" anti-individual rights pronouncement does a Pragmatist wheeler-dealer like Trump have to make before you care about that?

The reality is that the election is such a circus because the country, especially Pragmatist politicians, are so anti-intellectual with no grasp of principles of limited government and rights of the individual. That explains the rest of it, including the inability to evaluate what the qualifications are and who might have them. It has nothing to do with "imperfection"; there are no standards.

It has been suggested that Trump could have gotten a larger return on his starting inheritance if he made ordinary investments in the stock market, but then he would have missed out on the high of taking other people's private property with eminent domain that he finds so "wonderful".

The deal making period begins on June 8, right after the final primaries. If Trump is short of the majority, he may well go looking for a VP with votes in their pocket.

And don't kid yourself none of these guys would turn him down, Cruz and Rubio are first term Senators -- and Rubio is about to be unemployed. Kasich won't have a better chance next time unless he ups his profile by being VP.

Win or lose, the VP is the presumptive first seed in the next election. It didn't work this way in the Democratic side because the Clinton cartel scared Biden away.

Every president has claimed to be Christian. The political issue is whether they keep it as a private matter and pay lip service to it, or use it as motivation to impose public policy violating people's rights.

Trump is in some ways as overt as Cruz the way he waves a Bible over his head pandering to evangelicals, even when he can't pronounce Biblical names. But no one believes the antics. When Trump claimed to have his childhood Bible with him, waving it around and pronouncing it his favorite book, many didn't believe it, suspecting that he had brought it out for the first time since his childhood.

The difference between Cruz and Trump in this matter is that Cruz has presented himself as a religious zealot who wants to impose religion in some ways as policy (aside from all his other, better principles), and Trump could do the same thing as part of his Pragmatist deal-making whether he believes it or not. There is a risk, in that sense, that Trump could wind up being just as bad or worse, just as there is a risk that in other realms he could be as bad as Hillary.

But it's important to remember that Cruz does have principles on constitutional limited government that Trump does not, and the likelihood of imposing evangelical policies in a seriously damaging way in the foreseeable future is generally much less than anyone imposing the more collectivist statist ideas (including destructive pandering to islam) that has already been the general trend and threatens to become worse. In that, Cruz is the less dangerous, both because of and in spite of his ideas in comparison to both Trump and Hillary.

Eminent domain is not good i agree. But it is not as big an issue as obamacare, $15/hr minimum wages, explosions in taxes and NSA incursions into privacy