This struck me out of the blue: if the Republican tent doesn't lift up a presidential candidate from its' Tea Party constituency in this election, there will not be a valid election. Legally, valid perhaps. But in terms of moral authority? Not a chance.

Your highest rated candidates above, don't seem to fit that bill.

In my opinion, Herman Cain is a Patriot above all the rest. Early American Patriots held normal jobs and took a stand on policy to safeguard the freedoms and traditions of this country. And what does "more novelty than substance" really mean here in regards to Cain? He was the first candidate to propose substantive economic solutions with real numbers and analysis to back it up. Cain has my vote!

I don't know how the Patriot gets their rankings, but to have Cain as a 5 and Romney as a 6 is ridiculous. Mitt Romney is a RINO. He IS the establishment and will do nothing to change the Washington machine. I'm very disappointed in the Patriot Post and this analysis....WAY OFF BASE!

I would reverse the Gingrich/Cain ratings, as Cain is not a politician; as you write, it works both ways, and Gingrich has way too much baggage. Cain is the only candidate to date that has a plan coherent enough that he speaks to it regularly, while the others have either mirrored it or ask the interrested to "view a website". If they can't speak to a plan directly, how complicated is it, and why can't they talk about it in an interview? I also note that no candidate exceeds a 6. That is a pretty mediocre rating on a 1-10 scale.

I also applaud the omission of Huntsman, negative ratings need not be listed.

I was leaning towards Newt for a while now and after listening to Perry, Romney, et al shoot themselves in foot I think I made a wise decision. Cain is also strong. Maybe a Gingrinch/Cain ticket?

You can NOT satisfy everyone at once, But Ron Paul knows what is going on and has addressed it as well as the remedy. Some may not like the medicine but the Doctor dosen't change his diagnossis, NOR his opinion. Ron Paul is NOT a flip flopper / waffeler as I have seen all the other (posers) canidates do in the debates (if you can call them that) as well as in interviews.

The status quoe is afraid of Ron Pauks message as well as being terrified of what his solution would be (could be / if elected). He is the LEAST globalist of the bunch. Is well aware of all the corryption going on in this government as well as the U.N.s meddeling in American affairs.

Ron Paul in 2012.

Semper Peratus .

Acta Non Verba !!!!

I like Newt, but he has managed to shoot himself in BOTH feet !He will make a great Secretary of State !

If we get Romney or Perry we get someone the Republican Machine has picked and that just means more of the same. That is GHW Bush's NWO that punishes America and re-distributes the wealth world wide. We need an America first President please.

Your "objective" critique of Ron Paul is beneath contempt.

His "non interventionist" foreign policy is nuts?

I think playing the world's policeman for free, perpetual wars and nation building with money borrowed from China or printed up out of thin air is what's naive.

Your analysis of his positions concludes that people think he's too cranky? Some people THINK he's a nut-job.

He's a devout Christian. He doesn't think that his personal religious beliefs aren't a campaign issue.

I will not be reading your objective opinions any more.

Sorry for the typographical errors. You see I do suffer from "fat finger syndrome".

Best candite for president

I normally agree with all of your points in your Thursday essay. This piece, however, makes me question if you actually wrote it. Did you read the "pros and cons" before writing the introduction? Your claim that electability is not considered is completely false. From Congressman Paul's 'cons': "fails the "nut job" test with many voters...comes off as a crank; too narrow a support base; name recognition negatives; perpetual presidential candidate;." How is that not a consideration of electability? And given Mr. Romney's "cons", how could he receive a Patriot Rating of 6? All of his "pros" are about his electability and his cons correctly mark him as the white Obama that he is. I have always considered the Patriot Post to stand for true conservatism, but this "ranking" would better fit as a FoxNews hack job.

I am surprised you rated Romney so high and Santorum so low.

Santorum is conservative fiscally and morally. He has a strong conservative record. His idenas on foreign policy are right out of Reagan's playbook. Rick's election loss in 2006--let's face it, that was just a Demo year. On the other hand, Rick has beaten Dem incumbents. Rick's 2004 support for Specter is a negative, I agree, but was justified by party protocol.

By contrast, how can Romney justify government healthcare and statements in support of global warming, gay marriage and abortion?

Santorum should be 6 or higher on your scale; Romney a 4.

Keep up the good work.

Brad

Knute is the best candidate in the race. In any case they are all much more qualified than Obama ever was.

Ron Paul is clearly the ONLY Constitutionalist in the bunch. Your rating seems to view that as a negative. RP is the ONLY candidate that has a prayer of turning our decline around, or who even wants to, for that matter.

With respect, this rating seems a bit unfair, considering Ron Paul is listed as a 3 with the description of "Strong constitutional advocate" while Mitt Romney is a high 6 with a description of "Big government establishment Republican." The president is suppose to strictly adhere to the Constitution, not "Big government" policies.

Newt is far and away the brightest but his baggage is overwhelming. Cain cannot sustain. Perry keeps stepping all over himself. Paul is an isolationist and naive. Santorum is bright but bland beyond description. Bachmann is just shrill to the core. Romney is a career pol and a RINO. Where is Alan Keyes when we need him? He is the most capable person out there. He is knowledgeable about all issues and needs to throw his hat into the ring.

I believe that it was William F. Buckley, Jr. (heir to the conservative leadership of Robert Taft and Barry Goldwater) who said that conservatives should nominate the conservative with the best chance of winning the election. Although Romney is not the most conservative candidate, he is clearly the most electable.

It disappoints me to see former NM governor Gary Johnson not included in this list.

Yep! Tons of minor "cons". Still I do not know any Republican who would not vote for him, along with a good number of Democrats who view him as the most level headed.

This is a fine lady who would make a great president. That said, why then does this format have to drag Sarah Palin thru the coals by saying that Michelle is more articulate than Sarah Palin. That is a put down for both these fine American conservative ladies.

Both of these ladies are far more articulate than is Cain, Paul or Perry. Either would certainly make a better POTUSA than would Cain,Paul, Perry or Romney.

A good man, but not quite ready for a political office of this magnitude. The 9% national sales tax is a real stopper for me. Unfortunately, our economy is now more of a consumption-based economy, which would be really hurt by a national sales tax added onto the state and local sales taxes, and would hurt middle and lower income people more adversly.

Ron Paul is the ONLY choice...Romeny/Perry,et al are just RINOS....or Democrat LITE!! Not to mention warmongering NEO-CONS!!

Although in the past I have disagreed from time to time with things posted in this news letter and site I have never been so angered as I was when I saw these ratings. You giving Dr Paul a 3 completely shakes my faith in this publication and I no longer consider it the true Patriot's journal. For years I have subscribed and forwarded and preached the Patriot Posts message to anyone who would listen. You speak of Essential Liberty but with this one article I think you have exposed the truth of the matter. Your analysis of Dr. Paul's "cons" is straight from the pages of MSNBC and CNN and Faux News. I am incredibly disappointed and as a former financial contributor and supporter and in the spirit of your penchant for Latin phrases...Et tu, Brute?

You obviously have no idea what a "Patriot" is if you gave Ron Paul a rating of 3 and Mitt Romney a rating of 6 (same with Perry).

None of these gents, with the exception of Ron Paul, understand that economic freedom starts with "sound money". Property rights and our future hang in the balance of what is to be decided in the next couple of years when the current monetary system collapses.

Only Ron Paul stands behind the precepts of our Constitution. The rest of the field are pretenders and will keep the status quo, which means the banking cabal keeps stealing our wealth and labor.

Start paying attention.

I live in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and, and through some inside state house connections, was told that he had virtually NO HAND IN the so called RommneyCare legislation. It was written by the Democrats in the legislature and he signed it without reading any of it.

RommneyCare costs the Commonwealth millions every year and my tax money helps pay for it!

I really like Cain, and would love to see a Cain Gingrich ticket, or Gingrich as Secretary of State. I was for Romeny, but I'm really unsure what he stands for anymore.

Bert

There is no perfect candidate and never will be. Ron Paul is the only candidate that isn't an insider of some sort. He is the only Constitutional candidate of the bunch. I agree that Newt is very intelligent but he is a Washington Insider. Michelle Bachmann talks like a conservative but isn't' ready for the Oval Office. Ron Paul's stance hasn't changed in 30 years. He understand economics and understands what ails America. It isn't hard to see why the "establishment" media and party leaders don't like him. He has solutions and it isn't going to make the party leaders money or bring them fame. Herman Cain is a FED insider and the last person to elect as President since the FED is the core to most of the problems that we have in this country. The FED has systematically destroyed our money and have made themselves rich on the backs of the American people. Most of our issues in the country have their roots in money. Follow the money trail. $14 trillion in debt should speak volumes. Ron Paul is the only candidate that will talk about the FED and their meddling. He may have "strange" foreign policy ideas but they are spot on with our founders. We shouldn't meddle in others affairs with our military but try to resolve them diplomatically.

Its takes a lot of nerve after Obama to question Herman Cainand these others on most anything!! Obama is the "on the floor" standard.

EVERY TIME some competency "shortcoming" is brought up I would just say..."With Obama as the standard, you must be joking" and break into hardy laughter.

Pundits assume some sort of negative if an aspiring nominee has no political executive experience (after the past 50 years of it)! Hogwash...you have a staff for that aspect...the top person must bring honesty, common sense, a spine and respect for both basic economic laws and the constitution to the table.

NO MORE is required!

I would have given Dr. Paul a 10. He is the only candidate who recognizes that no economic recovery is possible unless we abolish the Federal Reserve Bank and stop using their debt based currency. He is also the only candidate who recognizes the unconstitutional, bankrupting nature of our 750+ foreign military bases. He is also the only candidate who bases every decision he makes on the principles contained in the Constitution. He is also the only candidate who recognizes the phony nature of our so-called war on terror, how it's only a pretext for invading sovereign nations and stealing their natural resources. If Dr. Paul doesn't win, it won't matter who does.

He's not prefect BUT I cannot find another candidate that can match Herman Cain accomplishments.

RE-ELECT NO ONE: OUR COUNTRY DOES NOT NEED "EXPERIENCE"... IT NEEDS INTEGRITY & ACCOUNTABILITY.

Mr. & Mrs. Vacio (Vote all congressmen incumbents out)

probably about as much as I did....thought this worthy of forwarding.

Just food for thought

Herman Cain is running for president. He's not a career politician (in fact

he has never held political office). He's known as a pizza guy, but there's

a lot more to him. He's also a computer guy, a banker guy, and a rocket

scientist guy.

Here's his bio:

* Bachelor's degree in Mathematics. (Morehouse)

* Master's degree in Computer Science (Purdue)

* Mathematician for the Navy, where he worked on missile ballistics

(making him a rocket scientist).

* Computer systems analyst for Coca-Cola.

* VP of Corporate Data Systems and Services for Pillsbury (this is the

top of the ladder in the computer world, being in charge of information

systems for a major corporation).

All achieved before reaching the age of 35. Since he reached the top of the

information systems world, he changed careers!

* Business Manager. Took charge of Pillsbury's 400 Burger King

restaurants in the Philadelphia area, which were the company's poorest

performers in the country. Spent the first nine months learning the business

from the ground up, cooking hamburger and yes, cleaning toilets. After three

years he had turned them into the company's best performers.

* Godfather's Pizza CEO. Was asked by Pillsbury to take charge of

their Godfather's Pizza chain (which was on the verge of bankruptcy). He

made it profitable in 14 months.

* In 1988 he led a buyout of the Godfather's Pizza chain from

Pillsbury. He was now the owner of a restaurant chain. Again he reached the

top of the ladder of another industry.

* He was also chairman of the National Restaurant Association during

this time. This is a group that interacts with government on behalf of the

restaurant industry, and it gave him political experience from the

non-politician side.

Having reached the top of a second industry, he changed careers again!

* Adviser to the Federal Reserve System. Herman Cain went to work for

the Federal Reserve Banking System advising them on how monetary policy

changes would affect American businesses.

* Chairman of the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank. He worked his way

up to the chairmanship of a regional Federal Reserve bank. This is only one

step below the chairmanship of the entire Federal Reserve System (the top

banking position in the country). This position allowed him to see how

monetary policy is made from the inside, and understand the political forces

that impact the monetary system.

After reaching the top of the banking industry, he changed careers for a

fourth time!

* Writer and public speaker. He then started to write and speak on

leadership. His books include Speak as a Leader, CEO of Self, Leadership is

Common Sense, and They Think You're Stupid.

* Radio Host. Around 2007-after a remarkable 40 year career-he started

hosting a radio show on WSB in Atlanta (the largest talk radio station in

the country).

He did all this starting from rock bottom (his father was a chauffeur and

his mother was a maid). When you add up his accomplishments in his

life-including reaching the top of three unrelated industries: information

systems, business management, and banking-Herman Cain may have the most

impressive resume of anyone that has run for the presidency in the last half

century.

Herman is a committed Christian. His father was chauffeur for Robert

Woodruff - the major philanthropist and President of Coca Cola Company from

1923- 1954

And, did you know he recorded a gospel album years ago? It has been

recently released on the Internet:

When did it become Unpatriotic to keep our noses out of other country's business? This list is a joke.

Ron Paul is the only candidate who really wants meaningful change. The others are different sides of the same statist, spendthrift, beltway coin. They offer little different from Obumma, other than making the soft tyranny "our" soft tyranny.They would all continue to exercise overreaching powers, and will laugh when asked to provide the section in the Constitution which allows it.

One of the "cons" listed claims that Paul has no clear expression of faith. This is not correct.

His campaign website says, in part:

“I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Savior, and I endeavor every day to follow Him in all I do and in every position I advocate.”

-Ron Paul

My faith is a deeply private issue to me, and I don’t speak on it in great detail during my speeches because I want to avoid any appearance of exploiting it for political gain. Let me be very clear here: I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Savior, and I endeavor every day to follow Him in all I do and in every position I advocate.

Here's the link for the full statement:

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/statement-of-faith/

I agree with all your Cons on the Candidates except for RON PAUL. As the economy continues to slide, you will say that he was right.

And as far as the Foreign Policy is concerned, he is not naive, but in support of America FIRST and foremost. I do believe that the majority of the People are coming to the same conclusion and they are no longer confident in the same old illusion of Wars for profit. They are learning very quickly that nothing else is in their best interest except Ron Paul's philosophy.

No matter what...Herman Cain IS an Washington insider.

His relationship with the Federal Reserve, which he wants to "fix" with one of two people from the Federal Reserve should strike fear in everyone's heart.

Ron Paul, however, wants to audit and abolish the Fed and many other agencies that are counter to the Constitution including the IRS. Don't worry about other countries. Worry about the USA. Isolationist? He's not stupid.

He is well respected. He's my guy.

I can't believe you have a gadsen flag on your home page but are clueless to what it means.

Mush !

What about Cain's work in DC as a lobbyist? Is that not "insider"? Not that I don't like Herman Cain, I think he's a smart man, competent, positive, personable and successful. I question his ability to overcome the problems in DC.

Obvious that he is a very dirty campaigner. His attacks on Romney at the last debate were disgraceful. He is also a hypocrit. He called out Romney, stating that his health care plan provided for illegals, and then stated clearly on O'Reilly that the federal government mandates that the states provide medical care to illegals. Also, he has never lifted a finger to help our Border Patrol agents who have been accused and convicted of ridiculous charges and sentenced to prison. It is much easier to be a conservative in a conservative state like Texas than in a very liberal state like Massachusetts. He also stated on O'Reilly that someone can't change their views at 50 years of age. I didn't know there was an age limit to learning, progressing, and growning. He comes across as an arrogant and not very intelligent person.

There is no perfect candidate and never will be. Ron Paul is the only candidate that isn't an insider of some sort. He is the only Constitutional candidate of the bunch. I agree that Newt is very intelligent but he is a Washington Insider. Michelle Bachmann talks like a conservative but isn't' ready for the Oval Office. Ron Paul's stance hasn't changed in 30 years. He understand economics and understands what ails America. It isn't hard to see why the "establishment" media and party leaders don't like him. He has solutions and it isn't going to make the party leaders money or bring them fame. Herman Cain is a FED insider and the last person to elect as President since the FED is the core to most of the problems that we have in this country. The FED has systematically destroyed our money and have made themselves rich on the backs of the American people. Most of our issues in the country have their roots in money. Follow the money trail. $14 trillion in debt should speak volumes. Ron Paul is the only candidate that will talk about the FED and their meddling. He may have "strange" foreign policy ideas but they are spot on with our founders. We shouldn't meddle in others affairs with our military but try to resolve them diplomatically.

While everyone is entitled to his\her own opinion and therefore has the "right" to be wrong, I respectfully disagree with your low rating of Mr. Cain. While I do applaud Ron Paul for his outspoken stance on several issues, I simply think that Mr. Cain is the only candidate worth our support. Romney and the other "career politicians" are useful only insofar as they are an example of precisely what we DO NOT NEED. But we can be assured of failure if we as a bloc do not unite behind a single candidate.

"If we could combine the best qualities of all candidates into one, the 2012 election would be won. Strategically, the number of constituencies represented by the GOP slate should coalesce, at the end of the primary, in support of one candidate. If that coalition holds, Obama will be defeated."

We need to work diligently to that end, namely the end of the evil that is working relentlessly to harm this great nation. Thank you PatriotPost for all your efforts to keep us grassroots folks informed and engaged. With the grace of God we will take back this nation.

Ron Paul at a 3? Is this some sort of joke?

He is the only one of the candidates who "abide by their prescribed oath 'to support and defend' our Constitution" on a consistent and regular basis. He wants government out of our lives and limited to those roles in which the Constitution grants it.

As for "isolationist foreign policy", someone needs to learn what exactly "isolationism" really is. Ron Paul is a non-interventionist. Big difference. He wishes to follow a model more aligned with Jefferson's vision of "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none". He does not want our country to police the planet, nation build and act as an empire. We don't have the money for it. We don't have the resources for it.

And our soldiers want to be home with their families defending our nation; not the nations of others. Case in point: Ron Paul received more active duty military donations for the 2nd and 3rd quarter than all other Republican candidates AND Obama combined. He also received the most military donations in the 2008 election process.

He wants to trade freely with other nations which is certainly not "isolationist".

If you disagree with Ron Paul's stance on our role in the world, then you are disagreeing with the vision of Jefferson and other Founding Fathers.

As a Native Texan, I voted for Rick Perry in his original run for governor. The second time I was annoyed but did again. The THIRD TIME I said NO! He has almost done to Texas what Obama has done to our great Nation. A few mandates, higher utilities (he takes from them) and the highest property taxes in the southwest. Our schools are in disarray, very bad scholactically. HE IS A LOBBYIST'S MAN. AND SPOILED!

I think that Cain has a lot on the ball. This last debate he was smooth and showed a lot of poise. His 999 plan has merit but, fixing the tax code..... Well, one man will not be able to make that change. How can we get government out of our pockets? Because he has been through the school of hard knocks I don't think he will pamper those who feel entitled (at least I hope not) Herman Cain can easily be a man of the people for the people and by the people. Don't sell him short!

Gingrich at same level as Romney and Perry? If Romney and Perry are "6's," Gingrich is a "9."

As a Massachuetts Republican, I am furious at Mitt for his mandated health coverage. I have the highest regard for him personally but you are correct he is a BIG governement guy who is to the left of George Bush. AND he doesn't believe Romneycare was a mistake, he still defends it. George Will's assessment is excellent, "Mitt Romney is the republican version of Mike Dukakis."

Thanks

Interesting that the highest rating is a six, and three of the contenders rate that. I find your assessments reasonably accurate on all three. I strongly disagree that "lack of foreign policy experience" is a setback for Cain. What does that have to do with character and reliability? There are real experts available to advise a leader. No commander of intelligence relies on his own judgement. There is staff, and that is what they are for. I would follow Herman Cain wherever he wished to lead. I would be reluctant to follow either of the other two sixes. Not trustworthy, in my view. Without trust, there is no loyalty. Experience in three wars is the basis for that comment.

Here's the hard, cold fact: The nominee is going to be either Romney or Perry. They are the only ones who have the money, the fundraising ability and the infrastructure in place to secure the nomination. That is the reason why Romney has been pushing people who can't support him towards Cain.

Romney is a moderate technocrat who can, in fact, beat Obama. What he cannot do, unfortunately, is implement the big changes that are going to be necessary to save our Nation.

Perry has shown he has the will and the political skills to take on the Unions, and the Trial Lawyers and the various Statists to produce a small, efficient Government. We need to help him see the light on immigration reform (or refine his message), and teach him to debate. This would be far preferable to having a competent manager to oversee the demise of our way of life,, which is what Romney would provide.

If it appears Romney is the nominee, my money will be directed to sending more pro-Liberty people to Congress to hold his feet to the fire.

Very pro! Not in to class warfare. Will need a strong vice pres.

AS a life-long conservative, I would love to have a true blue conservative as president, but in our partisan divided country today, I think we have to choose someone who can win the independent and moderate votes to defeat Obama, which if we do not too, our country as we have known it will no longer exist. We must elect more true conservative representatives and Senators, if we want to turn this ship around. Romney is a very moral man, who has a lot of experience turning businesses and things like the Olympics around to be successful.

I agree with all of the "Pro" comments listed.

I think that it is overstating to say that Newt believes in Man-caused Global Warming. Even if he once did, I have confidence that he is smart enough to now know that science does not support AGW.

Newt's speech at David Horowitz's recent conference was stellar. Watch it here at http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=qtjfMjjce2Y

America is in such a state of peril that we must have someone with the brains, experience and courage of Newt.

As to Newt's moral baggage, there is the distinct possibility that he has repented of that.

Out side of Ginrich is probably the most intelligent candidate running.

Name recognition is becoming a thing of the past.

He is smarter in handing financial matters than all candidates. EX. Not a lot of money to spend on campaign ads to get name recognition and notice by a broad field of people so what does he do. He makes one ad for a small amount of money, shows it a few times for a small amount of money and it goes viral.

Millions of people watched the "Smoking" ad in a matter of a few hours and millions more in the past few days, many more than watched any of Perry's or Romney's attack ads.

Now tell me that is not smart.

And you wonder why Herman is smiling like a possum eating persimmons at the end of the ad?

Cain VS unAble in 2012.

Ron Paul is the only candidate who has ever read and has consistently voted in any way that is true to the constitution, the only legal document authorizing our national government, and the only one who is trust worthy to hold the office of President. I will only vote for him even if I have to write him in.

Mmm. No thanks. Your rating system is showing a bias I had not discerned from you in the past. Romney with a 6 vs. the rest of the field, 6 being the highest given? Not a rating system I would put any faith in. But, notably, I'm a conservative constitutionalist; not an establishment Republican.

Yes, I concede that Romney will likely win the nomination and will be that lesser of the two available evils come November 2012 - but I will not be guilty of "endorsing" him just because I want to be on the side of the perceived winner. For shame.,,

New word for the dictionary

Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminimshing number of producers.

I am absolutely convinced that, of all candidates of all parties, Newt would, far and away, be the best president; but, is he electable?

I can't believe you put Mitt Romney's "Patriot Rating" at the same level as Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich and even higher than Herman Cain! Your first three Cons listed for Romney - "Big government establishment Republican; RomneyCare and all associated baggage; mirrors Democrat tax policies" - should have automatically bumped him down to a 1 or, at best, a 2.

And I guess "all associated baggage" when referring to RomneyCare includes the fact that his staff was invited to the White House so obama could model his so-called health "care" bill (STILL an unconstitutional federal act) after it. I would think that would be something worth mentioning explicitly instead of lumping it in there as just "baggage".

No, to those of us who expect our candidate to abide by the Constitution, Mitt Romney shouldn't be at the top of the list. He should be at the bottom.

I was shocked and greatly disappointed in your rating and pro/con description of Ron Paul. I have high regard for Patriot Post's profession on ESSENTIAL LIBERTY, and I support Ron Paul for those same reasons it professes. There is no one else in this field of candidates that has defended the essential liberties as described in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as long as Ron Paul has. And to mistake his idea of non-interventionist foreign policy as "isolationist," only means one has fallen prey to demagoguery. I challenge you to read any of his books and still hold to the opinion that he is isolationist.

I will always be thankful to have Patriot Post promoting Essential Liberty, but your ratings in this report have lowered your credibility with me as having a true understanding of those liberties and of the intentions of our Founding Fathers.

Ron Paul is a non-interventionist, not an isolationist. I think there is a significant difference. No one but Ron Paul is even thinking about paying of the debt we owe. Perry will have a balanced budget by 2020? How much debt will we be in by then, 20 trillion, 25 trillion, then what? The size of the federal government is the root cause of the problem and the only way to reverse course is to reduce the federal government. Rom Paul 2012.

Perry, signed a new law making the TSA the only government agency that has the legal right to molest women and children in Texas. No thank you.

It is clear you have never read any of Mr. Paul's essays on Liberty or the Constitution. Odd given your self description of being an "advocate of Essential Liberty". Neither have you considered the over 24 years of him being a Congressman consistently pointing out the true danger that both the Fed and our fiscal policies have had and indeed has created this current crisis. Like most, you are looking for a beauty contestant instead of a man of moral character with sound and practical solutions. Incredibly, you still hold to our empire strategy of the military being in over 38 countries but rail against the deficits. Which do you want? In true style of the chattering class, you have only style, no substance. Fluff is not going to get our wagon out of this ditch. I would put a Patriot rating of 1 on your reviews.

I'll vote for the Muslim before I vote for the Mormon.

We all know this is an exercise in futility, 1st the republican party will nominate Romney (father of obamacare). Because we all know the leaders of the republican party are just big government hacks like the democrats. this will alienate 70% of the party, Hermain Cain will try a 3rd party run. Here is the way its going to fall out, Obama wins, cain 2nd, romney 3rd. our beloved country falls to the socialist currently in charge, the republican party ceases to exist.

between the media and democrats, 45% of the nation is now brain dead zombies. and we all know how to "cure" zombies.

as for me, I am not going to invest in campigns, I am investing ammunition. It's about time to refresh the tree of liberty.

I agree, Newt is the smartest guy in the room, no matter which room he is in. I used to be a card carrying member of "The Friends of Newt." I would pay money to watch him destroy Obama in a debate, and would go door to door campaigning for him. However, I fear that his personal baggage will make it tough for him to be elected. I'm currently supporting Rick Santorum, because I think he is a true conservative (despite supporting Specter), and "he gets it." His comment at the end of the recent debate regarding the family as the central unit that will fix our economic and other problems is right on.

What you call isolationism is what our founding fathers intended for our country. Strong national defense of OUR country not nation building throughout the world. Dr. Paul wants to defend our country rather than bankrupting it with all our foreign interventionism. I never understand why people that would revolt against occupiers in our country cheerlead us occupying other foreign nations. Would people be happy if another country put harsh economic sanctions, bombed us back to the dark ages and said it was for our own good? Thanks to the intervention into Libya we now have Al-Quieda in charge of their government--are they supposed to thank us for that? Our heroes in the military have been fighting these people for 10 years but it is supposed to be okay to back these same people in another country? Wars are money to the contractors and big business but our kid's blood is shed for their profits. Dr. Paul wants to bring our troops home to protect us and our borders which is what our country believed in when it was founded--Ron Paul the ONLY candidate that believes 100% in the Constitution and has voted that way his entire life. He has never been and will never be bought off by lobbyists and the special interests backing most other candidates. 2012 will be the most important election in our lifetime but unfortunately, most people will continue to believe the propaganda that keeps the elites in power and probably will be just like 2008 voting for the lesser of 2 evils but no matter how you spin it evil is still evil.

You are perpetuating the myth of Ron Pauls isolationist foreign policy. He is NOT an isolationist. He is a non-interventionist.

The difference being, "Friendship with all nations,entangling alliances with none-George Washington"

In agreement with most every stance Ron Paul has taken. Feel he could not compete against Obama due

to a lack of charisma, appearance, and age. Believe Ron Paul would make a great president if elected.

Look at the people that Al Gore pulled into his web. Texan's are at least hard headed, and willing to learn from their mistake,s

NEWT GINGRICH:[Pros: Smarter than the rest of the slate, combined; incredibly articulate; straight up conservative with strong track record and leadership;]

If for NO other reason than that above, this man should be President. His "pros" far exceed his "cons", and are far more meaningful when talking about the qualities of the President of the U.S.!

If given a choice between Newt and Obama in the election, Republicans will put aside their "past" feelings and vote for him hands-down! He TRULY is the ONLY one that would whip Obama's ass in any debate, and reverse the Socialist mandate now being crammed down our throats!!!

I watched Gingrich from the time he entered Congress and watched him as he started as a Conservative and as the years went by till he became Speaker he moved to become a Liberal. Go back and follow him and there is no doubt, he is NOT anyone I want as President. Do not trust him!

On Cain, "Lack of political experience"??

Are you kidding?

He ran the FED in Kansas City and was a lobbyist. Not the kind of "politician" I want running the country. (Yeah, I know the FED isn't Governent, but to say its not political-you'd have you're head in the sand. ) I'd say he deserves a bottom Patriot rating along with Perry and Romney.

Ron Paul 2012!

NEWT GINGRICH:[Pros: Smarter than the rest of the slate, combined; incredibly articulate; straight up conservative with strong track record and leadership;]

If for NO other reason than that above, this man should be President. His "pros" far exceed his "cons", and are far more meaningful when talking about the qualities of the President of the U.S.!

If given a choice between Newt and Obama in the election, Republicans will put aside their "past" feelings and vote for him hands-down! He TRULY is the ONLY one that would whip Obama's ass in any debate, and reverse the Socialist mandate now being crammed down our throats!!!

Ron Paul has a much clearer statement of faith than any other candidate. He non-interventionist stance on foreign policy is much more reasonable than what we have endured in the last several decades and will save the USA much money and also make out country much safer as a result of not creating an atmosphere of hatred toward us as a result of our meddling in other countries affairs. Ron Paul is the only candidate who has presented a sensible plan for significantly cutting government spending.

Those rated 6 are a joke. Your rating system sucks.

You are ignoring conservative content and only looking at who can be elected with the backing of the good old boys. RINO's.

You are selling Herman Cain short.

Mr Adams must be rolling in his grave...

There is never a "perfect" candidate! But Cain is the best!

He is full of knowledge, an intelligent, skilled politician. Knowledge is power, that is why the other GOP candidates won't attack him and why I would like to see him as our next President!

The most visible negative for Herman Cain from my point of view is that he poses a definite threat to the status quo inside the beltway regardless of political affiliation. This is a good thing. One can hire foreign policy advice e.g. John Bolton. Most presidents do this as few have hands on experience in the field of foreign affairs. What foreign policy planks have we seen from the other candidates? 0

I'm very disappointed in this analysis, and almost wonder if Alexander wrote it. This is clearly not up to your usual standards. You are not advocating for a conservative - you have rated establishment Repubiks (as Mark Levin calls them) higher than the true conservatives. I've been a fan of the Patriot Post for years (as a 'The Federalist' reader); and this is the worst article I've ever seen you produce in my hometown of Chattanooga.

Gingrich/Cain

Since Mr Cain is running against another person who wasn't vetted but we had thousands of reasons to vett Obama and didn't.Obama had Low name indentification. absolutely no experience in the private sector, despises the military (as described in his writings), obviously no military experience, wife never was proud of America until America went brain dead. he has no valid papers and Congress so far isn't demanding them,the papers Obama has released have been declared a hoax. The Supreme Court so far doesn't want to get into the fray, had a chance and bailed out. What the hell could possibly go wrong. Call me Racist White man again, who cares. I am a transplanted Texan living in Florida and I have developed a skin as tough as our Gators. Perry went brain dead, Romney appears to be a RINO. So right now it is Cain,with our new Senator down here Marco Rubio as veep or even our new Congressman Allen West for VP, a retired military man and has the stomach to fight. America yuou have to get it right this time. You don't have to admit your mistake last time, for the sake of our Republic, our Constitution and our Bill of rights which Obama admits needs to be overhauled. FOR GOD'S SAKE GET IT RIGHT THIS TIME.

He is intelligent and certainly speaks to everything about this country that is dear to my heart. He is full of character and guts to tell it like it is. He is not wishy washy, I would definitely vote for him if he is our GOP candidate!

What a joke the Establishment Repubs are pushing on us. Your ratings are just as goofy!

Romney is a Kennnedy Liberal.

Perry is a Mexican Liberal.

And, I shall never forget good ol' Newt, He supported the Super Liberal Democrat in the New York District 23 race. Such short memories you have. Do your research if you suffer from memory loss.

Herman Cain is the man. My prayer is he will grab the jawbone of an ass and clean out the Washington Bureaucratic Over Lords who are contributing to the American decline.

He is NOT weak on illegal immigration. It is the Federal Goverment that is. They are who is not doing their job on protecting our borders. Also, since our taxpayer money is going to educate them...which is required by FEDERAL LAW, it is better to NOT have them on the welfare rolls. In regards to the vacinations, what's the difference between opting in and opting out? Either way, if you didn't want it you didn't have to take it. I'd rather have my child take the vacination than chance having cancer of the cervix. Also, I do not DEBATE well. We already have a "smooth talker" in the White House. Smooth talking doesn't get the job done.

I am sorely disappointed with this ranking system.

This list seems right out of the establishment playbook.

I thought the Patriot Post sprung out of the Tea Party spirit but this post rings hollow.

What I like about Cain is the fact he has never been a politician and this is what America needs not another career politician. Look at the track record of all current career politicians in DC now and they have destroyed the American dream and what made our country great.

Ron Paul will be the next president.

I'm sick of hearing about Newt's baggage. Not as bad as Obama who is nothing but a smoke screen for the far,far left. Newt is a genius if you listen to his words and remember his accomplishments. The media and the left hate and fear him because they know what he can do. Imagine a 3 hour debate between him and Barry!

I think that at least Herman Cain doesn't do campaign double-speak. I agree with all the points from the Patriot Post.

I like much of what Newt has offered in his New 'contract' however, I want to know IF he is a 'globalist'? Does he still keep a membership with the CFR and TLC? If he does, that might point to a NWO type which we surely don't want or need.

If "electability" was not part of the ratings then what was the purpose of saying (1) that Michelle Bachmann "does not look presidential" (2) that Herman Cain was "diagnosed with Stage IV cancer in 2006" (3) that Newt Gingrich "acts presidential" (4) that Ron Paul has "too narrow a support base" (5) that Rick Perry has the "worst debate skills ever witnessed" (6) that Mitt Romney "acts, speaks and looks presidential" or (7) that Rick Santorum is "energetic"? It seems the ratings are very much about electability despite protestations to the contrary.

As others have pointed out, the assessment of Ron Paul is shamefully misleading. That Congressman Paul has made "no clear expression of faith" is simply untrue. That the compilers of these ratings missed the expressions of his faith pointed out above speaks volumes about how seriously they considered the rating they gave Dr. Paul. For a publication that rightfully derides the bias in other forms of media this kind of carelessness is simply inexcusable.

I've been receiving the Patriot Post for several years, but this one edition has me seriously re-thinking that decision.

I assume the higher the number the more positive the rating??

To all the commenters expressing outrage over the ratings: I'm glad to see such enthusiasm for what is clearly a mediocre crop of candidates, but if you read more carefully the criteria on which the Patriot Post staff based their ratings you will see that the ratings are based on ALL of the criteria, not just one or two with which you disagree.

The list is a downer, with no one rated higher than a 6, but all that matters is booting the current occupant of the White House back to his cronies and ill-gotten compound in Chicago. By that standard, each of the Republican candidates stands like a giant above the Narcissist-in-Chief. None stands-out within the group, so I will be content to support the eventual nominee when he or she is named.

To the Patriot Post: It would be helpful to add the current occupation of each candidate to the descriptions.

You apparently do not understand free market economics, although you are a patriot. Ron Paul is the only candidate who understands economics and can help America become productive and prosperous by getting government out of the way: the government cannot "produce" productive jobs, only the market does that because the price system is the perfect mechanism to do it. How will we solve Islamicism by having armies in the Middle East? Trade and teaching the truth about Jesus are the only ways. Ron Paul is for a strong defense just not in meddling in other countries by force: reason is the best foreign policy.

How could you possibly rate Perry a 6. Mandating a foreign substance be put into a child's body. What criteria do you use to take care of your children? The Federal government? Big Pharma?

Some Patriot you are...

I personaly think she ir tue to this movement and one if not the best contender for the job.I like her best!

Just another Obama,

I thought your patriot rating was based on protection of Essential Liberty? Yet Romney and Perry both scored higher than Paul. Seems like your rating system is based on perception of who might win the popularity contest! Boooooo!

Spreading Essential Liberty can't be done thru the end of a Gun barrel. Paul is strong on Military but against Militarism, a big difference. His record is surely shows more consistent support of our Constitution than all other candidates combined.

Ron Paul 2012!

Not sure about Newt, I like his experience but then again he is one of these career politicians (not as bad as some especially the Democrats) that I mentioned in my last post. but it will be either Cain or Newt still waiting to see how they both hold up during the future debates.

His con's far outweigh his pro's. Chaired Gore's election campaign, not convinced he's very conservative, Trans-Texas Corridor, immigration and Dream act. I question his dedication to the Constitution as written.

As a Perry coordinator for West Central Florida and in North Georgia, we know that Newt is the brightest and the best, and would clean OBama's clock in a head-to-head debate. But do you get around all of the past baggage? Maybe admit your mistakes and go forward.

While he may look "Presidential" to some, what I see is another "smooth talker" who says what he needs to say to get elected. I didn't like him the last time he ran for President. He is NOT a conservation. He is "old school Republican" and I don't think we would be any better off with him than we are with Obama. He has had 6 years to get his debating right. He is probably the one who will get the nomination and I would VERY reluctantly vote for him. I would not be happy about it though and don't see the country being much better off with him.

Michelle is a lovely lady, however she is a Tax Attorney and will not admit that the 16th Amendment was never legally ratified and the IRS is not a government agency.

She also will not admit that Obama, being a DUAL CITIZEN was never eligible to be President of the United States.

I don't consider foreign policy experience to be a con for Herman Cain, anymore than it is for the rest of the field of candidates (none other than possibly Newt has any real experience in foreign policy issues). President Obama got elected without any such experience by picking the incompetent Joe Biden as his "expert". In my opinion Obama has still shown no capability in foreign affairs nor has he made any foreign allies since he took office. The key for foreign policy experience is to find someone who really knows foreign affairs issues and select that person as your real expert and adviser (not a Joe Biden type nor Hillary Clinton).

Romney & Perry rate higher than Cain, Paul & Bachman??? As Patriots? Conservatives? I respect Mark Alexander and value his opinions, but this is a bizarre report.

Newt Gringrich is the poster child for the "Country Club Republican" that helped get Obama elected. He has been a part of the Washington elite for so long, he has become another Bob Dole or John McCain. If we want a candidate that will "lead from the front" and not compromise his principles for a good write-up in the New York times, we need to look elsewhere than Newt.

The term "Patriot Rating" carries the unfortunate suggestion that those who have a less than 10 rating are somehow less than 100% patriotic Americans. Did you really intend to suggest this with your system?

I mean we can disagree, but still both love our country, right?

I have many disagreements with these guys (and gal), but I would not question the patriotism of any of them.

Perhaps you could call it the "Patriot Post Rating?"

Also, what's Obama's rating?

1. Perry & Romney are Rino's and neither I nor Tea Party will vote for them NO MATTER WHAT! Would rather allow obummer the win and fight this out in the streets where it will eventually end. If we elect another Rino allowing more of our rights to be stripped away and the 2nd amendment decimated, we will only be fighting from a weaker position. We were "Doled" and then "McCained" and we will not elect a "go slow" socialist ever again. Even Bush was a socialist as he let Teddy Kennedy write the education bill that trippled its budget, and then sign on to prescription drugs hoping the courts would save his ass. You gave Paul a 3 and these two bozo's a 6. dumb asses!!!!!

I can't think of anyone more prepared to lead this country than Newt.

Hopefully, Newt will start campaigning against the Anti-Capitalist Group (ACG). We need to replace not just the ACG Whitehouse, but also the ACG Congress. Also, if he starts running against the ACG, then if the Democrats drop Obama, he has already been running against Obama's replacement.

I disagree with the Patriot Post's assertion that Ron Paul is an isolationist. A more correct term would be a non-interventionist. Smearing Ron Paul with terms like isolationist, naive, dangerous, nut job and crank paint your organization with a neoconservative appearance.

Ron Paul is the only candidate that has correctly identified our nation's top problem as the national debt. His plan reduces our nations spending to more sustainable levels that may ultimately lead to a balanced budget and potential future debt reduction. His plan would reduce foreign entanglements and the related expenses and would end several unauthorized federal departments. If federal spending is not addressed in some coherent way, the US debt will increase to the point that investors will no longer loan money to the government, leaving the Federal Reserve System to print (counterfeit) the necessary federal reserve notes. Taken to the extreme, no one will want US Dollars! That will be a far worse outcome than scaling back the US empire! I have also observed that neoconservative's tend to have no objections to the abuse of the Federal Reserve System.

If we only need a slick looking, smooth talking President, we could keep the one we have.

I am leaning more and more toward Mr. Cain BECAUSE he is not a politician or Washington 'insider'. Having such great success in the business arena and because he has a moral commitment to life and liberty makes him more desirable than some of the other candidates.I believe he will choose 'advisors' that will have his own qualities and who excel in their respective fields.

Your Patriot Rating of these candidates is very disappointing and apparently given in ignorance of the facts. Ron Paul is not an isolationist, he merely doesn't believe in killing innocent people around the globe for corporate interests in undeclared wars. The nut jobs are the neocons who want to kill everyone who disagrees with their "master plan". Where did you come up with the comment that Ron Paul has no clear expression of faith??? Where did you get your information for any of your ratings? It is evident that these Patriot Ratings were given with no concern for the truth of a matter or the facts. The "Patriot Post" has lost a lot of it's credibility with this posted Patriot Rating. I understand Ron Paul's ideas seem to be a little confusing to people on the surface of the matters. If people would look a little deeper into the substance of what he is saying, they may be surprised to find agreement with him, I know I was. Ron Paul is a much deeper thinker and more intelligent and knowledgable than most of us. To understand his positions, we have to stop and think a little more than usual. I realilze this may cause a little brain strain, but it is worth the trouble. Our nation is in very serious trouble and now is not the time to settle for sound bites.

Herman is a nice guy but he should stick to the Pizza business.

Pawlenty was correct about Bachmann: Her achievements are lacking. She was going to remove the fraudulently elected Al Franken from office, but it became another one of her many failures.

I read your appraisel of the contenders and naturaly assumed that you rated them as you would a golf game; the lower the score the better. In that context the numbers make sense but if considered inversely none at all. This election will, perhaps more than most, call for the anti-politician with proven executive experience, indeed it must be framed that way if America is regain her position in the world. An amateur has had nearly three years and made a mess of everything he's touched. We need a statesman and not a politician to undo the damage. I think the democrats have destroyed any chance of future by-partisanship but the effort to achieve it must be made anyway. As much as I loathe what they stand for the Democrats do represent a piece of the electorate and their voice needs to be heard.

The fact taht Michelle Bachmann was a former attorney for the IRS should disqualify her for any political position. She cannot be trusted. FOr that reason, she should have received a zero

I believe michelle has what it takes to be president and to take back this nation .She is a bold warrior for the cause we pursue and not afraid to step up on any issue that would be against our beliefs as a nation.She is true to her stance on our constitution which was originally derived on the basis of Gods word and the trials of law based trials on marters of the gospel throughout the world.

Someone has been paying too much attention to the mainstream media. The "pros and cons" listed here sound almost like they were lifted from CNBC or CNN. Ron Paul, for example, does NOT have an "isolationist" foreign policy. He does NOT advocate isolating the U.S. from the rest of the world. All is advocates is leaving the rest of the world alone as far as our military goes. To say he is "naive" is ridiculous. Look how long he's been in Congress actually DEALING with foreign policy. Just this morning I heard him say that Iran is not really the threat everyone (EXCEPT the UN and the CIA) claim they are. He further said that even if they GOT a nuke, they wouldn't dare us it because if they did their entire country would be gone in a matter of hours because the U.S. and Israel would wipe them out. That doesn't sound like a real isolationist to me. Dr. Paul just knows what it COSTS to keep military all over the globe for decades at a time, and he knows we simply cannot afford it. SOMEONE might be naive about foreign policy, but it is NOT Ron Paul. Why do you suppose he gets more donations from our military than ALL the other candidates combined? Do you think the men and women on the ground are "naive?"

Having read The Patriot Post since I first became interested in our political system and what our country would look like if governed by the constitution, I would have expected your rankings to fall in line with my own. The Patriot Post has certainly influenced my progress. That said, I find your low ranking of a particular candidate who embodies more than his opponents, as you put it, "a demonstrated ability to abide by their prescribed oath "to support and defend" our Constitution" quite remarkable. Even more astonishing, you have claimed "we do not rate candidates on "electability," as that is often a reflection of Leftmedia propaganda" and yet you list in his cons at least three points that are all within the domain of "electability." Of course I am talking about Ron Paul. Do try to be intellectually honest and logical the next time you come up with a rating system.

Wow, Alexander is taking a beating on this shameful ratings thread. It's nice to see people waking up out there!

Ron Paul 2012!

I agree with Jason Phillips, although less vehemently. Several of your pros and cons are related to 'electability'. I wonder, though, if anyone can or should attempt to rate candidates without considering these factors as long as you don't lump them together in one ill-defined category. (That usually means you haven't really thought seriously about the candidate or you "just don't like" him or her.)

For the umpteenth time, Gingrich is not, _not_ a conservative! By his own words, he is a _moderate_, which to me is one who is unable or afraid to commit to either side of the fence. Articulate, yes. Smart, yes. But when push comes to shove, he will more likely approximate your review of Romney: "mirrors Democrat tax policies" and unreliable on key conservative issues as listed. This has been his MO in the past, and no reason to think it will change. His baggage speaks for itself; we do not need another morally challenged, Clintonesque president. Rating Newt a 6 is an unwarranted gift.

Experenced and very inelligent. Will defeat BO in one on one debate.

I am convinced he is the best hope to beat BO.

Wow, Alexander is taking a beating on this shameful ratings thread. It's nice to see people waking up out there!

Ron Paul 2012!

Get off these 2 RINO's Perry and Romney! We will NEVER elect either!!!!

Newt, Cain, and or Paul in any combination Pres and VP is the only option that the real conservatives that now control the Rep Party will ever allow to be elected.

If the new england Rinos that use to contro the party don't like it they can watch as we split the party. We are not afraid of doing so and letting obummer win. the alternative is allowing the Rino's to take us further into socialism under the false flag of conservatism. Better to go to war now while we have the strenght and still a few rights left!

I'm very disappointed in this analysis, and almost wonder if Alexander wrote it. This is clearly not up to your usual standards. You are not advocating for a conservative - you have rated establishment Repubiks (as Mark Levin calls them) higher than the true conservatives. I've been a fan of the Patriot Post for years (as a 'The Federalist' reader); and this is the worst article I've ever seen you produce in my hometown of Chattanooga.

You have lost me permanently as a subscriber/receiver of your newsletter. These ratings lacks any rational basis. You are now part of the problem!

These ratings blew me right over. I did not see this coming from the Patriot Post. Perry and Romney are the two most obvious Republican establishment candidates. The only way we'll ever get this country back on the right track is if the Tea Party overtakes over the Republican party. I believe Cain is the best choice for the Tea Party.

"straight up conservative" is a laugh on a less than valid point - Newt is an opportunitist as are most politicians. It is wonderful to see someone so "smart" because flim-flam will most likely carry the day. Can you not remember, Newt supported, endorsed the Liberal Dem Candiate in the special New York District 23 race.. He supports what ever floats his boat!

Give me Herman Cain!

As an independent voter, Ron Paul is the only Republican I am sure to vote for – at this stage of the game. He is the only one I trust to be what his says he is. His foreign policy is not so “extreme” as the brainwashed pundits seem to think. Paul is as strong or stronger on defense than anyone – it’s our offense he wants to cut back on.

Newt is my choice. He needs to own up to all the skeleton and come completely clean. He is the only one that can stand up against Nobama and win.We have no other choice.

I think a Cain-Bachmann ticket would be the best of what we have to chose from.As a businessman Cain's strong point would be in assessing a problem with the help of his staff & then taking the most reasonable approach to solving it. With Bachmann at his side he would be privy to the inner workings of the political system.

Excellent job summarizing pros and cons for all the candidates. If I could appoint the next president, it would be Newt Gingrich. He'd destroy Obama in a debate, and he'd be a damn near perfect president. But the Leftmedia fanned such hatred of him while he was Speaker, and they would throw everything they have into demonizing him again, so I'm not confident he could win the election which, after all, is almost all that matters this time around.

The only thing I'd add to any of your analyses is that Rick Santorum, as good as he is on national defense and the economy, is such an over-the-top social issues candidate that it eclipses his views on everything else. He seriously repels moderates and independents. That's why he lost his Senate seat, and why he could never be elected president.

Quote..."The "pros and cons" listed here sound almost like they were lifted from CNBC or CNN."

+1

Is this post an assessment of electability or of conservative, ie adherence to the Constitution, principles? Not only is Ron Paul a man of personal integrity who lives according to those principles he is supports the Constitution (NOT the 'living' Constitution).

How dare you list as a negative "no expression of faith". Faith is a personal matter. What counts is how a person demonstrates their moral compass. In my experience and in my opinion, those who profess 'faith' vere towards exposing themselves as being hypocrites.

Why the slur of labeling Ron Paul as a "perpetual candidate"?

Has Patriot Post abandoned it's mission?

Ron Paul 2012

Con

Claims to be progun but declines to answer progun organizations questionnaires, as does Newt Gingrich.

I AGREE WITH MOST OF YOUR CONCLUSIONS. HE IS BY FAR THE SMARTEST OF THE GROUP AND MOST ASSUREDLY THE BEST QUALIFIED. HOWEVER, I AM NOT SURE HE IS ELECTALBLE. BUT, I WILL SAY ONE THING, MARTITAL INFIDELITY DID NOT SEEM TO AFFECT WHAT PEOPLE THOUGHT OF PRESIDENTS KENNEDY AND CLINTON. DICK PERKINS

These ratings blew me right over. I did not see this coming from the Patriot Post. Perry and Romney are the two most obvious Republican establishment candidates. The only way we'll ever get this country back on the right track is if the Tea Party overtakes over the Republican party. I believe Cain is the best choice for the Tea Party.

This is very discouraging to me. Maybe the first test they should do is whether the candidate is part of the CFR or Tri-lateral commission.Those that are will just give us more of the same ala Obama, Bush, Clinton. They should be rejected immediately.

Also, if this really is a Patriot/conservative group, and if they stand for and understand the Constitution, they would understand that Dr. Paul's foreign policy is Constitutional. If they consider that "isolationist" then they either don't understand or don't support the Constitution.

John Wilson

You have lost me permanently as a subscriber/receiver of your newsletter. These ratings lacks any rational basis. You are now part of the problem!

+1, again

A public apology might be in order Mr. Alexander. :)

I certainly like Newt ... the old Newt. The present one has a lot of baggage and sometimes speaks before thinking. He is the smartest of the entire lot. But, probably not electable.

Romney is the guy I will endorse. Why? Because I think he IS electable. Most of the others are probably not. Romney is a moderate and thus will appeal to the independents and more moderated voters more than a more conservative person. He looks and acts presidential. That's important.

Yes, he has changed his position, but so have I. Once I was pro-choice, now I am pro-life. That is not a flip flop ... it is growth, evolution.

As far as Romneycare is concerned, he should say it was an experiment that was tried in Massachusetts, not the entire country. And, he should say it failed. And, that Obamacare is different, but will still fail in a much larger way.

Obama has enough flip flops to deal with as well. Increasing the military in Afghanistan, Gitmo, Patriot Act, drones, to name a couple.

Unfortunately, as an avid active Tea Party Republican leader, disagree with these assessments and so will many of my followers. I fear they will not be inspired to come out and work with this selection criterion. This may be the undoing of the Republican coalition.

I see consistent international, social, personal and fiscally conservative principled positions more important than "does not look presidential". I see experience as optional. How can you have less executive experience than Obama, Clinton or McCain, yet they ran successfully?

On the other hand, I see a record of taking both positions on most issues, of defense of the establishment banking industry, or of abandoning our allies as disastrous. I see personal moral failures as a hint of future untrustworthiness. I see a record of socialist policies in former positions as catastrophic (Aren't we trying to get rid of the Socialist in the White House?) These disqualify Romney, Cain, Gingrich, Perry and Paul.

Where does that leave us? Bachmann and Huckabee (who still could join the race). I can mobilize for either of them, but not of the choices given in the article. Given those choices (especially RomenyCare Romney) the Tea Party I know will be uninspired and will simply sit out the race.

Michelle Bachmann a 3 and Rick "give me all your illegals" Perry and Mitt "father of Obamacare" Romney 6? My rating for your rating? -3 Talk about being in the bag for the establishment's choices. BTW, the left is drooling over the thought of either one of those two being the candidate.

Probably the best man alive to be President and pull us out of this Obama created mess, if we could just get him elected.

I like Hernman Cain very much andI will vote fer him

Though Paul is not my first choice (Cain, at this point), I don't consider his "isolationist" foreign policies to be a "con" -- in fact, they're probably among the most CONstitutional in the field. I do worry about Paul's strict libertarian background, though, as I believe there need to be laws regarding drugs, prostitution, and others -- and, of course, I'd want to know his views on same-sex marriage and abortion (both tending to be unbiblical among strong libertarians).

Romney, Perry are just RINOs.

Newt and Ron P are just not electable, as is Ms Bachman.

Cain is the only candidate that is truly conservative and has nothing that Obama can use against him.

not Mc and that's a good thing.

Being a conservative is THE most important attribute of the President. Yet, you rank the conservatives at the bottom of the list. Did I miss something here?

Michele Bachmann is a genuine conservative. Why are you jumping on board with mainstream media efforts to marginalize her. We should be challenging the media, not feeding off our own.

Cain's lack of political experience is a qualifying trait. We tried professional politicians, remember? How many of America's early office holders would not meet the standard you are imposing on Cain? And yet their service was sufficient to win our freedom against huge odds.

Literally every other candidate is a RINO or worse.

I think it is time to realign your core values.

IF THIS MAN IS THE GOP CANDIDATE AGAINST THE CURRENT PRESIDENT, THE CURRENT PRESIDENT WILL GET REELECTED TO A SECOND TERM. HIS STANCE ON HEALTH CARE ALONE MAKES HIM UNELECTABLE. PLUS, YOU WERE RIGHT ON WITH YOUR CONS ANALYSIS. HE FLIP FLOPS ON TOO MANY ISSUES AND I AM AFRAID OF HIM. DICK PERKINS

None of these make any sense to me. Ron Paul a 3? Is this a joke? I can't believe this was published by the Patriot Post. This is the exact thinking that has gotten us where we are...settling for less than the American people and the constitution deserve because the state of mind of the people of this country has strayed so far from REAL liberty and REAL LIMITED constitutional government, they don't even recognize it when it's staring them in the face. What are we all afraid of? Is it possible that today's conservatives, dispite all their proclamations, are actually afraid of real liberty without government interference because they know that it comes with no safety net from the government? Shame on all of you. It's time to be responsible for ourselves and realize that true liberty only comes to those willing to live without the guarantee of ANY of the government's safety nets. We must come to the realization that to live without government interference, it is necessary to give up ALL government entitlements and rely only on ourselves. It is impossible to have it both ways. I have come to the conclusion that ALL socialist ideas are counter to true individual liberty no matter how slight. I am not willing to give up 1 ounce of my liberty for the promise of security...in any form or quantity. I'll take care of myself and will remain self sufficient enough to help others and I suggest everyone do the same. The time for talk and half measures is over. If we do not make a 180 degree course correction we Will lose our republic, and our liberty along with it. Personally I'd rather be dead.

Ron Paul 2012

You folks are INSANE...

Giving RINO Mitt Romney the almost double the rating of Paul, Romney is BY FAR the worst of the bunch, as socialist as you can be...and Perry...please...

You call Cain a "true outsider", yet he was past chairman of the Kansas City Federal Reserve branch, as well as a vehement Romney(see above) supporter in '08...

There is nary a more fiscally Conservative, true Constitutionalist on the list...or anywhwere else than "Dr. No" Ron Paul...

You guys let me down, as your "rankings" sound like all the other MSM outlets...sad...

With these rankings, you've lost all my respect for this publication.

BTW, folks that call Ron Paul's foreign policy "isolationist" simply do not understand it...it is free trade and commerce at it's finest...Reagan(who was a close personal friend, and fan of RP) would be proud...We need to bring our troops home, seal OUR borders, and focus on our backyard, not some 3rd world nations that have always fought, and will always fight, regardless, simply because we want a little of their oil.

We must get our spending, budget, and taxes under control NOW...otherwise we are doomed to permanent failure...that's just simple truth...and Ron Paul is THE person to do that in 2012. Romney...more of Obama...Perry...more of Bush...

Please folks, get some sense, and get real...

Lack of political experence may be a mixed blessing in the coming election. Common sense may rule. Remember, the problems faced by us today were caused by experts with extensive political experence. I wonder what damage they could have done if they didn't have so much experence.

Unfortunately, as an avid active Tea Party Republican leader, disagree with these assessments and so will many of my followers. I fear they will not be inspired to come out and work with this selection criterion. This may be the undoing of the Republican coalition.

I see consistent international, social, personal and fiscally conservative principled positions more important than "does not look presidential". I see experience as optional. How can you have less executive experience than Obama, Clinton or McCain, yet they ran successfully?

On the other hand, I see a record of taking both positions on most issues, of defense of the establishment banking industry, or of abandoning our allies as disastrous. I see personal moral failures as a hint of future untrustworthiness. I see a record of socialist policies in former positions as catastrophic (Aren't we trying to get rid of the Socialist in the White House?) These disqualify Romney, Cain, Gingrich, Perry and Paul.

Where does that leave us? Bachmann and Huckabee (who still could join the race). I can mobilize for either of them, but not of the choices given in the article. Given those choices (especially RomenyCare Romney) the Tea Party I know will be uninspired and will simply sit out the race.

Your leaning towards Mitt Romney and Rick Perry bothers me. Your ratings reflect only "ELECTABILTY" and have nothing to do with whether your higher candidates will actually do anything to preserve the Republic.

I am very, very disappointed. I believe that any of our candidates can be elected over B.O. if we select one with TRUE, SOLID conservative values.

On Ron Paul's "cons": A, He's no isolationist but a realist who knows that the Empire can no longer afford its militarist expansionism while at the same time, explicitly endorsing & preserving a strong national defense; B, He has extremely wide support, it's just not yet very deep; C, Although a Christian & a constant Right to Life advocate, Americans should outgrow the "faith" thing in presidential elections & the Christian right should free themselves from the unsubstantiated belief that personal faith makes any difference whatsoever in the Oval office (Look at W as the most recent failing example of faith being a litmus test for either his competency or his ideas of justice).

The Patriot Post needs to renounce their Neo-Con foreign policy. Despite their many Founders' Quotes to the contrary, they still harbor a cherished hope that our Empire is the patriotic way to proceed in spite of its many manifest failures around the world. The Marshall Plan worked for Europe & Japan after WWII but its principles haven't worked for anyone else since. Ron Paul, a true patriot if ever there was one, will begin to restore the liberty, justice & prosperity that's fundamental to both the American Creed & the ideals of our Founders. If the GOP doesn't yet get it, they will rue the day that they let this once in a lifetime candidate slip away. Statism & Corporatism are both equally repellent to the 99%. The P. P. needs to wake up & shake off its false dichotomies of either/or. The American answer is quickly becoming, "We won't accept either." OCCUPY!

Quote...

John Wilson

You have lost me permanently as a subscriber/receiver of your newsletter. These ratings lacks any rational basis. You are now part of the problem!

Posted October 27, 2011 at 1:11:57 PM

+1 again

To all the commenters expressing outrage over the ratings: I'm glad to see such enthusiasm for what is clearly a mediocre crop of candidates, but if you read more carefully the criteria on which the Patriot Post staff based their ratings you will see that the ratings are based on ALL of the criteria, not just one or two with which you disagree.

The list is a downer, with no one rated higher than a 6, but all that matters is booting the current occupant of the White House back to his cronies and ill-gotten compound in Chicago. By that standard, each of the Republican candidates stands like a giant above the Narcissist-in-Chief. None stands-out within the group, so I will be content to support the eventual nominee when he or she is named.

To the Patriot Post: It would be helpful to add the current occupation of each candidate to the descriptions.

No educational accomplishments given for any of the candiates

Not too bad on the ratings.

Santorum and Bachmann are social conservatives at a time when the economy is #1 - they won't win.

Gingrich is a great debater who is seen as being "above the fray." But, he has a TON of baggage, and it's easy to play nice when other candidates don't see you as a threat and aren't shooting at you.

Cain has great business experience, but is a political novice, and therefore a political liability... just look at his abortion and foreign policy missteps. Cringe worthy every time.

Perry has lots of campaign money and comes from a very red state that is doing well. But you left out all the crony capitalism charges, and as gov he really inherited the business climate that TX has. And he really is the worst debater we've ever seen.

Mitt is an MA moderate, but as Ann Coulter points out, as gov of the bluest state, he will inevitably be more conservative as POTUS. And his main strength is the economy... which is problem #1 in this country.

I think it's time we get firmly behind Mitt, unite, and work our butts off to beat Obama!!

Something is not definitely right with your ratings system.

Clearly your selection is based on FLASH and not substance.

I suspect this may be some sort of psychological experiment to see if you have "mind-numbed robots" as the media refers to conservatives.

When will you release your true assessments, based on substance?

Professional politicians have been in control far to long Cain has common sense and business knowledge we need his expertise. Originally he may not have had name recognition, but now he does he can and I hope does win the election.

I noted that you neglected to mention Romney's Mormon faith as either a pro or a con, which I consider to cut both ways, like Cain's lack of Beltway political experience.

I look forward to a Cain/Gingrich ticket, with the special pro of seeing a Gingrich/Biden VP debate. I would pay to see that one.

It is a mistake to call Ron Paul's foreign policy positions naive. It is easy to think they hearken back to the 19th century, but I believe that if things go on as they are, Ron Paul's belief that we should actually take George Washington's counsel to avoid foreign entanglements will turn out to be incredibly prescient. I don't believe that he will ever be President, but I believe that is not his goal. What is his goal and what he IS doing very well is bringing the debate around to the things that really matter, like the constitutional illegality of the Federal Reserve and how it and other central banks are largely responsible for every single financial mess in the world during the last century; and we're wasting too many resources fighting war after war in foreign countries, not to mention in the so-called "War on Drugs." Eight years ago, even four years ago, most people had never even heard of these ideas, and those few who had considered them to be too wacko to even be worth discussion. Now they're rapidly approaching mainstream, which is where they should be. Maybe in another generation, when the Constitution is barely hanging by a rapidly-fraying thread, we will be ready to accept a candidate like Ron Paul.

***** Why don't you post an online survey for your readers and let US rate the candidates?

Right on Brother Woody!

TRUE PATRIOTS UNITE and

OCCUPY the Essential Liberty Forum!

Ron Paul 2012!

Mr Alexander has been called out.

A "patriot rating" of 3 for Ron Paul? While Romney and Perry get 6 each? You have got to be kidding me!

Romney is a liberal - the author of ObomneyCare. He should get a patriot rating of 0.

Perry is scary. He's like George W. Bush without the brains. Remember this is the guy who tried to forcibly vaccinate 11- and 12-year-old girls against a sexually transmitted disease. I don't know about anyone else, but to me that disqualifies him as a conservative, too. That's like something Nancy Pelosi would support.

Ron Paul is the real deal. He is the true Constitutionalist of the bunch, and the only one with the knowledge of economics and the financial system needed to right the ship. He has proposed $1 trillion in actual cuts (not reductions in proposed increases) in federal spending the FIRST year he is in office, with the budget to be balanced during his first term. No other candidate even comes close. No other candidate even has a real plan.

Naive foreign policy? The naive people are the ones who think we can go on being the world's policeman forever. Ron Paul wants to protect OUR borders, not Afghanistan's.

No clear statement of faith? That's either a big fat lie, or the person who compiled the ratings did zero research. A previous commenter has provided a direct link to Ron Paul's statement of faith, so clearly a retraction and a revision of this ridiculous rating is in order.

Patriot Post, if you want people to keep reading your articles and visiting your site, you have to do a better job of candidate research than this. Please re-visit this rating and prove you are more than just another neo-con GOP shill web site that plugs the "front runners" to the exclusion of other serious and worthy candidates.

PatriotPost,

Only the candidates that can beat Obama should even be on this ratings blog. That would obviously eliminate Ron Paul, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum and very probably Herman Cain based on his recent (inexperience) gaffes and inability to coherently explain his plans (not just 999) and lack of funding and national organization to go the distance.

That leaves a choice between Perry and Romney. Although well funded, Perry has demonstrated he cannot debate intelligibly and resorts to personal attacks he can't verbally substantiate when countered. He is far too focused on the wrong issues that must be priorities to beat Obama. Further, he doesn't look, sound or act presidential. Absent a complete transformation, Perry is not the candidate that can take on Obama head to head.

That leaves Mitt Romney who has the governing record, business sense and turnaround background, presidential swagger and huge finances to draw from(like Obama). He knows health care and what's wrong with Obamacare and can explain why it must be repealed. Sure he's not perfect but his pros far outweigh his cons. Handling the economy and job creation will be the only thing that matters to most people in November '12 and Romney is the strongest on this front.

That said, I'd like to see a Romney/Cain ticket. Rubio would have been stellar but with him not open to a VP run, Cain is the logical pitchman and has the southern appeal that will put this ticket over the top. Romney has the name recognition, organization, and the essential funding necessary. He also has already been vetted thoroughly by the left, can best fight off attacks from Obama's camp and expose Obama's lack of leadership like no other.

I'm not hating on Ron Paul or the others but they are just making noise at this point taking time and money from the most probable winners. Ron Paul politically is already dead, he just hasn't figured it out yet. It doesn't matter what he thinks or says if he can't beat Obama.

The primaries will weed out this Republican field quickly. We can only hope these folks bow out gracefully and support the nominee with a full endorsement like Romney did in 2008. Most people forget that Romney did the right thing when he didn't have to against McCain to ensure John had the best chance in the general election. I respect him for that and didn't forget this.

I think you missed the mark on Ron Paul.

My father, who was a very solid Republican for the second half of the 20th century, said many years ago that it is not America's job to police the world. I could tell it was bothering him that we were heading in this direction. His thinking was in line with many Conservative thinkers of his time, and is also in line with the Constitution.

But Conservative thinking has changed. I understand that our world has changed, but that is not a reason to ignore or bend our constitutional principles - in fact the Founders predicted the evolution of our country and came up with a fairly change-proof document. Otherwise, we could conveniently ignore the Constitution every time the world and our country changes.

People who don't understand Paul's fairly strict pro-Constitution comments like to throw around the term "isolationist," and yet that is not what he is. An isolationist is someone who doesn't believe in any alliances (symbolic or otherwise) with other nations, and who believes that their country should be entirely self-reliant.

Paul has never preached this. In fact, he is very open to free trade and supports alliances with other countries (in fact, he would like the power that has been delegated to the UN for such purposes returned to the US). He just doesn't think it is necessary to have 650 military bases around the world, and he doesn't think we should be sending billions of dollars annually around the world to other nations (especially wealthy nations) - and I agree.

I am also confused by your statement, "no clear expression of faith." I don't recall seeing that listed anywhere as a requirement for the office.

Faith is a very personal thing - much like someone's heart. Just because someone doesn't wear it on his sleeve doesn't mean he doesn't have it. I am guessing that what you really meant to say is that you are not seeing any evidence that his faith lines up with your personal faith.

If that is the case, that is very unfortunate.

I would no sooner judge a person's qualifications to be President on his declaration of what church or temple he goes to than I would judge my doctor because he doesn't like the same type of food that I do. It has nothing to do with his qualifications. I have heard some who say that you need to know where a person stands religiously in order to know where they stand morally.

Again, if that is what is being said here, that is very unfortunate. A moral person is found in their actions and reactions, and in their track record, and in their own heart - not merely in their declarations and denials.

Religion, last I checked, is still optional in this country, and a very private right. It should not be hoisted above everyone's head like a battle flag.

Romney------ Obama Light !

From what I can see by putting it all together, Governor Perry is the best candidate for this job. I will be glad when the Republicans can see this.

On Ron Paul's "cons": A, He's no isolationist but a realist who knows that the Empire can no longer afford its militarist expansionism while at the same time, explicitly endorsing & preserving a strong national defense; B, He has extremely wide support, it's just not yet very deep; C, Although a Christian & a constant Right to Life advocate, Americans should outgrow the "faith" thing in presidential elections & the Christian right should free themselves from the unsubstantiated belief that personal faith makes any difference whatsoever in the Oval office (Look at W as the most recent failing example of faith being a litmus test for either his competency or his ideas of justice).

The Patriot Post needs to renounce their Neo-Con foreign policy. Despite their many Founders' Quotes to the contrary, they still harbor a cherished hope that our Empire is the patriotic way to proceed in spite of its many manifest failures around the world. The Marshall Plan worked for Europe & Japan after WWII but its principles haven't worked for anyone else since. Ron Paul, a true patriot if ever there was one, will begin to restore the liberty, justice & prosperity that's fundamental to both the American Creed & the ideals of our Founders. If the GOP doesn't yet get it, they will rue the day that they let this once in a lifetime candidate slip away. Statism & Corporatism are both equally repellent to the 99%. The P. P. needs to wake up & shake off its false dichotomies of either/or. The American answer is quickly becoming, "We won't accept either." OCCUPY!

Totally disagree that he has anything of the Patriot smell.

A Texas Rino or maybe even a Socialist like Bush Jr.

If you feel Ron Paul is an isolationist, then you clearly don't understand him which is a huge mistake.

Why don't you ask him?

As far as Cain, He WAS the fed. Chairman of one of the Federal Reserve Banks. How did we get into this inflationary mess in the first place? The Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

We're taxed enough already and you support someone who wants to initiate two new taxes? A national sales tax (which means I would be paying 16% sales tax on everything) and a brand new, failed in Europe VAT tax? Gimme a break.

You are in conflict with yourselves. Re-examine your priorities. Find out the facts.

A true Patriots rating based on restoring the Constitution vs. being on the wrong side ie. CFR, Tri-lateral commission, establishment/liberal republicans.

Gingrich: -6

Perry: -6

Romney: -6

Cain: -5

Santorum: -5

Bachman: 3

Paul: 6+

If you believe in the Constitution there is really only one choice.

P.S. Bachmann has her problems, but she deserves better than a 3, too. She's clearly preferable to Romney or Perry from a conservative standpoint, and I personally prefer her to Cain, too.

A man who does not remain faithful to his wife is unlikely to remain faithful to stated principle either. This gets beyond "peccadilloes" in my opinion.

@ Brother Woody,

As Ron Paul states so eloquently, Faith and morality dictate law - law never dictates morality. TRUE faith, and not professed faith should be one indicator and not thrown out so quickly with Bush as an example.

I agree completely with the rest of your post.

The only honest man in the bunch and certainly the most responsible Constitutionaly.

Correct about all his policies which admittedly need some further thought about a full pull back from foreign involvement.

Saving the Constitution is the most important, however.

Romney should run as a Democrat if he wants to get elected. I don't think very many conservatives will stand in line to vote for an establishment liberal. Maybe a Hillary/Romney ticket with Romney to soften Hillary's pro-military stance.

Romney is a "closet" liberal....make NO mistake about it. Remember, he was the Governor of MA. NO conservative would ever be elected for any political office in MA. He set up Romneycare which Obama use as a blueprint to set up Obamacare. Obama wants to run against him because he knows when they get to healthcare he can use it again him. That's scary in itself!! And last but not least....he's flipped flopped on the issues more than Sen John Kerry did. No, Romney is not the person the Reps want to use to beat Obama.

Michelle Bachmann and Herman Cain are the two candidates that come to my mind who have always been spiritual,moral,honest and patriotic people.And, they believe in "we the people." The people of this great country want to see someone who is of the same mind as our founders.

No political experience I think is a plus. America cannot continue to play politics as usual. We are slowly but slowly losing our freedoms. Having political experience just seems to accelerate this. Herman Cain has an exceptional work ethic. He is a prime example of the american dream. Why he wants to be president at a time like this is beyond me. So if he gets the Nomination he surely will get my vote. I think him a Newt might be a good team. Herman with a business mind and Newt with a hugh political back ground. I just know American will not survive if this administration is allowed to continue.

The most bombastic man in the group. A pompous but, yes, very informed man. Tries to have an anser for every issue and is not Constitutionally focused but, is focused on getting elected and having his way.

I have just got your "The Patriot Post", and saw that you ascribed a "Patriot Rating" of 3 for Ron Paul, but a 6 for Rick Perry and Mitt Romney.

Perry has a proven track record as a dictator; the Gardasil mandate is proof of that. His push of the “Trans-Texas Corridor” is another. He has no regard for people’s Rights.

Then there is Mitt Romney, flip-flop, flip-flop, flip-flop. Need I say more?

Perry, Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, and Cain, all supports violating our Bill of Rights being in favor of the Patriot Act, spying on citizens and privacy invasion, support the Federal Reserve, and support all as these military campaigns, undeclared wars, against undefined enemies, and which murders so many innocent civilians. INCLUDING CHILDREN.

Ron Paul, for his entire political career, has championed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Warned us of the internal destruction caused by the Federal Reserve, the erosion of our Rights by the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act.

And your rating for him is but a 3 as a patriot? And Perry, Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, and Cain are deemed better? You see these butchers of the Republic as patriots?

I am canceling my e-mailing subscription from The Patriot Post. This is not a patriotic publication/organization; it is just another part of the ongoing march of the New World Order minions.

Just cannot get myself around this guy. Still too much of a lifetime politian for me!

Gingrich is "smarter than the rest of the slate, combined"??? In what way? His moral failings make him incredibly stupid, in my opinion. Like Clinton and Edwards, a man who cannot be trusted by his wife cannot and should not be trusted to lead the country.

Ron Paul is the only one without a skeleton in the CFR closet.All the others are world government advocates. Believing as the founders did that we should not have aid beyond our shores is nor isolationism it is a sane way to look at things.

Cain Can. he does have a problem with the federal Reserve and needs to have the whole thing explained to him so he understands that the Fed is dead.

Otherwise better than anyone of the men but, Paul.

The cancer is a serious negative for most ignorant people. They didn't know about Rossevelts Polio and look how many times they voted that criminal in.

You're analysis is extremely flawed and biased. Thee's only one true patriot running for President in the GOP field. You've not done your research on Ron Paul and it shows.

BTW, I'm unsubscribing from "The Patriot Post", what a load of shite!

RINO

I liked the rating system here. Straight forward and very honest. It is not Mark's fault that the candidates are so awful this year. The truth is that the Republican field is very weak. It is also very difficult to satisfy both 'far right' tea party folks and Independents at the same time.

Thanks

The idea of a black President has failed! We don't need "obama II".

Pretty Other than htat I agree with your assessment.

what about the former Governor of new Mexico. He has a very sound case?

I would vote for Newt in a heartbeat but I am afraid that my well-intended vote would be "wasted" on an inceredibly smart and in-the-know individual who is highly qualified to lead our great nation...BUT who has had so much bad press (much of it is sadly true) that the vast majority of the totally unwashed & highly ignorant masses would poo-poo his election to the point that he has about as much chance of winning the White House as the most brilliant and wise Ron Paul.

I like him. No one is perfect.

@gottalovem.

You must be a member of the corporate MSM.

Am I right?

Here, here, Wendy, Brother Woody, Mark, Joe, Meredith, Peter Courtenay Stevens, Adk Rebel, and Kevin. Mr. Alexander has definitely been called out. I guess he didn't really know his audience.

I'd love to continue this but unfortunately I have to go back to work or some poor liberal may have to go home early from the "Uccupy Wall Street" demonstration due to lack of funds. i'll check back later.

Ron Paul 2012...keep up the support. We can make it happen.

@Major Stu,

Rick Perry's evangelical faith and Romney's Mormon faith should not be considered pros or cons in any electoral discourse. Neither of these religions are mainstream depending on who you talk to. Both are just as radical or exclusive to some people.

Rick Perry by his own account and past history in Texas is more likely than Mitt Romney to apply his church's values into public policy. He's done that in Texas while Romney had to hold his nose to satisfy constituents in liberal Massachusetts. It is near impossible to be resolute when you have liberals on all sides yelling at you to do what the majority of their constituents want. Rick Perry never had to face this level of scrutiny in conservative Texas. He never had to reach across the aisle.

Invoking religion into the national discourse is not what the founders would have supported. Romney will not do that unless people who do not agree with his faith force him to. He fully addressed this issue in 2008 and let it be known his actions as president would not be dictated by his church.

Time to move on to what's important!! Religion is not one of them.

He would be a good choice.

I think you missed the mark on Ron Paul.

My father, who was a very solid Republican for the second half of the 20th century, said many years ago that it is not America's job to police the world. I could tell it was bothering him that we were heading in this direction. His thinking was in line with many Conservative thinkers of his time, and is also in line with the Constitution.

But Conservative thinking has changed. I understand that our world has changed, but that is not a reason to ignore or bend our constitutional principles - in fact the Founders predicted the evolution of our country and came up with a fairly change-proof document. Otherwise, we could conveniently ignore the Constitution every time the world and our country changes.

People who don't understand Paul's fairly strict pro-Constitution comments like to throw around the term "isolationist," and yet that is not what he is. An isolationist is someone who doesn't believe in any alliances (symbolic or otherwise) with other nations, and who believes that their country should be entirely self-reliant.

Paul has never preached this. In fact, he is very open to free trade and supports alliances with other countries (in fact, he would like the power that has been delegated to the UN for such purposes returned to the US). He just doesn't think it is necessary to have 650 military bases around the world, and he doesn't think we should be sending billions of dollars annually around the world to other nations (especially wealthy nations) - and I agree.

I am also confused by your statement, "no clear expression of faith." I don't recall seeing that listed anywhere as a requirement for the office.

Faith is a very personal thing - much like someone's heart. Just because someone doesn't wear it on his sleeve doesn't mean he doesn't have it. I am guessing that what you really meant to say is that you are not seeing any evidence that his faith lines up with your personal faith.

If that is the case, that is very unfortunate.

I would no sooner judge a person's qualifications to be President on his declaration of what church or temple he goes to than I would judge my doctor because he doesn't like the same type of food that I do. It has nothing to do with his qualifications. I have heard some who say that you need to know where a person stands religiously in order to know where they stand morally.

Again, if that is what is being said here, that is very unfortunate. A moral person is found in their actions and reactions, and in their track record, and in their own heart - not merely in their declarations and denials.

Religion, last I checked, is still optional in this country, and a very private right. It should not be hoisted above everyone's head like a battle flag.

Cain's 999 tax plan will usher in a VAT tax, that would be very bad.

Dan, my analysis is very biased for the Constitution. If we don't restore it we're finished. You might follow your own advice, research Dr. Paul and maybe listen to him instead of the pundits. No shiite!

I believe Herman Cain, although not as experienced as other GOP Candidates is surely more qualified than our current President. I heard him speak on Hannity he other night and as he said when asked questions he doesn't know the answers to, he goes out and educates himself on them. I think this is important as his lack of knowledge will lead him to choose responsible Cabinet members who do have the experience. That was what Biden was supposed to give Obama

The best person to run the country right now is Obama. 2000-2008 almost tanked the country. Why go back to those same policies? We need higher wages to create demand.

My choice for the nomination has been and remains Gov. Perry. In the rough and tumble of Texas politics,the art of debate is not terribly essential. That is indeed bothersome on the national level, and presents a problem when confronting wiley Obama. It can be overcome, and should not be the fulcrum of the nomination.

Nonetheless, Gov. Perry has the proven track record as governor of Texas as a no nonsense conservative and pro-free market sdvocate. His lack of practical experience on foreign policy is no different than any governor, including Ronald Reagan.

He is the obvious conservative choice with the organization and fuding to win the presidential election in 2012.

As a resident of the Peoples' Glorious Socialist Republic of Massachusetts, I can talk about Mitt Romney first-hand.

IMHO, Mitt did as fine a job in my nut-ball state as he could. My sole complaint is the "Massachusetts Health Care Mandate," precursor to the widely reviled ObamaCare. This awful piece of public policy threatens to drive the state into receivership once its Washington support spigot is turned off, as surely it will be in 2013.

But I do not blame Mitt for that. The Mass Dems were keen on state government owning & running the hospitals and putting all doctors on the public payroll. They had more than enough muscle in the state House and Senate to make that happen. However, Romney and other cooler heads were able to divert this pure-socialist impulse into state subsidy of a highly regulated private health care industry.

Inefficient? Terribly. A failure? No doubt. Crony capitalism? An exemplar. But the good news is that it is reversible. The single-payer system beloved of Mass Dems would not have been.

As a thought experiment, imagine reversing the U.K.'s or Canada's failed health care experiments, for instance. It would be politically impossible. The countries would have to fall into anarchy before that would happen.

Mitt is incredibly talented. He'd make a fine president, IMHO. I just wish he would confront the "RomneyCare" label directly and cleanse himself of it instead of attempting to proudly own it. He, Massachusetts and the U.S. deserve better.

HERMAN CAIN IS THE MAN WHO CAN DO THE JOB OF TURNING AMERICA AROUND. HE HAS BECOME EXTREMELY POPULAR BECAUSE OF HIS CHARACTER, HIS EXPERTISE IN BUSINESS, HIS LACK OF BEING INFECTED BY WASHINGTON POLITICS, HIS BEING A DEVOTED CHRISTIAN WHO LIVES BY THESE VALUES, HIS GREAT COMMUNICATION SKILLS, HIS HAVING "FIRE IN THE BELLY" A A STIFF BACKBONE LIKE REAGAN, HIS BEING VERY LIKE ABLE. HE DOES THAT WHICH HE SAYS HE WILL DO. HE HAS BEEN STUDYING FOREIGN POLICY FOR 9 MONTHS NOW AND MAY KNOW MORE THAN MANY OF HIS OPPONENTS. HE IS THE MAN FOR THE JOB WHO CAN BRING AMERICA BACK TO ITS CONSTITUTIONAL, CHRISTIAN BASIS. I DO BELIEVE THAT HE IS NOW CONSIDERED TO BE FIRST IN THE POLLS IN MANY POLLS, SHOWING THAT HE DOES HAVE NAME RECOGNITION. HE REMINDS ME OF RONALD REAGAN. AMERICA WILL BE SO MUCH BETTER OFF AND IN A POSITION OF HEALING WITH A MAN LIKE HERMAN CAIN AS OUR PRESIDENT. BARBARA A. STEPHENS

I cant believe you gave Romney a six.

This is not what I expected from the Patriot Post.

This is why "Barack Hussein Obama Wins Re-Election"

Why will this be the November 3, 2012 Headlines?

The Republican Party and the American people didn't learn a thing from the 2008 Presidential Election. The Republican Elite which are true RINOs(Republican in Name Only) are more interested in the the party status and power in Washington than the American people. If that were not the case John McCain would never have been nominated. The majority of Republican voters are conservative and don't want a RINO in the White House. As the Media tries to pick the Republican Nominee the American people blindly listen to the mainstream media projecting who they want to run against their boy Obama, twelve months from the Republican Convention. The Republican Elite go right along with them so as not to rock the boat and keep the status quo in Washington. The American people are not stupid, but they are uneducated about the Republic (we are not a democracy) and the founders philosophy. This is thanks to thirty years of Government controlled schools and teachers union influence. Without a knowledge of our founding, our government and the relationship of our founding to gospel doctrine the average person cannot make an educated decision on how to vote. That being said most Conservatives are more educated than the average person and the Republican Party Elite is alienating the the 40% of the population that is conservative and the Conservative Christian Vote. If the Republican Party does not put the people first they will end up with another John McCain candidate. A non-conservative neochristian which will ensure the re-election of Barack Hussein Obama. Why can't Media sponsored candidates can't beat Barack Hussein Obama?

Herman Cain currently leads in the polls, but he is unelectable. You ask why. Herman Cain cannot beat Barack Hussein Obama because,

1. He's black, no black man will beat Obama especially without the Conservative Christian Vote .

2. He's not conservative enough. His 9-9-9 plan sounds great, but when you run the numbers most Americans taxes will go up. The consumption tax is a great idea, the flat tax is a great idea, but 9-9-9 will destroy America with out first totally eliminating the Income tax and the IRS. As long as we do not have a balance budget amendment the liberals and socialist in congress will continue to spend more than we have and the US will continue to decline. An independent analysis of his tax plan, released Tuesday, concluded otherwise. The Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank, said Cain’s plan would increase taxes on 84 percent of U.S. households, hitting low- and medium- income households the hardest. The analysis said that households making $10,000 to $20,000 would see whopping tax increases averaging $2,705 – an increase of nearly 950 percent.

3. Cain is a Federalist, in the last debate the former Federal Reserve insider Herman Cain brazenly lied during the Republican debate when

he denied that he had opposed an audit of the Fed, a claim that was proved false within hours by Ron Paul’s campaign team.

4. He is not knowledgeable on Gun Rights and The Second Amendment. His position is Gun Control is a States Right issue. Gun owners trust his position on Gun Control?

5. Herman Cain has no real political experience.

Mitt Romney, It should be obvious why Mitt Romney is unelectable.

1. He's a Liberal, he's so liberal it's hard to classify him as a RINO rather than a Democrat

2. He's Anti-Gun , Pro Gun Control.

3. He's Pro Socialized Medicine, Author of Romney Care. Romney does not want to repeal Obama Care. Obama Care is bases on Romney Care and was developed with input and support of Romney aids and Jonathan Gruper, Romney's aid and confidant for Romney Care.

4. He's a Mormon, that is not a back thing, but the Liberal Media has demonized the Mormon faith to where having a Muslim President would be better in many peoples eyes. Perception become reality in politics.

5. He believes in Man Made Global Warming

6 He is in favor of Amnesty for illegals yet he gives Perry a trashing on Immigration. He is a hypocrite. In the Oct 19 debate the most ` important part of the exchange between Romney and Perry on illegal Immigration, Romney said" You can't have illegal’s working on our property; I'm running for office, for Pete's sake I can't have illegal’s." The issue was how it would look for Romney, not the fact that he had Illegals working for him.

Rick Perry is the longest serving Texan Governor in history. He has made a number of controversial decisions that could undermine his ability to beat Barack Hussein Obama. He has changed his position on a number of issues in the past few years to become a dogmatic nationalist and a social and fiscal conservative and a big States Rights supporter. His hard stance on several explosive issues, such as abortion, firearms, same-sex marriages and capital punishment provokes a reaction outside of the conservative circles. Honest to a fault and admits his mistakes.

The question is will he stay that way in the White House.

1. The media hates him because he a Christian Conservative and he's from Texas.

2. His position on funding for illegal immigrant Education has conservatives split on Perry. The fact is that the Texas law says if you have been a resident of Texas for two years you qualify for in-state tuition. The law does not require proof of citizenship.(see below)

3. His poor performance in the debate format may be his undoing

Ron Paul Who the Hell is Ron Paul? The most ignored Candidate in history. The only true Constitutionalist running for President and he makes no apologies for it. Ron Paul has been cast in the role of the misfit, the eccentric and the unelectable; securely kept within the fringes of the Republican Party. The mainstream media shuns him and ignores his poll numbers. He believes in small governments, non- expansionist foreign policy, gold-backed currency, personal liberty and abolishing federal income taxes. He holds the most conservative voting record in Congress and he is also the biggest advocate for the dismantling of the Federal Reserve. We is the only candidate that would follow the Constitution to the letter. Has the "Restore America Plan" to balance the Federal Leviathan's budget in just 3 years and pay down the Debt.

His following is force to be reckoned with and will likely decide if the republicans win or loose the White House in 2012.

1. Paul first ran for president as a Libertarian.

2. His policies scare a lot of the Washington Elite and the Liberal Media.

3. He has some controversial positions the media exploits on a public ignorant of the Constitution.

4. He is considered the Godfather of the Tea Party.

5. He isn't physically attractive enough for some voters.

6. His isolationist position and position on bringing our troops home scares many people.

7. His plan to Balance the Budget in three years and pay down the national debt scares the poverty pimps and unions.

Michele Bachmann She is also smart, attractive, and telegenic. She’s got charisma, as well as sharp eyes and ears for the issues on which she can separate herself and the biting examples/phrases that will get her points across. Even with the support of the Tea Party it will be a tough Race. 1. She does have the support of Republican Elite.

2. There are some who are net ready for a woman in the White House particularly some of the Evangelical Christian and Muslims.

3. She has made some serious gaffes and misspeaks that the liberals and media will capitalize on and run into the ground.

4. The media and democrats are afraid of her and will savagely go after her as they did Sarah Palin.

Newt Gingrich Newt is a great intellectual thinker and historian. Author of the Contract with America. he is a great speaker and has a lot of great ideas, but he is un-electable in a presidential race.

1. Newt has a lot of personal baggage that will be drug out in a national race.

2. The Republican Elite are not behind him.

3. His commentary though correct is often divisive.

4. He is not a leader. He says the right things, but he does not lead men. This is evident by the troubles he has had keeping his campaign team together.

5. He caved and made deals with Bill Clinton that betrayed his conservative followers when he was House Speaker.

6. He believes in Man Made Global Warming.

7. He is pro-Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants

8. He resigned from congress amid ethics violations.

Jon Huntsman is unelectable as a Republican. Someone screwed up letting him in the party. He a personal friend of Barack Hussein Obama.

1. A former Mormon missionary , the Media will have field day with this.

2. High school dropout (he obtained his G.E.D a few years later).

3. RINO

4. He believes in Man Made Global Warming

IN CLOSING

Don't get me wrong. I think Ron Paul, Rick Perry or Michele Bachmann would be a huge improvement over Barack Hussein Obama. Personally I would vote for Mickey Mouse, the Tooth Fairy or maybe even the Devil Himself, over Barack Hussein Obama. At least we would know what we were voting for then. Republicans have to quit fighting amongst themselves. As Hank Williams Jr. said, Barack Hussein Obama is the enemy in this fight, not fellow Republicans. The Republican Candidates who have no chance of winning need to drop out of the race and the Republican Party needs to decide if its more conservative or more socialist. Ignore the dam media, quit the games, the life blood of our republic is at stake. This country is bankrupt. The world is at war. People are in the streets calling for violent revolution and the President and Democratic Leadership are encouraging them, saying they are behind them. Our borders are open to anyone. Forty-seven million Americans are on welfare. Forty-nine percent of American households pay no income tax. The federal government borrows $58,000 every second. Our economy is a shell game that will fail if it is not stopped soon. This is not the America I grew up in. This is not the America I expect my grandchildren to grow up in. We must return to our core beliefs, our founding and our God. If you do not fight in the realm of political ideas now, you doom your children to fighting in the streets.

BSherrill Copyright 2011

Bob Sherrill

Blackwater Subsea, LLC.

ENERGY from Darkness

713-857-4704

bob@blackwatersubsea.com

www.blackwatersubsea.com

Romney is a way to smoothe-talking,Politician, who changes his mind much too often to be trustworthy! Also is too far left!

Here, here, Wendy, Brother Woody, Mark, Joe, Meredith, Peter Courtenay Stevens, Adk Rebel, and Kevin. Mr. Alexander has definitely been called out. I guess he didn't really know his audience.

I'd love to continue this but unfortunately I have to go back to work or some poor liberal may have to go home early from the "Uccupy Wall Street" demonstration due to lack of funds. i'll check back later.

Ron Paul 2012...keep up the support. We can make it happen.

While I agree that Newt comes with a lot of baggage, I can't think of another candidate more able to tell the MSM where to stick their attacks. Also, I practically salivate at the prospect of Newt challenging our narcissist-in-chief to seven Lincoln-Douglas type 3-hour debates (with no moderator.) What a spectacle that would be!

Looks as if we'll be back to voting for the lesser of two evils.

Romney and Perry are both Rinos from the same pod.

Both will say whatever it takes. I would rather elect Cain with his lack of foreign policy experience than either of the above mentioned two faced, can't be trusted slick willies.

There is no doubt that Gov. Romney is a smooth campaigner based on years of practice. But the fact remains that he comes from the Rockefeller wing of the GOP. That he is the favorite of establishment Republicans and inside the beltway "conservatives" is no surprise. But it certainly does not endear him to the Republican base.

The problem is that he is not a true conservative, and more troubling he finds it quite convenient to change positions on critical issues to adapt to the latest inside poll.

That he is a better choice than Obama in the 2012 election is obvious. But conservatives would vote for him while holding their noses.

I keep wondering exactly what baggage everybody thinks Gingrich is carrying that would keep him from gettig elected? Let's see, marital infidelity...do you really think Democrats will bring that up? Shutting down the government? Do you think Obama wants to go there? Balancing the budget? Oh wait, that's not baggage is it. Everyone seems to think that in 1980 Reagan came across as this perfect candidate. How many remember that he was the first man elected President who had been divorced? I believe that as Cain stops being the flavor of the month that Newt will start to get a more serious look.

To whom it may concern, I like Herman Cain and am working to see that he is elected. I look at him that he isn't anything like the "professional politician" that promises the changes that the people want and then simply say that it cannot be done. I am tired of all these people and would have changed my party affiliation if it were not for Herman Cain. Yes he has no experience, yes he will have to learn, but I see a lot of potential in Herman Cain that I don't see in any other candidate. I think that eventually others will see what I see and elect a bona fide true American hero. May God bless the United States of America by giving us Herman Cain to be the next President of this once great country!!!

The perfect ticket: Ron Paul, Pres. Michelle Bachman, VP

Wow. Epic Fail. Ron Paul's pro: "Strong constitutional advocate..." ??? Really? What the!?!... He's been the LEADING and often ONLY consistent constitutional advocate in U.S. Govt over the last 30 years.

"Cons: His isolationist foreign policy is incredibly naïve"...'isolationist'? 'incredibly'? Other commenters above have eloquently stated RP's non-interventionist foreign policy stance and tied it to the Founding Fathers guidance.

Such reprehensibly bold distortions from the Patriot Post. I'm deeply disappointed.

I came to the site today prepared to unsubscribe. I have never been more disappointed in anything nor more compeletely dumbfounded than I was by your "rankings" article.

Once here, I took the time to read the comments and am so completely overjoyed at the response of the readers that I can hardly even contain myself ** does a happy dance**. Clearly people are waking up and thinking for themselves to the extent that your ridiculous hatchet job has caused no damage. Really, did you even read the "pros and cons" before publishing them? It just sounds like something regurgitated by the establishment media. Not your usual style AT ALL.

I started by jotting down names of people whom I particularly agreed with, intending to mention them rather than repeat points, but there were so many that I filled up my paper!! Big thanks to Kennon, Robert Dutton, Walter Buller, IndianaFreedom, Jeff, Robert, John Pickerill, L.Hull, Wally Keasler, Joseph & Shane for doing such a great job educating others today! I have to reiterate IndianaFreedom's point: if you are serious in these rankings and this isn't some poorly conceived "reverse psychology" experiment, then the presence of the Gadsden flag is entirely inappropriate as you did not uphold it's standards today.

Just look at Romney's "cons", and how can you rate him a 6 as the top rating compared with other candidates??? I understand your preliminary comments about how you have rated the candidates on all issues, etc. However, if Romney isn't a democrat socialist, I don't know one. If he is nominated, kiss this country goodbye because the illegals now running our government will continue our destruction for another 4 years, and maybe longer.

@Gary D Rhodes wrote:

"@gottalovem. You must be a member of the corporate MSM. Am I right?"

No, you're not. I'm just a very observative good ol' boy from Texas with years of experience watching campaigns and an extensive 30 year writing background.

I only want the best candidates to stay in this race and above all "The Obama's out of the White House".

May the best most deserving governor win OVER Obama by a landslide like Reagan did over Carter. I'm tired of these close elections.

I am confused: "Smooth Talker" is a pro for Mitt Romney, but a pejorative when describing Obama as a 'smooth-talking “community organizer.”'

Gingrich - 6 - you have got to be kidding. Old hat. Not a chance.

Perry - 6 - LOL ROFLMAO - He is a suit and a plastic one at that.

Romney - 6 - Sheesh - RINO - Obama lite - Never will get my vote.

I'll vote for myself or Mickey Mouse before I vote for any of these three.

I came to the site today prepared to unsubscribe. I have never been more disappointed in anything nor more compeletely dumbfounded than I was by your "rankings" article.

Once here, I took the time to read the comments and am so completely overjoyed at the response of the readers that I can hardly even contain myself ** does a happy dance**. Clearly people are waking up and thinking for themselves to the extent that your ridiculous hatchet job has caused no damage. Really, did you even read the "pros and cons" before publishing them? It just sounds like something regurgitated by the establishment media. Not your usual style AT ALL.

I started by jotting down names of people whom I particularly agreed with, intending to mention them rather than repeat points, but there were so many that I filled up my paper!! Big thanks to Kennon, Robert Dutton, Walter Buller, IndianaFreedom, Jeff, Robert, John Pickerill, L.Hull, Wally Keasler, Joseph & Shane for doing such a great job educating others today! I have to reiterate IndianaFreedom's point: if you are serious in these rankings and this isn't some poorly conceived "reverse psychology" experiment, then the presence of the Gadsden flag is entirely inappropriate as you did not uphold it's standards today.

Cain should rate a 6. I'm surprised that Patriot Post would rate someone on the Republican left like Romney a 6. I know the establishment Republican experts think you have to pay your dues to the system before being nominated. How did McCain work out? Maybe some of them are afraid if the system was transformed by some untainted outsider who hadn't been trained in political cronyism they might not be appointed to fill the government job positions.

Since your ratings scale went from 1- 10, looks like you have only rated a few barely above average and the others at or below average. I've liked Newt from the beginning and all the debates have firmed that up. I'll probably be voting for him in the primary.

I would give Herman a 7!! I agree Newt is the smartest, but with the horrible press we have they would mount an all out assault on him. I think Newt needs to be very involved in Herman's administration but in the background. I think it is a HUGE plus that Herman is an outsider. We've seen way too many professional politicians and I am sick to death of them! Let's put a REAL person in there who deals with other people in a straightforward manner. He may not have "foreign policy" experience as a politician, but he has had that kind of experience with his business background. He also has the keen ability to attract and select others who do! I'm over Romney-too slick and Perry has been very disappointing in his tiffs with Romney. I love the fact that Newt has risen above all that. All of these people need to be a conglomerate behind Hermain Cain and act as advisors. Bottom line-any or all would be 1000 times better than Carock Obummer.

After reading this, two thoughts strike me.

1. When you list pros an cons such as:

o Female

o great family history

o does not look presidential

o too easily stereotyped

o black

o low name recognition

o notable marriage/moral peccadilloes

o a lightning rod

o fails the "nut job" test with many voters

o worst debate skills ever witnessed

o not old enough to look like John McCain

then it appears that the assertion “we do not rate candidates on electability," is just so much BRAVO-SIERRA.

2. Given the Patriot Post’s history of defending Essential Liberty, it would seem to me that anyone who has made a direct assault on it (i.e. George W. Gardasil Perry and Mitt Romneycare) would earn a DQ rather than the top score. It makes one wonder how John McCain-Feingold would have faired.

Ron Paul will be the first US President elected by the Internet.

Herman Cain's experience includes dealing with foreign laws and bureaucrats in his business dealings. This is much more likely to provide information on foreign positions than talking to politicians.

I find your disregard for his work with the navy as indication of lack of military experience to be at best disingenuous.

I find your inclusion of his skin color to be indicative of racism, and NOT a factor on which to judge him.

I find his "9-9-9" plan to have one to many nines. The federal government should not be collecting any sales taxes.

I came to the site today prepared to unsubscribe. I have never been more disappointed in anything nor more compeletely dumbfounded than I was by your "rankings" article.

Once here, I took the time to read the comments and am so completely overjoyed at the response of the readers that I can hardly even contain myself ** does a happy dance**. Clearly people are waking up and thinking for themselves to the extent that your ridiculous hatchet job has caused no damage. Really, did you even read the "pros and cons" before publishing them? It just sounds like something regurgitated by the establishment media. Not your usual style AT ALL.

I started by jotting down names of people whom I particularly agreed with, intending to mention them rather than repeat points, but there were so many that I filled up my paper!! Big thanks to Kennon, Robert Dutton, Walter Buller, IndianaFreedom, Jeff, Robert, John Pickerill, L.Hull, Wally Keasler, Joseph & Shane for doing such a great job educating others today! I have to reiterate IndianaFreedom's point: if you are serious in these rankings and this isn't some poorly conceived "reverse psychology" experiment, then the presence of the Gadsden flag is entirely inappropriate as you did not uphold it's standards today.

I'm sure Nr. Cain is a very nice fellow and has an excellent garsp of economics;howecer, let us not forget he was in the Fed's board and headed the Federal Reserve Bank out of St. Louis Mosouri and his 9-9-9-plan as their PUPPET would give the INTEWRNATIONAL BANKING THIEVES A virtual stranglehold on our economy. He sees nothing wrong with the PRIVATE cartel of international banking thiebves having total UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONTROL OVER the production of our currency. I submit, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOO REASON THE UNITED STATES SHOULD PAY INTEREST TO A PRIVATE BANKING CARTEL FOR THE PRIVIKEDGE OF CREATING OUR CURRENCY. The congress has abrogated their responsibility and this unconstitutional operation must be dissolved and ALL THEIR SO=CALLED DEBT WIPEDE OFF THE BOOKS.

ALL ASSETS SHOULD BE CONFISCATED AND SOLD TO PRIVATE BANKS.THE POWER OF THE PURSE MUST BE RETURNED TO THE PEOPLE.

Lost some respect for Michele Bachmann after her association with Donald Trump.

On Ron Paul's website, he has his statement on faith and it very detailed. He is an unabashed born again Christian and is not afraid to say so.

Regarding the 'Con'- 'Low name recognition';

This is hardly a negative.

Example; Had anyone ever heard the name 'Barak Obama'

before?

Pretty sorry lot isn't it!

How can you list one of the "Pro's" for Mr. Cain as being "black"? Isn't that what we were accusing the left of simply voting in regard of back in 2008?

We are faced with a huge series of complex, life-changing issues created by previous administrations and ably aided by Obama and his team of buffons. I am not going to comment on all the candidates, but let me say that Perry scares me. He is a mean-spirited bully who appears to believe deep down that his road to success is to try to destroy Romney. And he has demonstrated beautifully his inability to think on his feet The GOP teleprompter man?

At the heart of America's problems is finance, and I belive that Romney has the background and skills to take us through that gauntlet successfully. Romney is not a dyed-in-the-wool conservative, but he is smart enough to know what needs to be done. The era of high-spending governments is over; he knows it. Fiscal conservatism is the call; he knows it.

We need a strong, experienced leader with a strong team supporting him. A Romney/Cain ticket, elected and then aided by many if the current GOP candidates (not Perry) will be the right prescription for an ailing America based on the choices available. And he can beat Obama.

Your cons approach with regard to Dr. Ron Paul is ridiculous. Read George Washington's farewell address to read, understand and comprehend that our intentions as a new nation - and it holds true for today - is to stay away from foreign policies. The United States, the corporate US has its greedy interests in other countries for profit and profit only. Isolationism, in a Constitutional format would allow the united States of American to profit and to develop security and defense that would not be defeatable!

Pro for all the reasons heretofore articulated. She looks as Presidential as anyone (sex and "looking Presidential" (whatever that means) are not relevant criteria.

Con, yes she does get a little whinny and loud (can't candidates us their normal speaking voice, please!)

As middle of the road and wishy washy as Huck.

I believe your assessment of Ron Paul's rating is in serious error. Of all the candidates, he is the only one who has CONSISTANTLY PUT HIS VOTE AND ACTIONS WHERE HIS MOUTH IS. ALL THE OTHERS HAVE DEMONSTRAITED A WILLINGNESS TO SACRIFICE our Constitutional liberties for the expediency of the momont or to achieve what they consider an appropriate "outcome". Yes, Paul's foreign policy views may seem extream in our modern turbulent times but ask yourself, is he paying homage to our constitutional roots??? I say ABSOLUTELY. iT'S the united states congress who have abrogated their responsibilities by giving even greater war power aythority to the potus then king George was allowed.

I believe Perry's allowing in-state tutition for

children of illegals will hurt him plus his

lack of debating skills. Even though he may

have been advised to attack Romney, he comes off

as very mean spirited and attacks on small issues.

He needs to stick to telling us what he will do

for the country.

Sad.

Still, I think Gingrich has the best understanding of the issues - all of them - in their historical contexts. But so do some professors. For his ability to execute, I pick Cain for his executive abilities in the private sector. Cain and Gingrich is my strange pick.

Bachmann sounds more and more like a cheerleader.

PS: Poor Michelle! Grinding and pushing isn't sexy?

His previous flip flops may come back to haunt him

and how do we know he won't do it again as president? Looks and acts presidential but his

religious faith worries me.

Romney and Perry at the top of your Patriot scoring...really...you just shot your credibility with this Constitutionalist and I suspect with many others.

@Stoneface (or Stonwface): You have just given a perfect demonstration of why Paul will not be elected president. Nobody reads things printed in all-caps.

He is very conservative which I like but he comes

off as mean spirited, also. He needs to stick to

the issues and attacking Obama instead of his

fellow candidates.

Cons-Governor Perry DOES have very strong conservative roots. Keep in mind that when Al Gore ran for president in 1988 he presented himself as a southern conservative. Rick Perry like many elected officials in 1988 in Texas was a "blue-dog" Democrat. He and most other such Democrats in Texas eventually switched parties (eg. Phil Gramm, etc.). I am 94 years old and have been a Republican in Texas for more than 60 years. Governor Perry has done more for private property rights and small businesses in Texas than any Texas governor in my lifetime.

Gentlemen & ladies, fellow patriots all...

I contend that Mark Alexander is "dumb like a fox" and that this entire faux-rating system is a well executed ploy to illustrate the very problem plaguing the conservative bloc...we continue to eat our own while our enemies are "smart" enough to unify behind a single candidate... I originally thought that this was a post for April 1st, but now I'm seeing the genius in it. Now while I agree with the points made by a great many of you regarding "true conservatives", elect-ability, and so-forth, we need a strong candidate in the mold of the framers. At a minimum this post has stoked the embers of intellectual debate, so mark it down as a "win" for Mark & Co. Good job.

You really don't have a clue as to what Ron Paul stands for do you. He is the only 100% Constitutionally solid candidate running and you give him a "3." Read your Constitution because you are obviously truly out of touch with what our founders created.

Romney and Perry at the top of your Patriot scoring...really...you just shot your credibility with this Constitutionalist and I suspect with many others.

You've been one of the nay-sayers about Ron Paul for a long time and your bias is showing.

Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist. He is a non-interventionalist. You need to learn the difference.

And, how many times does he need to say and show videos about his religious views? He is a born-again Christian, with STRONG pro-life beliefs.

He just is about the only one that truly understands the proper role of Government.

His base is much broader than you credit. I'm a lifetime Republican, have been paying atention to politics for 20 years and I'm 55 years old. (Does that fit your 'profile'?)

To put A TOTAL RINO at the top of the heap also shos your willingness to cave to the establishment mantra of percieved 'electability'.

It looks to me like you're pushing your own agenda.

To say that I'm dissapointed, is understatement.

I like this man and trust what he says. Believe

he would make up for not being 'political' by surrounding himself with conservative advisors.

His health issues concern me so he needs to be

careful who he chooses as his running mate.

Newt or Michelle might be a good fit.

@d axxx: Permanent alliances was what the founding fathers warned against, not any kind of foreign policy at all. The policy for the nation must obviously be one of national self-interest. To defend its mercantile freedom the marines were dispatched to Tripoli. This was foreign policy in the nation's interest but not a permanent alliance. Your moralistic attitude toward the public interest reminds me more of Flea Party than Tea Party points. Besides, it was in the public interest to let the British play police force: America was paying a debt.

I see... Romney gets a 6 and Paul a 3.

A vote for Romney is national suicide. An 'R' behind the name of someone who will do nothing different than Obama, other than quiet down the Republicans is more dangerous, in my opinion.

You, Patriot Post, wouldn't know an advocate for Liberty if it bit you in the behind.

You, Patriot Post, are part of the problem. Pick up a copy of the Constitution and read it. You may change your position. Until then, I'm going to unsubscribe.

Unsubscribing now.

Your rating on Ron Paul looks like it came from the main stream media, includuing Fox News.Dr. Paul's voting record over several administrations is proof positive that he is the real deal and a profile in courage.He has five children and ,I beleve, fifteen grandchildren and no mention that he is a good family man.His religous beliefs are well known to anyone willing to inquire,\.He just doesn't use them to pander.His military record and clear insights as to the real dangers to our country and system should have rated him at least a 7.I have long experience in matters overseas and can tell you that his foreign policy proposals are solid.Any candidate that wants to continue policing the world and have our blood and treasure wasted should be shunned and not put forth as a serious candidate to keep us safe and prosperous.It's not weakness or isolationist to WALK SOFTLY but carry a big stick!

I cannot believe you gave Rick Perry and Mitt Romney both a 6. Mitt Romney takes the cake as a RINO. I AM VERY disappointed. I am so upset with these two choices in their "non professional" and "non presidential" behavior in the last debate. I am not going to vote for either of these two if either one of them are the GOP nominee. I will write in my choice. The country deserves another term of Obama if either one of these two unprofessional clowns gets the nomination.

It's time for people to get real and elect someone who understands economics and how the business world works.

Mitt is the only candidate that has a change of beating Obama. Is he perfect? No. Was any presidential candidate ever deemed perfect at this point in the primaries? Is any candidate perfect? Mitt has shown his calm leadership skills consistently in the debates, has a strong morale belief system and has both private business as well as government experience. Do you want to win or do you want to lean so far to the right that it's wrong? My vote is for Romney.

I like Herman Cain because he is not a poitician and not in league with the "moderate" Republicans that are "inside the beltway."

Herman Cain has shown he has/can/will surround himself with great advisors, probably some of whom will NOT get the OK from the 'mainstream media' -- but who cares? He's the real deal with an impressive list of successes in the business world, ranging far and above anyone else's in the field. He has a great sense of humor, will laugh at himself if need be, and would be able to talk circles around BHO as to the way to get the USA back on track with jobs and a better economy.

Wow. Ron Paul at a 3 and Gary Johnson not even listed. I thought this site actually supported liberty and the constitution, not just RINOs, radical republicans, and those that claim to support liberty until their social or moral values are involved. What a disappointment.

I noticed there were several "candidates" left off the rating article posted. John Huntsman being one. Although I'm certain he would rank lower than Michelle Bachman I was curious why he was not rated, (or did he rank 0 and not worth mentioning?). Also, I know he's not in the mainstream of candidates but Gary Johnson is an outstanding candidate that I would rank higher than all the current crop. Why he has no exposure is a mystery to me and it's also a shame. He articulates the most congruent stances conservatives are after and I believe he would rank very favorably. It's unfortunate he doesn't have $100 million of his own money to gain the kind of exposure necessary to become a viable force to be reckoned with. Thanks for doing the heavy lifting of ranking these candidates and giving us an idea what the criteria were. Great Job!!

Given the Cons that you've listed, how can he possibly be a "6" Patriot. Everything about him says "slick", establishment politician that will cave in to the mass media and other left-leaning political pressure. Note: Please add his recent flip-flop on Ohio Issue 2 restricting public union collective bargaining.

Major, major mistake to have done this editorial, disguised as an objective analysis, at this point. You could have predicted that there would be widespread disagreement with your result and that no one would walk away having their mind changed. You should have predicted that most would come away with a new contempt for Patriot Post, not seen before in these pages.

This hurts your credibility, changes no minds and only tends to make true conservatives more depressed.

I will continue to read these pages but my trust has been greatly diminished.

Quote..

John Wilson

You have lost me permanently as a subscriber/receiver of your newsletter. These ratings lacks any rational basis. You are now part of the problem!

Posted October 27, 2011 at 1:11:57 PM

+1

Ron Paul 2012!

i find it difficult to believe the winner of the value voters summit has "no clear expression of faith". perhaps you need to see his speech again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wnj-5z9NJoY

ron paul 2012

I can't believe this is the field we have to choose from in such a perilous time for our country. I understand that any candidate is better than an Obama re-election, but I don't see any of these as being up to the task. I need to stockpile more food and ammunition...

I agree completely with all your "pros," and the most electrifying, ironically, is that he is black. If the Republican Party nominates him, the hackneyed old "racism" charge against our party DISAPPEARS. Remember, if we nominate a white guy, there will always be the leftist undercurrent of "this criticism of Obama is so over the top that it has to be fueled by racism." On your cons, "more novelty than substance"??? THAT still applies in spades to Obama; there's plenty of substance to Cain. Cain's a quick study--the foreign policy knock will go away soon. And money will solve his organization and name recognition problems--I just gave him $50 today, and I believe he has JUST rolled out his online solicitation. "Sound-bite deep on many issues"??? That again is our current president--I've never heard anything but platitudes from Obama. Hey, Obama wasn't in the military, either, nor was Clinton, nor was Romney. "Not previously vetted"??? We STILL can't vet Obama--he hasn't released ANY records whatsoever. So, in a matchup of Cain against Obama, the latter is in DEEP TROUBLE!!!

Newt's got baggage, etc. I've got baggage, etc. Most everybody has baggage of some sort.

I'm thinking about who, of the group listed can best lead our country out of the abyss we're in. Newt wins, hands down as far asd I'm concerned.

I can't believe you rate this candidate, Rick Santorum, above Rick Perry. Nobody in his state, Pennsylvania, can stand him.

Dear Mr. Alexander,

Three conclusions quickly flow from your rating of Mitt Romney;

1) If you were to paste Joe Biden’s name & photo over Gov. Romney’s, the pros & cons would fit closely enough to give him a rating of 6 as well. (I wonder if Obama and Hillary would also outscore Michelle Bachman?)

2) Perhaps your rating system needs revamping?

3) Perhaps my opinion of the Patriot Post needs revamping?

Actually, I hold you and your publication in VERY high regard. Please keep up your good work! I just have never seen Mitt Romney embrace any Essential Liberties.

Respectfully,

Tom Richards

Gingrich, as the Republican candidate, would be Obama's worst nightmare. In the Theatical Arena of the Presidential Debates, Newt would blow Obama off the stage: He's smarter, speaks plain American, vastly more experienced in Geo-Politics, and would counter every "mis-speak" Obama would try to throw at voters.

Quote...Gloria Anton

I like Herman Cain because he is not a poitician and not in league with the "moderate" Republicans that are "inside the beltway."

Posted October 27, 2011 at 2:52:22 PM

Gloria,

You might want to turn off the tv and look a little closer at Cain's history. I might trust him a little more than Romney or Perry, but that's not saying much. There's a reason media doesn't publicize Cain's political experience. Man of the people? Right, more like man of the Central Banking system, not to mention experience in lobbying.

If Mitt Romney becomes the 2012 GOP Candidate, say hello to four more years of Obama!

I cannot believe you did not even mention his position on abortion. I have heard him say REPEATEDLY that he is Pro-Life (personally), but always adds that he believes the gov't has NO authority to be involved in abortion decisions. I heard him asked repeatedly if he thought the gov't should outlaw abortions, and he consistently answered "NO".

mr Gengrich is smarter and more articulate than any of the other candidates...his lack of forigen policy doesn't bother me as he understands the world we live in like none of the others do.he would make an excellent president and is really the only one of the group that could lead us out of the mess obamaha has us in...leadership is the key to making all the other puzzle pieces fall into place.

Can't we overlook Newt's Cons??? We need someone who can take Obama down in debates!

You are so wrong, and I do not mean just wrt to Bachmann. Your opinions throughout for all of them demonstrate an obvious negation of true Tea Party sensibilities. I would expect these ratings from the RNC or the CFR. Not from a Tea Partier. Who the h€!! have you been talking to?

Great man! He is a real person, that's why they (the media) don't get him. The American people get him. It will be a mistake to count him out.

I had completely dismissed Newt from the race until

I heard Romney vs. Perry, the front runners in recent polls. I seriously doubt that either of them could out debate Obama. I feel that Newt would have little problem with the light weight president. Perhaps we can forgive Newt for his marital failures as the Dems forgave Clinton's Oval Office behavior when they said, "that's Bill's personal life" which seemed to justify his amoral acts in the peoples house.

Awwww, Give Rick Perry a break will ya! 1988 was a long time ago. People grow and change. I can understand Rick Perry being against illegal immigration and at the same time supporting the children who are here with the TX Dream Act. Better to have them educated than not eh? Texan's have big hearts and they try to do what is right. That would never have passed without the support of GOP legislators in the state.

Wow. Ron Paul at a 3 and Gary Johnson not even listed. I thought this site actually supported liberty and the constitution, not just RINOs, radical republicans, and those that claim to support liberty until their social or moral values are involved. What a disappointment.

I couldn't disagree more on your assessment of Ron Paul's foreign policy philosophy. He's the only one that has a sane take on foreign policy. We have got to stop our imperialistic view of the world and mind our own damn business. Since when did national defense become imperialism and nation building? We are not the world police department, nor should we aspire to be. It is really any wonder so many people want to do us harm when we are meddling in the internal affairs of sovereign nations?

Mark..With your so-called in-depth knowledge of the candidates, I am astounded to read your comments on my favorite candidate of all time..RON PAUL. You cut him whoafully short on his track record in Congress and his courageous stand on Constitutional issues. You also didnt mention his broad, sweeping proposals to overhaul DC, stop the wars, get rid of bad baggage, cut salaries and balance the budget, stuff noone else even comes close to mentioning. Your badly misinformed comment on his foreign policy shows that you, in fact, do not really have a handle on where he is coming from. It is politically expedient for guys like you to simply pidgeon hole his ideas as too extreme. His ideas are anything BUT extreme. They are EXACTLY what this country NEEDS at this point in history. Screw the middle of roaders that are either too naive,too lazy to do their own due diligence or misinformed to make an intelligent, rational, objective decision as to the urgent validity of his ideas. I agree with some of your other posters...with a following like yours and putting out this kind of drivel makes you part of the problem not of the solution. We need someone in the Oval Office that has the intelligence, integrity and political savvy that RON PAUL brings to the table. Get off of the bandwagon and stop helping the MSM marginalize him.

Jack Hartwell

Port isabel, TX.

Wow. Ron Paul at a 3 and Gary Johnson not even listed. I thought this site actually supported liberty and the constitution, not just RINOs, radical republicans, and those that claim to support liberty until their social or moral values are involved. What a disappointment.

Like most of the other commenters I am surprised and disappointed in your ratings. I agree that Perry and Romeny are the establishment candidates and seem to be the ones being pushed on us by not just the left-side media but many of our 'own'. Very disappointing.

I have to also say that if I see one more comment where a sentence starts with Ron Paul is the only one... First of all, just not true. Both Bachmann and Santorum are constitutionalists. Bachmann probably more than Santorum.

Herman Cain is a nice fellow and likeable but he makes me think of the whole Ross Perot snafu. The idea of an 'outsider' non-politician coming in and fixing things as he/she would fix a business is appealing except that the government is not a business. Nor does it run as a business. The government has no real product. It produces nothing. At best it is a service facility for the American people, or is supposed to be. While Herman may be bright in terms of the free market, the fact is that government does not create jobs - except government jobs. His lack of understanding of foreign policy in fact is a big deal, if I have to explain that then you aren't noticing what is happening around the world. And we already have a president who was voted in based on outsider status and lots of charisma - where has that gotten us?

And if you're going to ding Bachmann for being shrill, why not ding Perry for being angry? If Bachmann were a man, and did and said exactly the same thing shrill would not be used to describe her.

Sorry to disagree with you but in my mind if we are talking about true conservatives then Bachmann and Santorum are the only ones who make the grade. Neither compromises on conservative principles and make no apologies for being conservative. They don't try to hedge their bets and change their personalities to accommodate the audience they are speaking to. Ron Paul is brilliant in the area of fiscal matters, but he stance on national security, the military, foreign policy turns me off. It is naive at best. And then there is all those earmarks he brought home to Texas. Oh right and he said that Hannity, Levin and Rush were statists.

Also, lack of leadership from Bachmann, really? Well who authored the bill to repeal Obamacare? And Dodd-Frank. Who said no to raising the debt ceiling? Who gave the tea party response to Obama's state of the union address? This woman has been fought tooth and nail by the establishment republicans and hasn't caved. I'm sorry but if that doesn't show leadership and persistence what does? This shows me that she will fight to accomplish what she says she will, that she won't let being popular or being liked be a guide in her actions. And I believe that she truly understands what it will take to repeal these bills and reform the tax code.

It's nice to be charming and likable but when faced with the pressures of the presidency I think Cain will face some serious problems. Much as I like him, I he has too much in common with Obama. Outsider, charismatic but out of his depth on too many issues to do a good job.

We are in trouble folks, put aside your biases and consider what it is really going to take to turn things around. The only candidate who even ackknowledges it is Bachmann, she has said time and again there is no silver bullet. That it will be a long and difficult uphill battle - and that's the truth. She is not pulling any punches but telling ti like it is - maybe we should believe her.

When I first subscribed to Patriot Post I felt you were an objective knowledgeable news source. Now I'm questioning my memory. You've seriously angered me with the misrepresentations of Dr. Paul. What more could we ask for in a candidate? Intelligence - can't be a doctor of medicine with out it. Conviction of beliefs - whether we're talking about his faith in Christ, his devotion to one wife, or his stellar service to our nation (both militarily and in office) - one can't ask for more. Staying power - same drive to support and defend the constitution for 30 years. Honesty - returns a portion of his office budget yearly. Unshakeable - puts up with crap from this and many other "news" orginizations without whining or crying. Entirely vetted - you know EXACTLY what you get, and why (all based on US Constitution). Cheap shots won't impress me with your knowledge Patriot press. You dropped a few rungs in my opinion, with this unwarranted attack - you're not being honest at worst - at best you didn't even attempt to be informed about him. Must be some preconceived ideas because he's older or in your opinion does not look "presidential."

"notable marriage/moral peccadilloes"

I don't want to hear any more about Newt's "baggage", after Monica's stained blue dress, which obviously made NO difference to the voters.

I beleive the pros out weigh the cons here. Mr. Gingrich is an exceptionally inteligent and well rounded person. His experiences and beliefs position him to be a very successful president. His conservative values are what this country needs and I believe Mr. Gingrich is the person to restore America economically as well as stategically. I have read his latest book and am amazed at how much information is outlined and how much the average person does not know. Newt Gingrich for president in 2012!

I know Newt would clean Obama's clock in a debate. Especially since teleprompters are not allowed. I agree that he is viewed as an Washington insider but unfortunately that is what maybe needed to get us out of gridlock. He knows how the system works and should be able to use it to his/our advantage. LBJ's greatest strength was his years in Congress and knowledge of where the "bodies were buried". More than anything Newt exhibits strength which we so desparately need now. Is he the ideal candidate no---but is there one. The main stream media will attack him (and any other Conservative candidate not matter what the issue). So if affairs are the issue then use the Clinton defense --- it doesn't matter. The key is we must turn this nation around or lose it forever. God save the United States.

If you understood liberty and integrity you would have given Ron Paul a 6 and the other GOP presidential candidates no more than a 5. None of the others has consistently voted against violence, taxation, regulation, infringement on personal privacy and liberty, and done it all in a way that does not bring glory and attention to himself. Your analysis is faulty. You need to have a serious talk with Ron Paul himself. I'm sure he will talk with you. Brent Thomas Davis, Championing Liberty, Probity and Valor

Newt's mortal sin in my opinion is the image of him making out with Nancy Pelosi on the Global Warming Couch. Urrrp - I threw up in the back of my throat again just thinking about it.

Dear Ron Paul supporters - folks, sorry to say but he just reminds everybody old enough to remember of another RP - Ross Perot.

Cain - actually has a shot as long as he can continue to not choke on the foot in mouth disease.

Romney - hack RINO that the establishment loves. I believe BHO would crush him without breaking a sweat - RomneyCare for the Nation? No thanks.

Perry - GWB Pt III. BTW, I do have a heart & can also belive in the rule of law you obnoxious blow dried pantload.

Santorum - couldn't win HIS OWN STATE. Buh Bye.

Bachman - Perfect foil as Veep.

Mr. Gingrich is the Republican who can most likely defeat Obama in 2012. There is no other Republican who could stay in the ring with Obama in the theatrical spectacle of nationally televised debates, and prevail. Obama is a professional Orator, (it is his ONLY attribute) and would defeat any of the other Republican candidates. In the Presidential debates, Mr. Gingrich would be Obama’s worst nightmare! Let’s face facts: The televised Debates are ‘theater’, and most American voters don’t pay any attention to campaigns and elections until the few weeks preceding the elections. Then, they go to the polls and vote for the ‘winner’ of the debates.

Mr. Gingrich is the most politically experienced and savvy Conservative on our slate. Other candidates may well share his political views, but none have the straight-forward, aggressive ability to think and speak on his feet, to take the fight to Obama, as he does. No other candidate has the capacity to forcefully contrast Obama’s big-government, socialist, failures, with the specific, Conservative steps he would take in order to pull the country back from the precipice at which we now stand. Rick Perry is soft on Immigration. Mitt Romney is simply another slick, oily, East Coast politician; the author of socialized RomneyCare in Massachusetts. Herman Cain is a businessman…period. His ‘9-9-9’ plan is not viable: People who pay no federal income taxes won’t want to begin paying them, and will never acquiesce to paying an additional National Sales Tax. He has no feel for foreign policy. Huntsman is simply a Liberal running as a Republican. Ron Paul is weak-to-missing on National Defense, and appears to believe that national security is optional. Bachman and Santorum are nice people with some good ideas, but could not debate or win against Obama.

Mr. Gingrich 'tells it like it is', and with the ‘Bark ON’. Americans like factual, 'plain talk', not the tangential, 'Diplo-Speak', Emotional Appeal, or the Glittering Generalities regurgitated by the usual, slick, politicians. Mr. Obama needs the comfort and reassurance of friendly environments, such as the college campus or the Union hall, in which to speak. Mr. Gingrich, on the other hand, is capable of going into hostile environments and getting his message across…convincingly, in plain, American language. As a former House Speaker, he has already demonstrated strong, effective, leadership, and has shown detailed knowledge of both domestic and international issues.

Awwww, Give Rick Perry a break will ya! 1988 was a long time ago. People grow and change. I can understand Rick Perry being against illegal immigration and at the same time supporting the children who are here with the TX Dream Act. Better to have them educated than not eh? Texan's have big hearts and they try to do what is right. That would never have passed without the support of GOP legislators in the state.

Why would you give a 6 to a man that invites a bigot (referring to comments about Romney) like Pastor Jeffress to introduce him, and then say he hit the intro out of the park? A pastor that says the first amendment regarding freedom of religion is for "Christians" only? Perry looks defective to me. To me this demonstrated a very serious flaw in Perry...and it's not the only thing I've seen.

This president has to be the president of the entire US, not just "Christians"....or what Jeffress, and Perry by association, thinks are "Christians".

P.S. Bachmann has her problems, but she deserves better than a 3, too. She's clearly preferable to Romney or Perry from a conservative standpoint, and I personally prefer her to Cain, too.

In my opinion, Mitt Romney is rated too high; His 'cons' are major issues with many voters, me included. I don't like the fact that he is an establishment republican. Romney care is a major stumbling block, and even though he says it only works on a state level, his association through his bill and similarities with Obamacare are going to be a big drag. He is not a 'strong enough' conservative for me.

In my eyes, Newt Gingrich is the most qualified, but with alot of baggage. Perry is weak on immigration, which is a major issue.

My vote is for Herman Cain at this time.

You rate Rick Perry a 6? Sorry but you can't trust this guy. Conservative wannabe. Example: mandatory vaccine for HPV while telling kids to abstain from sex. Just tells kids gee we tell you to abstain but we don't expect you to.

Mark, first thanks for this analysis and thanks for all of your service during and after the military....if America survives as a freedom loving Representative Republic it will be because of Patriots like you.

In response to your analysis, I think much of it was great and unafraid.....willing to say the hard things.

I would argue that Perry cannot be ranked even with Newt or Herman Cain. The "you have no heart" if you don't agree with instate tuition for illegals is a TOTAL disqualifier for me...in substance and tactics it is pure liberal democrat. And the fact that as you point out his debate skills are "the worst ever witnessed" in my view would have to take his rating down far more than you've done here. I'd give him a 2 or 3. (If you accept that Newt and Cain are 5/6)

Second, you say upfront that electability is not a consideration but nearly ALL of the positives for Romney go to electability....looks presidential, smooth talker, strong campaign organization, good name recognition, etc. etc. So, IF electability were part of the analysis then I'd agree that Romney would probably be about even with Newt and Cain, but if electability is NOT part of the analysis then Romney should trail Newt and Cain (and Santorum and Bachman) by a couple points at least. (Not sure why you have such a tight scale....essentially 3-6. I think if you expanded that you could show some daylight where some exists.)

I'd prefer Newt over all of them (and agree that he is smarter than the others put together) if it weren't for the baggage that he brings (electability) that's who I'd get behind.

I was a Paul Ryan fan....and there just isn't a Paul Ryan in this group. Would like to see him as VP though...

Since electability is unavoidably important (however impossible to measure accurately), I'm starting to think that Romney/Ryan or Romney/Rubio might be our best hope. Someone who's electable combined with someone who would "theoretically" keep him on the Conservative path when his instincts begin to lead him astray. If it were a "strong" VP like a Cheney with Bush situation combined with the conservatives in the House and a Rep majority in the Senate, and that's starting to look like a governing coalition that I could live with (and might be the best we could possibly hope for given political realities).

Wow, Mark, this is one of the few times you have truly disappointed me. As a conservative Christian, to me the word "pragmatic" is naturally one of the dirtiest "four-letter" words in the English language, and I'd take greater offense at being labeled as such than at being called most anything else. Your "Patriot Rating" appears to me to actually be very much a rating of "electability" and as such is poisoned by pragmatism.

Leaving aside any arguments regarding your supposed "negatives" regarding Ron Paul, here is the description you should have posted for Dr. Paul. I kept all the words you used, plus *only* adding phrases (with slight modifications by deleting a few words and by adding one word in brackets) that you used for other candidates but that apply *AT LEAST* as much to Dr. Paul as to the candidates you applied them to:

Ron Paul

Pros: Strong constitutional advocate; articulate economic positions; energetic; energizes his adherents; Tea Party; articulate and sensible tax reform and economic plan; served as a flight surgeon in the United States Air Force for five years; believes in American exceptionalism; demonstrated track record; private sector business experience; understands the free market; strong proponent for states' rights and limited central government; understands Social Security is a "Ponzi Scheme"; good family man, and is clear [enough] about his faith; bold and brash; speaks his mind; intelligent; Federalist; true libertarian; principled stance on key issues, based on logic (his understanding of the issue), not expediency; consistent in his stances; pro-business; pro-gun; pro-life; not Ivy League.

Cons: His isolationist foreign policy is incredibly naïve and thus, dangerous; fails the "nut job" test with many voters; seems too singularly focused; comes off as a crank; too narrow a support base; name recognition negatives; perpetual presidential candidate; no clear expression of faith.

From the Patriot:

"Patriot Rating based on comprehensive analysis of many factors. Among these are their record, experience, capability, character, leadership qualifications and, of course, a demonstrated ability to abide by their prescribed oath "to support and defend" our Constitution. We evaluate their record of defending Essential Liberty, and their support for restoration of constitutional limits upon government -- including the judiciary -- the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values."

Based on your own criteria, I fail to see how you could rate Ron Paul less than a 10. He is the standard bearer of Constitutional priciples and limited government. Your total misconstruction of his foreign policy objectives (he is NOT an isolationist but a non-interventionist....BIG DIFFERENCE!) validates either your absolute ignorance of his positions or your complicity in the goals of the political elite to hand pick the GOP candidate.

I have been disappointed in your analysis of both Ron and Rand Paul before, but this is over the top.....to rate the likes of Rick "Gardisil" Perry, Mitt "Romneycare" Romney, Herman "Whichever way the wind is blowing" Cain, Rick "never met a war I didn't like" Santorum, and Newt "consumate alley cat" Gringich, more highly than Ron Paul is truly astounding.

If any of these neocons top the Republican ticket in 2012, heaven help this great country. Those Republicans who will vote for anyone other than Obama need to be supporting Ron Paul, 'cause those of us who support him won't vote for anyone else~!!

I will address only Gov Perry's move from the Democratic Party to the RIGHT side. Recall history: Our own President Ronald Reagan was a Democrat before he saw the light. We know the history of HIS presidency. I do not want people to disregard Gov Perry just because he was once a Democrat.

You note the following cons for Newt:

"Cons: DC insider; notable marriage/moral peccadilloes; a lightning rod; list of political liabilities as long as list of career accomplishment; no military service; limited business experience; accepts anthropogenic global warming; comes across as a policy wonk."

You must be kidding! When our current president had associations with the likes of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn for up to 20 years and he is considered un-tarnished?

GIVE ME A BREAK!

My goodness! Naive free spending chicken hawk pragmatists score high and liberty minded faithful constitutionalist score low. Better rethink your mission statement.

Bachmann demands following the Constitution.She is for small Gov.She will surround herself with the knowledgeable people she needs to serve our nation.She has no skeletons in the closet to be a distraction in the race.She has promised to fight illegal immigration & defend our nation.She will bring gas & energy prices down by using our own resources.

The reason that Romney is at 25% approval is because people do not want the same old liberal Republican crap, do not trust him on anything, or really want a real conservative to represent the real Americans and not the big biz/govt suits. The math is easy to understand 75% of GOP voters do not like Romney.

There were a couple things I neglected to say in my previous commentary. First, if Gary Johnson can't get any press or air time then my vote would have to be with Ron Paul. I think it's intellectually lazy of you and all the rest of the press to just write him off as a kook, (nothing could be further from the truth!!). He has solid and consistent positions on most every issue. He has a strong but private faith and is the ONLY candidate that has a chance of reigning in the federal governments' reckless spending, growth and destruction of private enterprise. As far as his stance on international affairs I believe the term "isolationist" is faulty. It would be more accurate to say he is a "non-interventionist". I think that is not only a reasonable position to have but is also what nearly all our founding fathers expressed as well. As a country we desperately need to get back to our constitutional roots, (and a gold standard), or we will be in the same position as Greece, only with no-one to bail us out!! Also, all this talk about Obama being this fabulous orator and debate master, give me a break. Ron Paul could debate him and when the lights are on these two men I believe Ron Paul will take votes away from obama. Most voters only know what the MSM tells them when it comes to Ron Paul, but if it came down to an actual campaign and debates he would rapidly dissipate that smokescreen. I say Ron Paul/Gary Johnson ticket is the way to go!!!

P.S. Like many of the others commentators, I appreciate the work you did to establish these ratings but I was dissapointed with the folks you ranked at the top of the heap. Rommney and Perry are both non-starters as far as I'm concerned. I'd rather see Herman Cain get the nod, but as I stated above Gary Johnson followed closely by Ron Paul is how I would rate them.

No military experience. I believe firmly that any and all candidates for the presidency of the United States MUST have a military background. The President is, after all, Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. Prior military service makes a candidate believable and real to the military and veterans.

You failed TO MENTION: Santorium has a voting record

that very much needs to be taken into acct.

I like what MOLOTOV has to say about Ron Paul

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=349453

And more...

http://www.wnd.com/?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104165&EmbedC=984dac0a-a990-45f1-87d8-9b166449906c#ooid=Vydzd4Mjp1eD5-Jrk8vJl-J7CsfoPYV4

Ron Paul 2012!

Ron Paul’s rating of 3 is at least 5 points shy of an honest and accurate number. Personally, I rate him a 10 because he is a strict Constitutionalist, but then you’d say I was claiming he walked on water.

Ron Paul is not an isolationist. That’s a ridiculous slur I’d expect from a Democrat or neocon or RINO. He regards America’s foreign relations as our Founders did.

First, let's distinguish patriotism from isolationism. Patriotism does not mean cutting all ties with the world, raising the drawbridge and turning completely inward. That would be totally contrary to the intent of our Founders, who understood that America had to be involved with the rest of civilization. Trade, diplomatic relations, mail, immigration—all these aspects of our national life were regarded by them as important and were therefore addressed in the Constitution.

Today, with transportation, communications, finance and commerce so rapid and so global, America cannot isolate itself. Nor should it even try. Those who advocate a hard-line American isolation from global affairs are neither realistic about America’s history nor cognizant of America's destiny. On the other hand, we Americans should not give up our national sovereignty to unelected international bureaucrats who rewrite our laws, regulate our internal affairs, redistribute our wealth and override our process of representative government. It is not isolationism to stem the flow of illegal immigrants across our borders. It is not isolationism to protect American jobs and the balance of trade from unfair foreign practices. It is simply good sense: putting America first for reasons of national security against forces hostile to our sovereignty and our economic, social and political freedom. Independence is not the same as isolation.

Paul recognizes and supports that. He says the only sensible and honorable foreign policy for America is strict neutrality. That means nonalliance, nonintervention, and no meddling in the internal affairs of other nations. It means free trade with all who want it, friendly relations with all who want it, and a strong national defense against those who do not want friendly relations. That’s no more naive than the Founders were.

Paul also says our nation also should stop acting as policeman of the world and should withdraw from all military treaties so that we are not drawn into war by proxy. George Washington warned us in his Farewell Address to avoid all entangling alliances. “Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances, with any portion of the foreign world” he said. Thomas Jefferson agreed; in 1799 he wrote, “Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto.” Their advice is still sound, especially since NATO is being turned into the standing army of the United Nations and former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan stated publicly that NATO forces will be sent anywhere in the world to impose what will now be called stability missions. The bulk of NATO forces are U.S.

To fault Ron Paul for being an isolationist shows inept and confused thinking, and should be removed from your calculations as you reevaluate his rating.

perry,romney and huntsman are all progressive plants just like bush,mccain,lindsey graham just to name a few. they will take us down the same road as obama,pelosi,reid,kerry,clinton etc,... just at a slower pace.

How many times does Mitt need to say he is for smaller government, and that he would repeal Obamacare (which is not copied from the Mass. plan as it dealt only with insurance whereas Obamacare covers every aspect of health care!), He is honest enough to change his mind when seeing he is wrong, such as abortion, etc.. He also took no salary while serving as governor nor for turning around the Olympics, and he loves America and the Constitution. I trust him and back him wholeheartedly!

Patriot Post,

If your intent was to find out what your readers really think about the candidates...job well done. You've really kicked a hornet's nest with these ratings results.

In the past few months I have professed support for each of these candidates at one time or another(except Romney). I've now come to the conclusion that anything short of a Ron Paul in office runs the risk of being a shallow victory. I've always been an all or nothing kind of guy, and I am beginning to think that this is the hill I choose to die on.

Ron Paul 2012!

Perry is two face when it comes to illegals, he let illegals have instate college cost. This is what Perry wants for Texas and the rest of the nation. From the L. A. Times

1. 40% of all workers in L. A. County ( L. A. County has 10.2 million people)are working for cash and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal immigrants working without a green card.

2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.

3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.

4. Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal, whose births were paid for by taxpayers.

5. Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally.

6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.

7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.

8 Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.

9. 21 radio stations in L. A.. are Spanish speaking.

10.. In L. A. County 5.1 million people speak English, 3.9 million speak Spanish.

(There are 10.2 million people in L. A. County . )

(All 10 of the above facts were published in the Los Angeles Times)

Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but 29% are on welfare. Over 70% of the United States ‘ annual population growth(and over 90% of California , Florida , and New York ) results from immigration. 29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens .

We are fools for letting this continue

Re: The Patriot's 2012 GOP Candidate Ratings

The Pros and Cons

After reading the "Cons" on Perry and Romney, how in the world can you give them a 6 and Cain only a 5?

Romney, Santorum and Perry argue in the 'debates' like immature school kids - certainly NOT presidential. Bachmann and Paul promise to stick to the Constitution. Cain and Newt have reasonable plans to put into action. I regarded your newsletter as quite good until I read this post.

I repeat: No military experience. I believe firmly that any and all candidates for the presidency of the United States MUST have a military background. The President is, after all, Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. Prior military service makes a candidate believable and real to the military and veterans. Yes I am a veteran and retiree of our Armed Forces. AND a 100% DAV.

If Ron Paul would use his current position to start impeachment proceedings against the current occupier/usurper of the Oval Office, he would get my vote. Otherwise, NONE of the candidates mentioned. What happened to John Bolton? He'd get my vote in a heartbeat!

This candidate is able to unite our country, in my opinion, like no other can.

He has common sense, he is a good man from a descent family and very trustworthy, and has a record of success in the economy, our prime problem. He admits his weaknesses and will learn to correct them. Political "correctness" is not in his blood.His focus is steadfaston what is wrong with this country. He is just what the doctor ordered.

I've read the "ratings", which in my not so humble opinion, were a little off of where I think they should be. Here's my ratings, and the why behind them:

Michele Bachmann - I basically agree with your assessment.

Herman Cain - I rate Mr. Cain a 5. He doesn't come across as an orator, but a man of common sense. He is not a D.C. insider, which adds to his credibility. He is a Conservative and speaks the Right's values.

Newt Gingrich - I rate Mr. Gingrich a 5, mainly due to his lighting rod stance on many political issues. I do believe Newt is one of the brightest candidates and has a good grasp of America's most pressing problems. His personal life is of no interest to me. And, he supports the ideology of man made global warming. He presents well in debate.

Ron Paul - I pretty much agree with your assessment.

Rick Perry - I rate Mr. Perry a 4, due to his stance on immigration (doesn't believe in a border fence and supports giving illegal aliens tuition at State schools the same as citizens). His inability to debate does him no favors.

Mitt Romney - I rate Mr. Romney a 4, due to his flipflopping on key conservative issues. RomneyCare didn't endear him to my camp. I do not have trust in what he says. He does "look" the presidential part.

Rick Santorum - I rate Mr. Santorum a 4, due to his "baggage" and his support of Mr. Specter. After listening to him during recent debates, I don't see him as the most intelligent of the candidates.

After reviewing what I've written, it appears that Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich are the leaders in my camp. I could flip a coin to decide on one or the other. Unfortunately, we need someone that can beat the Left in 2012, and that person my friends is Herman Cain.

Alexander , "dumb like a fox"?? I doubt it. More like asleep as "bear in hibernation."

Alexander has shown his misguided support for our countries foreign policy and handing out democracy thru militarism before.

With this "ratings flop" he joins the mainstream media in dumbing down America and framing the debate that doesn't matter.

Ron Paul 2012!

I think Newt is the most knowledgable and articulate candidate of the whole bunch, running for President. And with a good VP he could return our country to what it once was. Maybe some one like Herman Cain who is also brilliant.

cancel After reading that Perry inspite of being a fighter pilot in the US Air Force for five (5) years has change just when i hoped he would stand up for America in here time of greatest need as the war is here not, just in the ME and; there is no other Military man. He has softened to a different type person. I can't fault him for his compassion but, either, we fight Radical Socialism or America is already slipping away and we sink without a Constitutionally run country run by a Cabal. Too bad!

I favor Cain. His race card trumps the pack and takes that issue off the table except for liberal "Uncle Tomism." He is better than Obama in all ways.

He is not just a pizza guy. He repaired at least one private business. He can unify the GOP. He served on the Federal Reserve. His Veep choice could balance the ticket into a win. He was the first candidate to confront candidly the nation's economic problems. He has a good heart.

Ray S.

Like this man & most of his ideas & thinking. But would rather see him in a Cabinet post, as I think he could be of much greater influence & use there.

Bella,

If by "unite" you mean compromise, you've missed the part where the president takes oath to protect and defend the constitution. We aren't that far removed from our history to feign stupidity on Original Intent.

Ron Paul 2012!

I believe Michele Bachmann deserves a 5 rating. Abraham Lincoln didn't have any executive experience either. She's a solid conservative.

i find it difficult to believe the winner of the value voters summit has "no clear expression of faith". perhaps you need to see his speech again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wnj-5z9NJoY

ron paul 2012

Good staff, even cabinet level asset. Not ready for prime time in the White House

I believe Herman Cain deserves a 6. None of these candidates are going to run the country by themselves as none of the past presidents had have either. His ability to connect with conservatives and all Americans is a vital asset.

Not electable. Too many hard edges. Possible VP candidate to attract female voters

I believe Newt's rating is correct.

The lack of "experience" you mention is not a liability, but an asset. We must consider the team that the electee with bring in to address America's issues.

Pro...hands down the capable, knowledgeable, and dependable leader option apparent in either party.

Amazing how your “experts” manage to overlook Gingrich "flaws" which in my opinion are FATAL. Flaws such as his repeated undermining his own conservative troops in the House after becoming Speaker by doin "back room" deals and reaching across the aisle "McCain" style on legislation. Possibly his most revealing and grievous sins are those associated with laying a republican "foundation" as early as 1994 for the eventual ethnic cleansing of Christian Serbs from their historic homelands in Bosnia and Kosovo by the Clinton and G.W.Bush administrations and its conversion into an “islamo-marxist” GANGSTER state with claim to GOP sponsorship. Do your “experts” not study history at all? Anyone that see's this "faker" Gingrich as a "conservative WHITE HOPE" is delusional. Don't kid yourself, Gingrich is hoping to exploit the stupidity the US electorate and the republican base hoping they will select him to replace the fool currently seated in the oval office. He wants to become the next NWO president of the US to lead the US and the world onto the "NWO Plantation" that both GOP and democrat leadership have been conniving in the creation of for at least the past 50 years.

Nowhere nearly ready for the top job. Sloganeer Not thoughtful enough

I believe Ron Paul should have a rating of 4 simply due to his background, his dedication and love of country and ability to communicate. I also am not comfortable with his foreign policy statements.

I believe Mitt should have a 4 rating. His is establishment and seems to love power too much.

My support for Perry cooled after I found out his immigration stance. I want the Border Fence to be completed, and right now! Romney is too much a Big Government Establishment man for me to be excited about him, and RomneyCare paints him too liberal. I think Newt Gingrich is smart enough to guide us out of our financial/economic swamp, but is he electable?

If it were not for the personl past history, Newt would be a great president. He would absolutely put the present occupant of the oval office, under the table in a debate. However, the media would shred Newt and is family to bits, the opposition would pour on the dastardly poison and manure of smear tactics and not pay any attention to the man's assests regarding his ability to lead this country.

The very first thing to understand is that there is not one without some sort of baggage. Therefore what we need is who in this group can whip Obama?

There is only one that can beat him in front of a mike and looks more Presidential, and can get the majority of votes head to head. That is Romney.

I don't see how Romney gets a 6 rating. There's no way he's any where close to a conservative. He's not going to ignite any Reagan conservatives. Cain should get the 6 or maybe even a 7 because he'll fire up the base!

I believe Rick warrants a 5 rating due to his background and dedication to conservative principals. I cannot defend his Specter support (weak moment). He is well rounded in his approach to the job of president.

Sinc when is Military experience a requirement,Regand didn't have it service member yes made training films. Persent person does not have it. Poitical experience not neede refer to above. Present person was community organizer and when serving as senitor voted present most of the time, shaow lack of self confidence or has no belief is issues that he'd show a preference. Cain has business experience which is what is needed because of the effect a lack of it can haver on the economy, including jobs and blowback from ill conceved regulations and their affect on the economy. Has a plan for the economy if elected and states it. Does not wait for others to do his thinking for him and come to him with a plan. Present presiden't favorite comment "I' waiting for someone to give me something " .

Romney may well be the epitome of William Buckley's principle that The Republican we want to nominate should be the most conservative Republican who can win.

In my opinion Cain is the only one runing for President that has the guts to get this country back like it should be. If he will stand by Israel he will have my vote unless he changes before the election. The others don't know from one day to the next what their platform is. I would love to have voted for Perry but he doesn't have guts to get rid of the illegals. We cannot afford to let them draw social benefits that they don't support financially.

I keep hearing comments about Herman Cains lack of political experience, also his lack of contact with

foriegn policy. So what ? How much experience in these fields did Obama have in them --- zilch none -- he was a comminutiy organizer, period. How come this fact never seems to get mentioned ?

HLM

Quite a few people have taken Patriot Post to the shed for supporting Mr.Romney in this ratings.I don't read it that way at all.They said the highest score was "10" and by giving Mr.Romney a "6"(much to generous in my opinion)they are saying he is no better than middle of the road.In fact giving a high score of "6" to a few candidates tells us that the field we have to choose from is pretty pathetic.But then there are Republicans who would vote for a sack of potato's if it had an "R" after it's name much the same way Progressives will vote for the President even though he was a disappointment to them.

"We failed the Reagan test"President Obama said recently.Well as long as we keep voting in desperation instead of our aspirations we will keep getting empty suits such as we have had for the past 23 years.

I really cannot overstate my disappointment with the views expressed in this article, most especially the views regarding the abilities and viewpoints of Dr. Ron Paul. I have been following Dr. Paul's voting record for at least 20 years, and have found him to always vote based upon his fidelity to his Oath of Office which promises that he will "...support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..." As a retired Army officer who took a similar Oath of Office on more than one occasion during my 28 years of military service, I greatly admire Dr. Paul's honesty, fidelity, and patriotism.

Your article, just as so many other articles have in the "mainstream media", refers to Dr. Paul's foreign policy stance as "isolationism", which it absolutely is not. There is a huge difference between "non-interventionism" in dealing with other sovereign nations, and "isolationism". Dr. Paul believes in maintaining a robust "DEFENSE" against aggression, but not in the utilization of our armed forces as a U.N. police force, a force for the purpose of maintaining an American Empire, nor as a mercenary force. Furthermore, Dr. Paul has clearly and unequivocally stated on many occasions that he supports strong trade relations with other nations, which certainly is not a characteristic of an isolationist.

Dr. Paul clearly puts America's interests ahead of the One World Government interests of the U.N., the Bilderbergs, the Council on Foreign Relations, or any other anti-sovereignty entity.

Dr. Paul's grasp of finance and economics is obviously one of his other strongpoints, and without expertise in this area as well as a determination to turn our nation's economy around, our republic's days as a world economic power are limited.

Furthermore, I do not see how the fact that he is less than a spell-binding orator in any way interferes with his ability to make and follow through with executive decisions. Anyone who questions Dr. Paul's intellectual acuity or sees him as nothing more than a "crank" is entirely missing the mark.

Quite frankly, I have donated to your organization in the past because I have always valued your opinion as that of intelligent, well-informed, constitutionally-conservative writers, but if this article is representative of a future trend, or if it is intended to represent the overall consensus of your organization, I certainly must rethink my position on supporting you in the future.

Perry is a democrat through and through. He does not have pros. All cons. He created a negative environment for the other candidates in all the debates. I would appreciate his returning to Texas. I definitely would not vote for him under any circumstances.

I like Gingrich/Cain with Romney as Sec. of Commerce, Paul at HHS and Perry at Homeland Security.

I understand, but disagree with your rating of Herman Cain. I live in Georgia and have been following his political career (or lack thereof) for 6 years or so. Barring any new information, I believe he is the best candidate for president because I trust him more than I trust any other candidate to make decisions the way I would make decisions as POTUS.

Herman is a proven LEADER, not proven POLITICIAN. He connects with main street through his experience with the Godfather's & the National Restaurant Association, as well as, Wall Street as former member of the KC Federal Reserve Board (among many other corporate boards).

Bachman has been too ravaged by the media.

Gingrich, while easily the smartest D.C. politico in the race (in either party), is unelectable given his sorted personal indiscretions and global warming stance.

Ron Paul - Agreed. Too far out.

Rick Perry in another lifelong politician. I do believe he is a true conservative, but so was GWB. Immigration stance too left.

Romney has the business credibility from a Wall Street perspective, but not a Main Street perspective. I do not want the media and/or the establishment Republicans selecting our candidate, just because he was second last time, so it’s his turn this time. That, along with the Romneycare baggage is too much to make him a viable candidate against BHO.

Santorum is not a big enough heavy weight. He needs to run for governor or go sit on some boards of some companies and get some private sector experience.

Who would not enjoy watching the amiable, fatherly, smart Herman Cain debate Barrack Hussein Obama. What a contrast! People would immediately see where they went wrong on 2008....

Debates between Mr.Romney and President Obama? LOL! This has to be the perfect opponent for Mr. Obama.Someone who has no credibility within his party and was the author of the example for Obama-care.It's clock cleaning time!

You want someone who would really scare the President to face in a debate?.....Paul Ryan!

Perry was my kind of man until he refused to pass a law against the illegals in Texas.We cannot afford to give the illegals benifits that they don't pay into like the rest of us. He also vetoed the bill to stop texting while driving and the department of transportation claims that more people are killed while texting than by drunk drivers. He is a good Christian man but I will not be voting for him.

Ron Paul = 10 and all the rest add up to 10 total. Billions for defense, $0 for empire or nation building. Audit, then end, the Fed. End prohibition (again). Cut $1 trillion from his first budget. All that and a born again Christian to boot!

Romney = Obama lite

I have enjoyed and respected your posts for awhile now but today's post was extremely disappointing. Through process of elimination, one has to come to the conclusion that Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who fits the bill. As someone else said, if Paul doesn't win, it won't matter who does. We'll be finished as a country. I'm stocking up and hunkering down. Ron Paul is my choice even if I have to write him in. After that, we'll have to live with the decision of the voters. May they come to their senses...fast!

I believe you listed far too many cons. Michele Bachman is the only true conservative in the whole bunch of GOP candidates. She has far more experience and intelligence than Barack Hussein Obama. He is just a puppet whose strings are pulled by his master.

Bachmann is a diamond beside that piece of garbage.

On your candidate ratings you failed to specify whether lower or higher numbers were better.

Gingrich is probably the worse choice based on his sexual behavior but the smartest most articulate of all the candidates and the only one that knows how to lead us out of this mess we are in. Some foreign leaders will be shaking in there boots if he is elected. When he is elected we will know who we are getting.

I'm confused, "The rating is from 1 to 10, the higher the better" you say in the article. So, that would put Rommney and Perry at 6's above Cain's 5 and Bachmann's 3? Are you kidding? Or is your rating system backward?

Cain; is far more capable than the idiot currently occupying the White House. I would like to see either Bachmann or him as our next president.

Gingrich is probably the worse choice based on his sexual behavior but the smartest most articulate of all the candidates and the only one that knows how to lead us out of this mess we are in. Some foreign leaders will be shaking in there boots if he is elected. When he is elected we will know who we are getting.

Honestly, anyone but Romney! How can anyone claim him to be "electable" when his nomination would almost certainly lead to a third party candidate that would split the conservative and moderate votes.

I'd even hold my nose and vote for Perry if I have to, but I will NEVER vote for a RINO like Romney who will do more damage to this country than B.O.

I like the "plain-spoken" Cain, though his Fed roots bother me a little...I truly believe he'll move away from the Fed. Newt, Ron Paul, Rick, and Michelle would also get my votes. Again,

ANYONE BUT ROMNEY!

Will the real Newt Gingrich please stand up. I'm afraid you have him confused with a true conservative. Check his voting record when he was a congressman and speaker of the House. Before I would vote for him, he will have to satisfactorily explain his membership in the Council on Foreign Relations. Everyone should know their agenda - ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT - NEW WORLD ORDER - AGENDA 21. I WILL CHECK BACK TO SEE IF MY COMMENT IS PUBLISHED. IT SEEMS THAT NOBODY WANTS TO DISCUSS THE BILDERBERGERS, THE TRI-LATERAL COMMISSION OR THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS.

Romney has been on every side of every issue. The only thing he really believes is that he should be President. He is another Bob Dole, but better looking. His election as President would wreck the Republican Party and conttinue America's descent, albeit at a slower pace, into a socialist kleptocracy.

One item not mentioned is where they stand on the New World Order. The only one totally against it is Ron Paul. The rest are CFR, Bilderberg Group, Tri-lateral Commission members or leaning that way. We do not need another Bush the Elder.

Most qualified in all respects. A conservative with a heart.

Mr. Cain is the only candidate who makes me feel that I know for whom I'm voting. I can trust that what I see is what I'm getting. The rest of the pack (with the possible exception of Santorum) are just the typical "wafflers" on important issues. I can't trust Perry to not give immigration amnesty, or Newt to not go on another sexual excursion, or Mitt to not go "liberal" on me. Cain is my man.

I believe he put in time in the Navy or at least was a civilian employee of same.

RE: Bachman; one of your pro's is that she is female. What has that to do with anything? The men did not have a "pro" just for being men.

POLITIONS HAVE GOTTEN US INTO THIS MESS. WE NEED HERMAN'S BUSINESS SAVY TO GET US OUT OF IT.

I find your assessments pretty accurate with the exception of Herman Cain's.

"More novelty than substance." What kind of substance are you speaking of? What's your definition of novelty? I'd prefer someone who has actual accomplishments in life, rather than how well he's performed while being paid with my tax dollars.

"Short on foreign policy knowledge or experience." One of the comments above asked how much experience did Obama have. Abetter comparison in light of Obama's total ineptitude in that respect is with Reagan. No Foreign policy experience. None. The most important ingredient to foreign policy is to remember that the United States always comes first. Nothing else is important. I think Cain understands this fact.

"Campaign lacks organization." Yep, spending very little, and look where he sits in the polls. He isn't stupid. He is running a national campaign on a shoestring budget and is performing well.

"Low name recognition." Not so much any more. While much of his exposure to the general populace will come at the hands of the mainstream media, there will be more and more people who investigate his credentials as his name is presented. Do we really want name recognition with someone like Romney?

"'Sound bite deep' on many issues." This is a sound bite campaign format, like it or not. Give him a chance to explain his position on issues and that comment evaporates.

"No military service." See foreign policy comment above.

"Not previously vetted." So, I assume Romney was "previously vetted." Was that when he favored gun control legislation, or after? Before or after abortion or cap and trade? Cain will be vetted by the left-wing media in ways that we can only wish they had vetted Obama. That's one place where his "Lack of political experience" cuts in his favor.

My greatest wish with the current crop of candidates is for a Georgia boy ticket, with Newt playing the VP role, which would put him in a similar position to Cheney (a truly great VP) with Bush.

Just my two cents.

Perry instituted government magnet program for illegals. Bush again?

Romney. .Romney care

Put your head in the sand Paul about Muslims

Newt blinks.. like the rest a career politician that I can't trust. AGW.. oh lord

Cain is a strong conservative business man that knows how to surround himself with good people and he's the only candidate that can debate Obama with candor no good looking white boy can.. Race will be a part of this election.

Bachman.. scary, unimformed and sounds rather whiny..

I heard an interview with a wife of a Border Guard (Jesus Diaz) in TX – her husband is being accused of violating an illegal’s civil rights and is in danger of going to prison. When asked what Gov. Perry is doing, and she said NOTHING! “Rick Perry’s done nothing,” Diana explained. “He said that it was a federal issue and as a governor he couldn’t do anything.” Injustice, especially in your own state, is injustice! And even if he can’t let this guy go, he sure could stand for him! He didn’t stand for Ramos and Compean either…

Michelle Bachmann is second only to John Huntsman[and is much more conservative than he is] in her knowledge of American intelligence of dangerous activity across the globe. In the very few questions where these topics are raised, Michelle has insisted on America not getting involved unless its national interest is at stake. She was among the first to speak out on president Obama trying to control Israel's security interests, and where they could build homes, and the dishonor paid to Israeli diplomats coming to Washington DC. She was also among the earliest to identify that the new Egyptian regime was comprised in part of Muslim brotherhood, and the fact that they were actively participating in harassing Christians in Egypt, and attacking Christian women in public, and allowed terrorists to attack southern Israel through their inaction and cooperation. Bachmann was also one of the first to warn that the Libyan freedom fighters were not pro-democracy, and that there was no guarantee that we would be able to control the Libyan weapons unless American boots were on the ground, and that we should not allow these weapons to be distributed so they could be used to attack American troops and airplanes across the globe. We certainly do not want to find ourselves in the position of having another novice president with no foreign-policy experience, and who needs on-the-job training, as is true of the governors and the civilians running for president.

On the economic front, Bachmann has been against the Boehner compromises with Democrats in Congress and with the president, informing the country ahead of time that we were selling out American interests by accepting imaginary long-term cuts in exchange for large spending increases. She has indicated that while the speaker has been talking about pennies in budget discussion, we really need to of been talking about dollars, and that these continuing resolutions are only allowing our debt can take to continue to grow. Besides Speaker Gingrich, there has been very little outcry regarding these ongoing sellouts, and in my opinion, insufficient denouncement of the compromises that refuse to accept the job that the last Congress was elected on, which was to reduce the deficit, and certainly not to let this deficit grow any larger. I feel she has been a minority voice in Congress to remind the country what the 2010 elections were all about.

Romney is only the Establishment RINO! He's Cons FAR outweigh his PRO's. If I have to, I will vote for him over O, but I would much rather have Cain... or maybe Perry.

Newt is by far the smartest man in politics today. He would make an excellent president. The only problem is that he is probably unelectable which is a shame because he makes Perry and Romney look like squabbling school boys. He seems to be able to size up a situation quickly and act appropriately. He is a staunch conservative and I believe if he got elected he could get this country back on the right track.

Mr. Cain is a candidate who makes me feel that I know for whom I could vote. I can trust him what I see is what I'm getting:Made in America with out the help of the "touchy feely diversity he is American.

Romney has been on every side of every issue. He is another Dole, Bush, McCain. His election as President would wreck the Republican Party and Newt Gingrich please stand and up and take a walk I'm afraid you have not have the moral component to be president of this country you are just a politician that knows his way around Washington. Sergio Pastor,Latino but American first!!!

Your candidate rating is flawed in that you don't take trustworthiness into account. romney, perry and gingrich have all blown it with true conservatives. They are full hard rino scum and dirtied by politics. The fact that a publication like yours would rate them higher than and honorable citizen like Herman Cain is beyond me, and makes me think that cancelling my subscription might be in the future.

I really believe Newt Gingrich is the best candidate for the job.

Newt knows Washington, and has no fear. In my humble opinion, he has the best policy ideas and really can conceptualize and define a plan and strategy. He is a fantastic debater; the best we have out of our candidates. He not only is a supporter and pays lip service to the Constitution, but he is highly educated, and clearly understands our history and the founding documents.

The man knows how to speak, debate and do it all with a certain wit, humor, and charm that will provide the best debater against Obama, and articulate the Conservative message. Finally, he has done it before. He has tackled Washington, ushered in Republican leadership, and provided a Contract With America, which helped stave off the Clinton liberal machine from doing in the 1990s what the Obama administration, and members of the liberal establishment such as Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of the liberal leadership are doing now.

So basically I'm asking, where is the Gingrich train?!?!?! Hopefully after a few of the primary states, the dust will clear, and Gingrich will emerge the front runner and win.

Perry's pro-immigration policies in Texas should

earn him a 3.5 rating.

your rating system reeks of old guard republican. Have you sold your soul to the rino devil?

push the canidates we want, and discredit the ones we don't. No different than what the MSM does everyday.

I would NEVER vote for Romney or Perry. Neither one has the conviction or principles to lead this country back to greatness. career politicans only care about themselves, at the expense of others. Politicians like Romney and Perry are the reason this country is in this mess. You rate the father of obamacare and the guy who wants to give illegals free tuition higher than Cain, or Paul. Seriously you need to examine your criteria.

"The Patriot Post is a highly acclaimed advocate of Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values"

after looking over your ranking system, I think you need to re-word this..

The most polished debater. Has solid credsits but doesn't get the exposure that others have had witch begs the question that the main stream media fears him . Think he's hands down better then Romney. Very well versed on the issues. Have know idea why he's doing so poorly

It surprises me that, on the one hand you want to hold Congress and the president to the Constitutional standard, but on the other you rate the only constitutionalist in the group as being a nut, and cranky? Is that because you think that that is how he is perceived by the electorate, and thus has no chance? I thought electability played no role?

What's the use of asking us to sign that oath, where we are holding the gov accountable if they don't govern by the Constitution, and then come and help elect RINOs?

You either want a return to constitutional values in this country, or you don't, you can't have it both ways.

Ron Paul is not an isolationist. He is against what we are doing now: "building" democracy in the world at large, squandering our resources for no good reason. The armed forces are not for building anything, they are for destroying our enemies. Ron Paul is a non-interventionist, not an isolationist.

And that would be OK with George Washington, as you probably know.

Re: Mitt Romney

You said:"Cons: Big government establishment Republican; RomneyCare and all associated baggage; mirrors Democrat tax policies; political inheritance as son of George Romney (former governor of Michigan and 1968 presidential candidate); no military service; high-profile flip-flops on key conservative issues (gun control, global warming, abortion, homosexual "unions," health care); Massachusetts moderate; left of George W. Bush."

And you still rated him a 6??? To be left of W, who is "center" at best, makes him another McCain; another RINO.

Re: Perry

He's too much like a used car salesman...slick. Again too much like W, a wolf in sheep's clothing. I don't trust him politically (Algore connection).

Both Romney and Perry are the Leftmedia's choice, and for good reasons. Think about it, why would the Leftmedia support a Republican candidate?

Mr. Cane,

It's simple, we have one guy in the office with no experience in government. I think one is enough. Running the country is not like selling pizza's.

Herman is probably a good guy. Rick Perry is a good guy who knows how to help get people working again.

I will never vote for Romney. Romney is a ZERO ( 0 )

Not under any circumstance.

The Republican establishment will cease to exist if they put another compromising puppet on the ticket.

I'm a dyed-in-the-wool "Cain-a-holic". I am totally convinced that he is the one who can and will defeat obama in 2012. I do hope that the old-guard Republicans can see that their "next-in-line-Romney" is NOT a choice of the people!!!! We're tired of politics a usual. It's time to RAISE SOME CAIN! I believe in his plan, his patriotism, his vision, his experience, and his ability to speak to us without use of a teleprompter. I think he has enough sense to find someone who is more than qualified to address those areas where he has no experience. (Wonder what Condi Rice is doing???? Wouldn't it be great to see her back at the White House?????)

Herman Cain has my vote He is the only one with common sense-knows business and how to get this country back to "WE THE PEOPLE" and not for how much he can fill his pockets or perks,pork,lobbyist.He is business and look at the others who had no business sense or knowledge of anything and how this country is going down the tube. All you FAR LEFTIST ARE AFRAID OF HIM AND YOU SHOULD BE AS HE ISN'T GOING TO "KISS YOUR ARCE"!!! THE SAME GOES FOR THE OTHER CANDIDATES AS WELL SO KEEP YOUR NOSE OUT OF IT!!!!IF YOU ALL HAD ANYTHING-GOOD TO OFFEER-THAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT BUT YOU HAVE NOTHING BUT THE SAME OLD POLITICAL CRAP-ONLY DIFFERENT DAY!!

Wow! How can the "cons" about Michelle Bachman be any LESS than the empty suit we've already put into office??

Let's face it--It'll be a cold day in Hell before a Conservative Woman will be considered for the presidency. And that's really a SORRY excuse! Amen.

I would no more vote for Mr. Cain because he is black than I would have voted for President Obama in 2008 because he is black.It's asinine to even suggest this as a "pro" in his favor.

On the other hand you characterize Ms. Bachmann as "to easily sterotyped" yet to you she is "whiny and tinny".Who's doing the sterotyping now? And really a "Pro" is shes "female" how insulting and sexist can you be to an individuals campaign?

First and notable Cain has a sense of humor which is refreshing.

Herman is not full of himself.

Herman can handle criticism without giving back the same.

Represents middle America and small business from my opinion so far.

Herman has operated small businesses successfuly and knows the key phrases to small business "lingo".

Christian in faith.

Focuses on defining a problem and then finding a solution. This is his biggest assett in my opinion.

If you believe Cain is not an insider then we have

nothing to add. Chairman of KC branch of FED a banker. Same crowd that is ripping us off daily.

People are waking up. We don't need another Globalist-supported candidate.

Herman Cain? Head of a federal reserve bank-strike 1, DC lobbyist -strike 2

Face it, the republicans a re going to put up some loser that will allow Obama to get re-elected.

Enough has been said about the poor rating for Ron Paul (have you seen his supporters??? They come from the far left and the far right and everywhere in between- I can't imagine a WIDER base!) Are you therefore attempting to solicit contributions to this site from what you perceive as a wide republican base? It doesn't make sense otherwise. I will let another isolationist wacko do the talking and see if he doesn't make the same points as Ron Paul does. [His initials are GW]: "In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest.

”So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

”As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils? Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

”Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The Santorum web site is a bit terse. It describes where he stands on three issues. I thought there were more than three. However, his position on those three align with mine (http://www.ricksantorum.com/issues). Another thing I could not tell is how prone Santorum might be to compromise as all professional politicians seem wont to do. I lean strongly to a no-compromise candidate. I think Cain would be that as would Ron Paul and, perhaps, Michele Bachmann. I really liked what I read in Cain's book, "This is Herman Cain!" but today I read questions about his pro-life stand. I must read his book again because that is not an issue on which I will compromise. On Santorum, I just don't know enough to switch.

Any rating that puts Romney with high marks is simply put ludricous. The man is another McCain, a RINO. That should automatically rake him in -100 points.

Gingrich/Cain 2012

Newt needs to make a "Contract with the Tea party Patriots"!

For those who don't know about Mitts experience in business he has rescued several companies from financial collapse. He would go into the company and work from the bottom up to repair the inner workings of companies and put them back in working order. That is just the sort of thing that this country desperately needs RIGHT NOW! He knows the right people to consult and help with getting the Obama regime changes that almost seem irreparable now. His whole life he has been preparing for this time it seems to me. If we don't get someone that has the kind of experience that Mitt has we will be making a huge mistake as we might not be able to recover. If Mitt is not elected then who ever is needs to use him as a consultant to help them "Right" the economy.

He's too wishy washy regarding abortion. After listening to him I'd say he's really pro-choice. He's not my man at this time.

My accountant wife joined me years ago in favoring the national consumption tax. I suggest that fresh produce, milk and prescripton drugs not be taxed. This tax just might convince rich and poor to save (necessary for successful Capitalism) and be more thoughtful when in the marketplace. The outlaws (thieves, "moonlighters," burglars, "fences," drug traders and dealers, etc. as well as those who stay on the run to avoid income taxes) would pay at least some taxes to government when they buy their luxury cars, luxury condos and homes, precious gems and gold item, yachts, etc. Everyone would get a taste of "belonging" to this nation. The IRS could be "history" maybe. The machinery to collect already is in place in nearly every state so it would be a cheap system to install.

Ron Paul, rather than being a 'nut job' on the foreign policy of the U.S., he is the ONLY candidate who is right on and has not been captured by the military/industrial complex that encourages limitless U.S. involvement in the foreign affairs for any country for whom they take a dislike.

One big plus for Ron Paul:

The only candidate who is

anti New World Order.

This sort of reminds me of the fiasco Netflix tried to pull when they doubled their prices thinking their Sh*t didn't stink and lost 800,000 customers, their stock crash from a high of over $300 to in the $80to $90 range.

I can't say I am impressed with your ratings of the GOP contenders, It does reveil a side of your rag I had not seen before and I am more than a little disapointed; come on you have got to be kidding Romney, Perry, Gingrich as your top picks.

They are nothing less than Obama lite. I hope you don't get the exodus that netflix experienced but I think I need to take a vacation from your site to cool off a little as I have done with fox's Fair and Balance BS

The legislation was in the works when Perry came to office, and it passed with near-unanimous support from the Texas legislature (all but 4). The governor did not “pass the bill” as some of his Republican challengers claim. He simply sign the bill. THE BILL WAS VETO PROOF!!! Texas has had it in place for a decade and there have been no broad populist demands by the state of Texas or any other state to repeal it.

No governor has control over US immigration policy. That is Congress’ domain. Liberal interpretations of some articles in the Constitution over the years have tied governors’ hands when it comes to dealing with immigration on any level. Another case of too much government and too little support for the individual states.

The federal government mandates an education and entitlements for children even if their parents are in the country " illegally."

Perry did sign state legislation that permits such children to pay in-state tuition for college if the children meet certain residency and and other requirements. " Other states have done the same" ; some states leave that up to individual colleges, but all are restricted in their control of Illegals.

Perry has, however, taken a very firm stance on border security which is a completely different matter than immigration. Still, Liberals, like some of Perry’s challengers, tend to confuse border security with immigration.

The Perry campaign provided information about the border; every claim is indexed directly to government records held by the state of Texas.

How can mitt romney (name deliberately left uncapitalized) rank a 6? In what universe does that socialist scum bag rate a 6?, what have you been smoking?

mitt romney Is nearly as bad as obango (left uncapitalized, and deliberately misspelled, are you sensing a theme here?) he is as far left as they come, let me spell it out for you he is a RINO, that's R, I, N, O, a RINO a republican in name only, name ONE even quasi conservative thing he has actually DONE, not said like the john kerry flip flopper that he is, but actually DONE, you can't because he is an extreme leftist. Socialized medicine, check, Gun Banner, check, Tax Raiser, check, Deficit Spender, check, how can ANYONE support this guy, and still call themselves a Republican, let alone claim to support the values of the Tea Party. What a joke.

Cains personal shortage in foreign events is more than made up for by his expressed willingness to surround himself with knowledgeable people.

To paraphrase an old campaign slogan "It's the stupid economy." We need a man like Cain who understands and supports capitalism.

Whether you would rate him high or low, why did you omit former-New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson? He is an announced, legitimate candidate and deserves as much respect as any other - especially when the field is crowded with so many losers to the dismay of this activist who is old enough to have been Youth for Goldwater.

The one thing I note in the posts, herein is a statement that Ron Paul is not a socialist. Dr. Paul keeps repeating in his book; saying it over and over does not make it true. Nevertheless, see his stances, clearly "isolationist" - - his biggest and most serious deficiency. Study history; it is not the right way to go.

The one thing I note in the posts, herein is a statement that Ron Paul is not a socialist. Dr. Paul keeps repeating in his book; saying it over and over does not make it true. Nevertheless, see his stances, clearly "isolationist" - - his biggest and most serious deficiency. Study history; it is not the right way to go.

Newt is articulate and straight-forward in getting our country on the right track. He is intelligent and knows what needs to be done. I remember Newt when he was Speaker of the Houst and did a fantastic job.

I really like both Rick Perry and Herman Cain and believe that they would both make presidents far far superior to our present president but I think that given the times that we are living in that Newt Gingrich with his wealth of experience and great intelligence would be the best fit for our times. He knows how congress works and we as a country are beholden to him for breaking the Democrats stronghold on congress. Thank God that we have some great choices in the GOP.

I have taken issue with your evaluation of Ron Paul on several occasions, but it does not seem to alter your pros and cons. You simply repeat what the liberals say about him (on those rare occasions when they mention him at all) so you contribute to a negative response to what he is talking about. At a time of desperate needs, we need someone with bold solutions. My only concern was with his foreign policy, but I now agree that I don't want to be the "Policeman for the World." They don't want us or appreciate what we try to do. In fact, most of them actually hate us. That makes me willing to try something different, like stay at home and solve some of our own problems.

Mercy, you seem to already have her nixed. From what I understand,she has much more experience all around than our present President. we certainly don't want to repeat that. WE want someone with much more experience, conscious, intelligence, background and above all, an American. We want whoever has the best chance of winning

Romney's "pros" remind me, with some exceptions, of Obama in the last primaries. The "cons" listed for Romney by Mr. Alexander says it all in not supporting him for president. I would think that we would have in Office no more than we have today.

Herman Cain comes across to me as a true man and patriot that is totally interested in our country. I have been able to "read" a person by them speaking or my hearing to me. The first time I heard Obama, I was impressed. The second time, I knew he was more than an average politican, but a danger to our Nation and did everything I could to warn other people about him.

Herman Cain will get my vote! The GOP is our danger.

Boo. Big government former Democrat.

Go Ron. It's too big. Shut it down. It does nothing well. Strip its funding. Don't make Frankenstein more efficient; kill it.

Mr. Newt's plan for the country relies on taxes to make changes. The tax system is too politicized. It should NEVER be used to implement or 'kill' government programs.

This fault is far worse than his moral peccadilloes.

Lack of political experience a BIG PLUS!!! We don't need a politician for President. We need a common sense, , dpwn-to-earth layman with SMARTS! Herman Cain fills the bill!Remember, Ronald Regan had no foreign policy experience, nor political. He was the greatest President since George Washington!!!!!!

Michelle, too much eye makeup. Makes a person wonder if you are hiding something.

Rick Perry, supposed to be the one to save the day, forget it. Too many stumbles, learn to debate.

Herman, I think you may have something.

Mitt, we didn't want you last time and I still don't think you are the man.

Ron, I like your views, I just wish you could get elected.

Newt, smooth as they come, a league by yourself. Electable, I'm not sure.

Rick

No leadership experience of any note.

Sounds winey and petulant.

Easily lost among the crowd of GOP candidates

Would lose every debate with Obama because of lack of presence and oratory skills

Does not project strength or command

You seriously must reconsider your rating for romney.

Have you not listened to his speeches while running for the senate? He made Kennedy look like a moderate.

He is neither a patriot or Constitutional!

I believe a Gingrich/ Cain ticket would be extraordinarily effective as well as synergistic!

Democrats are used to dalliances, at least Newt married them.

I like everything about Perry excepth his debating skills and that he can learn. I can for give him on his immigration policy and I understand his reason why it is the way it is.

A man has character that does not flip flop on principles and Perry stands his ground.

Cain is the only GOP candidate who has proposed a consumption tax; adding it to to the income tax, however, scares the heck out of me. But, as Accountant's husband notes - without the income tax, a consumption tax would be a marvelous thing!

First and foremost, it would wipe out the greatest reason for congressional lobbyists - lobbying for tax breaks, which created the huge unmanageable monster the income tax has become. Second, it would eliminate the IRS. Third, it would eliminate the endless hours and money spent on complying with a tax code that your average IRS employee doesn't fully understand. Fourth, if structured correctly, taxpayers below the poverty line would be exempt and/or receive a rebate (an element Cain added to his plan). Fifth, we could save our own money -- does anyone wonder why the government tells us how much we can save in IRAs/401ks? It is to ensure income tax revenue. Sixth, it would make sure nearly everyone had "skin in the game" -- including those participating in the vast, under-the-table workplace. Seventh, those who traffic in illicit drugs and other criminal enterprises would wind up taxed when they spent their gains - you can hide illicit income, but not spending! I would LOVE for one of our GOP candidates to go gutsy and embrace REPEAL of the income tax (would require a constitutional amendment - tough [by design] to accomplish, but was done to repeal prohibition) and promote a consumption tax, with appropriate exemptions for basic needs (food, medicine, and a certain level of housing costs). Anybody out there willing to support this?

If this is what the Republican party is throwing up as an offering for the Presidency, then I guess I will just be penciling in someone. The thing alot of the Neocon bunch have not figured out is, I am not going to be alone in this. Glenn Beck spoke of this last year, and he warned some of the candidates that if they did not pull thier heads out, the Republican Party would be finished. Well the day is coming. Anytime someone tosses a huge "Patriot" rating on someone such as Newt, then I have to call bullcrap. Sorry, he is not a Patriot, he's a globalist. They are two very different things.

Putting Romney above Herman Cain is like rating an old Ford Tempo above a new Hyundai Sonata Turbo. Seriously?

Newt Gingrich is the one with enough savvy Politically and the intelligence to get our Country on the right track Financially, Militarily and Morally.

I think Mr. Alexander is correct in his assessment of the GOP field, and the proclivity for sniping at each other. Someone should have "handled" and briefed Bachmann much better early on to avoid her missteps, but it appears too late for her despite my own desire to see her succeed. She appears to be a most admirable woman, personally and professionally.

I don't care for Mitt Romney. He is just a spoiled prep boy. I smell a RINO here big time! He also believes in global warming, hint, hint. People this is a liberal in sheep's clothing. I don't trust him. Romney will say whatever it takes to advance his political career. Who knows which way he is going to tilt once he achieves power. We need Obama care defeated, not repackaged under a new name.

I am from Michigan and his dad was a RINO. His father campaigned against Barry Goldwater in 1964 and voted along with Pres. Johnson on Great Society initiatives, Etc. This is how he kept his job as governor in an otherwise blue collar State. So like father, like son.

Mitt Romney's voting record as Massachusetts governor says it all, with his voting "yes" for socialized medicine. You do your readership a severe disfavor by giving Romney such a high rating. I would vote for Herman Cain over Mitt Romney in a NY minute! At least with Herman Cain you know where the man stands.

I am sick and tired of Washington insiders running for POTUS. George W. Bush was a huge disappointment. I see Mitt Romney as just another repeat of GW, or worst. Herman Cain is the closest candidate I have seen to another Ronald Reagan. We need a true conservative, not another RINO for POTUS!

Looks to me like they were rated on electability.

I don't like everything Cain is offering like the 999 tax plan, which won't ever pass. But he is definitely the smartest one of the bunch. I disagree that he lacks executive experience as he was chief executive for a failing corporation and turned it around in record time.

America is a failing corporation. It needs to be turned around. Obama has done his best to destroy it. Other than Paul who can't win because of his being him, Cain is the best candidate.

The rest are too far right, or in the case of Romney, a total flipflopper who will say anything to get elected. He is a closet leftist. Likes socialism then shuns it. Likes gun control then shuns it. He is just another rich politician that will screw America just as Obama has done.

Really disagree with several of the email's cons about Ron Paul.

1) He's not a perpetual candidate let alone a perpetual presidential candidate. He runs in part to help educate the american people about a very pro-constitutional platform that he supports. Unlike Perry he has not always worked for the government. He was in the service and worked as a doctor before and after being in office. This is a silly con argument.

2) He has a very clear expression of faith on his website. It's the first thing I read about him on his website. He's a strong believer in Christ or at least he's unashamed to claim so on his website. He's private about his faith and doesn't seek to garner votes for it. It clearly influences his philosophy and principles and manner. This con argument is so patently false it calls into question whether the writer really did his homework. (I've also written to Tony Perkins about their dismissive attitude toward Ron Paul with regard to the value voters poll. A fellow named Cureton wrote me back. Any relation? Anyway, Ron Paul did a great job drawing on Old Testament narrative to buttress his case. I refer you to the speech on youtube if you're interested. Even if passionate Paul supporters skewed the results, at least they had the organization and desire to do so.)

3) With regard to Paul's alleged isolationist foreign policy: He voted to go after Osama bin Laden. When the Republicans got caught up in nation-building he introduced a new bill in order to clearly go after the reason why we were supposedly over there in the first place. He's anti-imperialistic. He's against having bases in 150 countries. That doesn't make him isolationist. It makes him sound like... our founding fathers. They proposed free trade without entangling alliances. Just because one is against interventionism, nation-building, world-policing, collateral-damage and blowback causing aggression does not make one an isolationist. Paul is for just war and finds our warhawking from both the left and right to seriously endanger us. Listen to Paul talk about how our interventionism is linked to our endangerment and it will ring true. We are motivating al Qaeda by our presence on muslim holy lands. We are motivating suicide bombers by collateral damage killing their friends, neighbors, fathers, brothers. We are motivating the masses against us by propping up despot dictators who take advantage of them.

An argument could be made that Paul is actually less isolationist than anyone else running because he adheres to our founding fathers vision of trade with other countries.

I dismissed Ron Paul last presidential election but many of the things that he said rang true. Now his warning is all the more prescient because he warned of the bubble, he warned of big government, he warned of blowback before it all happened. May I humbly request you give him a second look before dismissing him.

In my opinion, Mr. Romney looks and speaks like a plastic Ken doll. I keep looking for the plastic ring on the back of his neck that the GOP pulls to extract sound bites from him. I'm afraid that Mr. Romney is simply a "moderate" Democrat in RHINO's clothing. I'm afraid the GOP is going to cram him down the public's throat because he'll "play ball" with the GOP leadership an the GOP is, after all, not fundamentally different than the DEM's. It's all about money and power, and the heck with the well-being of the people or the safety of the Republic.

You need to read the Bible as it referes to civil government;George Washington's farewell address as it refers to not getting involve in foreign entanglements and Dr. Paul's voting record as it refers to being a "nut job". That statement needs to be retracted.

Dr. Paul is the only one discussing serious matters and offering common sense solutions.

None of the other canidates are offering any solutions on cutting unconstitutional spending.

How many undeclared wars do you want us to borrow money to fight?

I don't care for Mitt Romney. He is just a spoiled prep boy. I smell a RINO here big time! He also believes in global warming, hint, hint. People this is a liberal in sheep's clothing. I don't trust him. Romney will say whatever it takes to advance his political career. Who knows which way he is going to tilt once he achieves power. We need Obama care defeated, not repackaged under a new name.

I am from Michigan and his dad was a RINO. His father campaigned against Barry Goldwater in 1964 and voted along with Pres. Johnson on Great Society initiatives, Etc. This is how he kept his job as governor in an otherwise blue collar State. So like father, like son.

Mitt Romney's voting record as Massachusetts governor says it all, with his voting "yes" for socialized medicine. You do your readership a severe disfavor by giving Romney such a high rating. I would vote for Herman Cain over Mitt Romney in a NY minute! At least with Herman Cain you know where the man stands.

I am sick and tired of Washington insiders running for POTUS. George W. Bush was a huge disappointment. I see Mitt Romney as just another repeat of GW, or worst. Herman Cain is the closest candidate I have seen to another Ronald Reagan. We need a true conservative, not another RINO for POTUS!

BTW, I believe I understand Alexander's pref for Romney based on electability. Since Romney is an obvious RINO, ala Olympia Snow, he will appeal to the left. But I don't care to appeal to the left. I want a constitutional America back. I want someone who won't bend to the left for convenience just to get bonus points. It is time real Americans vote for those who will uphold the constitution and not pander to the anyone.

It would appear from your ratings, that the members of the Republican leadership aren't the only ones who have not learned and remembered the lessons of the last election or the wisdom put forth in your own emailings of the founder's quotes. Just as Boehner et al said we must wait until Republicans gain control of the House AND the Senate (and perhaps ALSO the presidency) before we have the votes to stop increasing our national spending and debt, I see even the Patriot Post espousing Party before principle in the hysteria of beating Obama at any cost. I expected better.

If one is a good rating and one hundred is a bad rating then I would rate romney about ten thousand. I would never vote for romney for dog catcher in China and certainly nothing else. JUST SAY NO TO romney. Worst possible choice. If we have to have a bad President then lets stick with the bad one we have now. If romney is nominated then prepare for obama's second term. If you get the idea I dislike RINOs more than libs You are very right

Romney follows the golbal warming viewpoint which stifles energy independence ofr America, crippling our country. This isa major economic issue affecting the lives of all Americans and Romney is way behind the other candidates on this critical issue.

Toomey and Specter were both establishment politicians. Rick did what he thought best for the country. I think he was right. If Toomey was out, we might have got an American senator. It just didn't work that way. The establishment held on.

If Romney is the republican choice we are doomed. I always highly respected the patriot post but this just blows me away. He is clinton through and through - smooth talking - saying whatever people want to hear, elite and out of touch. I am surprised that the Patriot post and so much of America are deceived by this false conservative. God help us.

You have to be joking. Mr. Perry is funded by La Raza and is part of the NWO. Please check him out further before you call him a patriot. this id from someone who lived in Texas and sees what Perry is all about. His claim to creating all the jobs in Texas is true but 99 percent of them went to illegals and to get a job in Texas you better learn to speak Spanish or you will not be hired.

Romney & Paul's numbers should be reversed.

Romney is a Big Government Republican. He is not fiscally conservative, but rather a technician. He is anti 2nd Amendment, Pro Abortion, Pro gay marriage, pro GLTG agenda, weak on immigration, weak on all TEA issues, weak on the Constitution, the UN, and the Fed. I will have great difficulty voting for him even against Obama. DISGUSTING!

Cain eliminated himself by eliminating Perry!

I think a Perry/Gingrich ticket is a winner!

I agree with you in almost everyone. Just want to add a few comments: Those 'debates' are really just a set-up to cause arguments. It didn't go unnoticed that whomever 'staged' these line-ups pitted romney against Perry from the gito, because they (like the MSM) want a liberal in the White House, and that romney is a rino liberal fits into their scheme of 'polyticks' (blood-suckers). The line-up had romney and Perry side by side almost every time, and this was purposely instigated to provoke tension. Rick Perry is a gentleman, and a Christian, but there is just so much one can take, especially from a cultist. That is the one thing you did not mention about romney. Had there been a muslim in the group, wouldn't you have brought that out, being we are a CHRISTIAN NATION ESTABLISHED BY THE ONE AND ONLY HOLY GOD? There is no denying that no matter what you say or do, THIS IS GOING TO BE THE DOWNFALL OF AMERICA BECAUSE "WE THE PEOPLE" REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ALMIGHTY GOD IS THE HEAD OF ALL WORLD GOVERNMENT, AND ESTABLISHED AMERICA, FOUNDED THROUGH OUR FOREFATHERS. But we have failed GOD in that we did not maintenance our Government enough to keep out the most rotten of evil, such as the perpetual list of democratic so-called presidents since FDR right on down. And today, the straw that has broken the camel's back is the demons unethically pushing an illegal alien into our government. "We The People" KNOW that the uneducated kid is not legal and is a muslim, AND OUR GOD IS NOT PLEASED WITH AMERICA FOR ALLOWING THIS TO OCCUR IN HIS NATION OF AMERICA!!! A couple of other points to mention: Perry answered 'the call'. He has the quals to be one of the best, most conservative presidents this Nation has ever had, because he is one of GOD's MEN; he was speaking from the heart about the immigration situation and it has been explained thoroughly. Only the lame-brained cannot understand the people of Texas made that decision, and WHY they did it. Being the Governor, Perry accepted the decision of the people, JUST AS IF WE VOTED ON A REFERENDUM, ANY PRESIDENT WOULD HAVE TO ACCEPT OUR VOTE!!! And THEN, about the vaccine for young girls; that vaccine was designed for femaleS 11 and UP! The BIG DEAL was made just to tear Perryd down by saying 'opt out', instead of 'opt in'...BUT THE LATEST REPORTS FROM CDC IS THAT THEY ARE RECOMMENDING THAT EVEN BOYS AND UP HAVE THE SAME VACCINE TO PREVENT CANCER IN THEM - REPORTED JUST THIS WEEK! WILL PERRY GET DROPPED DOWN FOR THAT ALSO??? Really, Perry entered with the best of intentions, but being a True Texan, when he was 'called out' by the debate team organizers and their carefully selected liberal moderators, Perry didn't stand a chance of coming out as the best of candidates in all facets, because that is what the MSM wants. MITT ROMNEY WILL NOT BE VOTED FOR BY THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY; HE IS A CULTIST AND THE TRUTH MUST BE TOLD TO ALL PEOPLE, NO MATTER WHAT KIND RELIGION THEY CLAIM TO BE. THE TRUTH IS THE TRUTH, AND THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUE CHRISTIANITY THROUGH OUR LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST!!! YOU PROBABLY WILL NOT PUBLISH THIS BECAUSE YOU ARE TOO POLITICALLY CORRECT TO PLEASE MAN, NOT THE CREATOR WHO MADE YOU A BEING JUST AS HE HAS ALL OF US, BUT HE ALSO GAVE US A BRAIN TO DISCERN TO STAY AWAY FROM THE EVIL, AND MITT ROMNEY IS AS EVIL AS BHO, BUT HE IS A LEGAL RESIDENT, NOT SO FOR BHO, FOR HE IS AN ILLEGAL MUSLIM, AND OUR NATION WAS NOT DESIGNED BY GOD TO HOUSE MOSQUES OF IDOL-WORSHIPING MUSLIMS - THEY HAVE BEEN OUR ENEMY SINCE ISHMAEL WAS BORN ILLIGITIMATE OF ABRAHAM - WE HAVE BORE THAT SIN SINCE BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF FAITH IN SARAH NOT "WAITING ON THE LORD" TO GIVE HER ISAAC, THE TRUE BLOOD HEIR REMNANT TO BRING FORTH JESUS CHRIST, OUR LORD AND SAVIOR. WE ARE IN A BAD WAY WITH OUR GOD BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU FAILING TO ACKNOWLEDGE GOD AS WHO HE IS, AND MORE THAN THAT, FOR FAILURE TO PROMOTE HIS SON JESUS CHRIST!!! ANY PERSON WHO DOES SO WILL NOT BE PLEASING TO GOD!!!

This article is woefully lacking in conservastive objectivity. I left Townhall because the Leftist trolls were all over the comments, & they changed the format of the site map so as to discourage navigation & the same re-format effectively locked me out of my own Townhall blog. But this article leads me to wonder whether the Leftist Trolls have infiltrated into your innermost sanctum.

Only people with I Q s in the single digit group would vote for romneybama. If romney gets the nomination I refuse to vote for him. I would rather stick with the nasty one we have now. Just say NO to romneybama

I really like Herman Cain,, He is imaginative, thinks very quick on his feet. He is NOT a politician, but an Honest Business Man. He is putting forward some very good ideas which nobody else has succeeded in doing prior to his initiative. Newt had some very good ideas as well. A true Conservative and American.

He can beat Obama in the race. He is capable of leading. He is level headed.He is conservative.

The only other thing you could ask for:

He is President.

I like Newt,, he is smart, he is knowledgible, he is experienced Nationally and Inter-Nationally.

I propose a Cain / Gingrich Ticket, or the reverse. What a team they would make.

Perry is not a debater, and Mitt Romney, I like, respect,, but he will not beat Obama because his politics are too close to Obama's. The Nation must see a difference between candidates. Romney is also the preferred candidate of the Establishment Republicans who have left our Country DOWN, time and time again. I like John McCain as a Man, but we don't need another Bob Dole, or John McCain running for Office in 2012, WE WILL LOSE!

I will work for him. He will be our next president.

At risk of seeming a single-issue voter, Romney has fallen for the global warming hoax hook, line, and sinker. In my view, that brands him as being too stupid to occupy the Office of President. Think of the damage a "carbon tax" would do to the economy. Why not a "water vapor tax?" Water vapor is a greenhouse gas, makes up about a third of the atmosphere, while carbon dioxide is a tiny fraction under one per cent.

Then there's Romneycare "and all the associated baggage......"

I support a man of principle, even if he fails to answer the trick gotcha questions exactly the right way. I refuse to let the media left pick my candidate. They cut down each frontrunner last time - untill they got the liberal they wanted.

They keep telling us to ignore Cain - he can't win.

Romney is a Rhino from a liberal state.

(Once the left gets him nominated - they will attack Mormon on all fronts,, news stories, documenatries, investigation reports on polygamy, John Smith, and the book of Mormon.)

Perry is the Texas A-hole that everybody accused GWB of being. (Now I see why the Bushes reportedly don't get along with guy.)All swagger, without the character.

Paul is simple not presidential material. I mean really, he makes the case for limited governmnet but is obsessed with the FED and appears the fool in the room.

Newt is the wise old man in the room and can lead. Not sure is is the choice for "front man", because he attracts lighteneing like a steel rod, but he would be in my inner circle.

Herman Cain is the real deal. A principled man who can lead. He may stumble on occassion - but remember that he needs no tele-prompter.

My support and my money go to Herman Cain.

I believe the democrats occupy the left shoulder of Friedrich Hayek's "Road to Surfdom" and the "big government establishment republicans" occupy the right shoulder. Consequently, I won't vote for a "big government establishment republican."

I believe Herman Cain is hands down the ONLY choice the country has in the 2012 election cycle. He is articulate, educated, experienced in business, and has a positive track record of accomplishments that can be traced.

The lack of Washington insider status is a plus.

The lack of foreign affairs experience is totally uniportant: so were Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, both Bushes, Clinton, and of course the present occupant of the white house.

The editors of Patriot Post love to cite the Founders and bask in their glory, but they don't want to be bothered with actually following their example of a Constitutionally limited govt and a non-meddlesome, mind-your-own-business foreign policy. The welfare state is (rightly) denounced in these writings, but its evil twin, the warfare state is worshipped like a golden calf. This leads to a bizarro editorial world where (Romney Care, gay marriage, global warming) Mitt Romney, a whiter shade of Obama, gleans a higher "patriot" rating that Ron Paul.

Ron Paul has a 30 year track record of abiding by the Constitution, even when it's unpopular to do so. If taking his strict Constitutional principles seriously means him comes off as a "crank", then that is an indictment of the modern day Conservative movement, not Ron Paul. It is also either willful ignorance or a cheapshot to keep accusing him of isolationism, when his policy is clearly non-interventionism, something this country needs to get back to.

Mr Alexander - you are hypocrite and a phoney to keep harping about a Constitution, which you really don't believe in; there is simply no other way to say it. Every time you write on the election, your credibility goes down and I am reminded to sent another $25 to Ron Paul.

Romney's cons out weighs his pros. No Romney for me!

How could Mr Perry so dominate Texas politics for the last ten years and yet be so inarticulate in the debates?

Would Mr. Perry continue to oppose centralized Federal power once the levers of that power were within his grasp?

Wines too much. Drags down the debates with his wrangling. Should concentrate on blasting Obama and not his rivals for the Republican nomination.

I like her, yeah she needs to speak more with more authority, but did you ever hear former Pres. Truman speak?

Rick Santorum is the best choice in my opinion.

This is all very interesting but means nothing.

The people do not choose the canidate,it is whoever the party puts money behind, and promote with push polls . Its a fake system!!! You and I mean nothing!!

Short on foreign policy, have you met Obama?

I think his business attitude and lack of political savvy might just be what this country needs to get back to what it once was. HE has ideas that just might work. No one else is a good political talker. Barry (BARACK) is a very savvy political talker but I think one on one Herman Caine would shut him down.

RICK SANTORUM, IS THE MOST QUALIFIED, HONEST, AND WORTHY PERSON OF ALL MENTIONED! HE IS HONEST TO THE POINT THAT YOU KNOW THAT YOU CAN GET THE RIGHT DECISIONS FROM THIS MAN!

IS HONESTY, TRUTHFULNESS, IMPORTANJT YES AND WE NEED IT BECAUSE OBAMA HAS BEEN A LIAR FROM DAY ONE AND IT WOULD BE THE BIGGEST SWITCH IN AMERICAN HISTORY!

IS AMERICA READY FOR THE TRUTH, FOR HONESTY? GOD ONLY KNOWS BUT IT SURE IS NEEDED TODAY, TOMORROW AND FOR THE 2012 ELECTIONS!

Most voters have little knowledge of the issues or qualifications. Obama proved that. For that reason I feel that overall visual appeal on the television screen is just about as important as all other factors combined. Too bad Newt comes off as such a potato head. His team should work on that.

Despite Bachman's severe shortcomings she would be a great asset as a VP running mate because of the female factor.

Most voters have little knowledge of the issues or qualifications. Obama proved that. For that reason I feel that overall visual appeal on the television screen is just about as important as all other factors combined. Too bad Newt comes off as such a potato head. His team should work on that.

Despite Bachman's severe shortcomings she would be a great asset as a VP running mate because of the female factor.

WE DON'T NEED A FLIP FLOPPER!

WE NEED A PRESIDENT WITH A CLEAR HISTORY OF JUST WHERE HE STANDS!

WE DON'T NEED A MAN THAT GAVE BIRTH TO MASS-A-CARE!

SORRY MITT WE'RE NOT FOR UOU!

Whoever the nominee is, he/she MUST carry the South. Anyone with a political beat in the MSM knows that Romney will never generate strong support in this region--that's why he has been their golden boy from the get go. Once they get him nominated you would get a sudden focus on his LDS background--a proven turn-off in this region. He has never been a strong 2nd Amendment advocate and they would make sure it is universally known. The kingmakers who gave us our current fiasco will stop at nothing to build up the weakest challenger. I find it hard to believe that in the scoring done by our Mr. Alexander no mention of Mitt's most obvious liability(s) is made.

NEWT GINGRICH IS THE MOST QUALIFIED PERSON OF ALL THE REPUBLICAN'S RUNNING!

HE CAN DEFEAT OBAMA IN DEBATE AND AT THE POLLS BUT HE HAS NOT JUMPED INTO A POSITIVE MANNERAND THIS IS SO IMPORTANT! WE FEEL HE HAS MORE WORK TO DO AND DO IT QUICKLY!

HE WILL GET MY VOTE IF HE IS THE FRONT RUNNER!

I really like what Herman stands for and his business experience. He and Newt would be my ideal ticket. Herman erases the race card and Newt provides the true knowledge of Washington.

1) Bachman has no chance ! We do Not need a woman as our Head of State.

2) Ron Paul - good numbers man, economist knows what's going on deep down in the bowels of DC..knows about the Illuminati/Vatican/et al, Corporatist Monopolists (Rockefellers, Astors, Warburgs, Soros,etc), BUT he wants NOTHING to do with the Middle East, and will NOT aid Israel. Has NO relationship with the Pentagon, none. He's no good for National Security.

3) Romney is a Mason, and is backed by the Bush Clan.. Romney-care, etc.. And he's not a Conservative, no guts.. Just a "Pretty Face"...

4) Gingrich is also a mason (like reagan). He's smart and knows everyone in DC, BUT he will not make it either..Maybe as Veep, not POTUS. The thing about him is that he does fear GOD, and that goes a long way, especially if Perry is elected..

5) Cain is a pain in the #%&*@.. He's a very nice guy, knows a bit about business, But that will not get him into the WH.. He also has stated he will work with the muslims in the cabinet.. that's a no go with the CIA et al.. He has no chance to be POTUS.. Has no knowledge of foreign Policy..working with the Pentagon/CIA et al..

6) Perry is ex USAF, has a relationship with the Warriors, is a very Conservative guy (if one cares to listen) he's NO Bush/Cheney brat... He wants to make us energy independent, has the bets tax plan to create jobs.. Has served outside the USA and understands what and who we are.. FOREIGN AFFAIRS, ie a relationship with the guys in Alexandria and the CIA is a must now.. with all the damage control that must be done after BHO leaves the WH..We need a quiet, tough stedfast, individual who loves this country and GOD. Perry is so well-connected , you who criticize him as if he were an idiot are ignorant folks.. Perry is the one, ain't no doubt about that, he carries his 2nd Amendment Right wherever he goes, and he's not afraid to use it. The dream team will be Perry + Gingrich !

BHO is a puppet of the Corporatists.. the guys who want to mix Business and Government.. Marxism is a means to an end, they do not believe wealth should be re-distributed.. The Banking Elite/Vatican/UN/et al want to control all assets, Money/wealth and want all power.. They are well on their way to achieving it thru BHO, BUT if we get a True Patriot, that could change for these United States, the rest of the world can go to hell in a hand-basket.. We need to root out the enemy, foreign and DOMESTIC...

Rick Perry is the stereotype college cheer leader, married to the beautiful Football Queen. Has had several unpopular goofs as a governor and seems to ignorantly commit more of them in his campaign, now that he's let Anita "talk him into" running for President. So many of the jobs he's produced in Texas have come, not so much from his capability as from God, who put the natural gas in the shale.

Give me a Newt Gingrich, who has proven ability to cut spending, and has the needed experience to deal with D.C. polititians. He has turned his spiritual life around with a Christian wife. He knows history and appreciates this country enough to bring it back to be a shining light on a hill once again. I believe Newt really wants to "serve", and not for his own glory. I do hope he will be given another chance to prove his capability.

I like Herman Cain, and believe he is a very capable man, but I have learned that he has been a successful lobbyist for the American Restaurant Association, so he is not a Washington outsider, and had this political ambition for several years.

@Abu,

is this you?

http://classicliberalsoldier.blogspot.com/

Cons: diagnosed with Stage IV cancer in 2006, now in remission - after 5 years in remission you are considered cured.

more novelty than substance - That's not what economists are now saying about 9-9-9. If it is novelty that a man who is not a politician is in the White House; I vote for the novelty.

short on foreign policy knowledge or experience - is willing to study and approaches problems from a fresh common sense perspective.

campaign lacks organization - only when compared to political campaigns of politicians.

low name recognition - check the most recent Gallup polls and you see this is raising steadily.

"sound bite deep" on many issues - so are most of the other candidates.

no military service - he was a civilian employee of the US Navy and we have a past President who is considered by many a draft-dodger, enough said.

not previously vetted - so vet him.

Rick Perry = NWO monkey

Mitt Romney = NWO monkey

Ron Paul = Our Only Hope

One thing you missed completely is his wonderful sense of humor and marketing ability. Many of the MSM are as clueless about this man's ability as those who have rated him a 5.

Every TEA party member, and the vast majority of true conservatives know who he is and what he represents, and at this juncmture, the GOP voters, not the establishment or the MSM are then ones who will select our candidate.

Mt. Cain has been the second choice of virtually all conservatives, who are more vital to the GOP than minorities and various special interest groups are to the Dems. Since Palin declined to run, he has overwhelmingly gained her considerable constituents. I would surely give him a 6+, as his positives far outweigh his negatives....and he has a knack of tyrning some of those "negatives" into positives!

Ron Paul is the laughing stock of the field. His isolationism will start a major if not a world war. Rep. Paul if he was smart, would drop out yesterday. Sadly, he is not that smart!

Isolationism is what led to WWII. As retired military, that should be the last thing we need.

So quit now Rep. Paul, please! For the good of the nation!

I wish someone would get Ron Paul a copy of the report that John Adams and Thomas Jefferson submitted on the subject of their encounter with the Ottoman Ambassador to the Court of St. James. That would move him off his "they are over here because we are over there," position. Indeed, Jefferson had to forsake his original non-interventionist foreign policy to prevent agents of the Ottoman Empire from crossing the Atlantic and raiding our seaboard. Preemption, if you will.

Rick Perry is a big spending, grow government Southern Democrat tyrant. We don't need him!

The same way people find something imperfect about their religious leaders and lose faith in the church, we tend to do the same thing with politicians. If you're looking for perfect, you'll never find it. Reagan wasn't perfect - either as a man or a political leader - but on balance, he was great for this nation. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. It's time to agree on someone and rally behind them!

I believe any objective analysis shows that Newt has both the greatest depth and breadth of knowledge and understanding of values and their policy proscriptions. Newt's "baggage" is old news. His last decade in his personal life and his life's work as a conservative, his communication and debate excellence, his understanding of the constitution and how to deconstruct the federal behemoth, all serve to make him my highest choice to be our nominee and next president. Clearly neither the GOP establishment, mainstream media, OR Obama want to face Newt!

The "Patriot Post" has hijacked "Patriot" and should hereafter appropriately be call just, "The Post"; after dissing Congressman Dr Ron Paul for being "singularly focused". Yes, Congressman Dr. Ron Paul is "a highly acclaimed advocate of Essential Liberty focused on the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary". Congressman Dr. Ron Paul has an excellent voting record to prove it, and is not a part of the status quo. Congressman Dr. Ron Paul's platform is the only medicine that will actually cure our sick, and cancerous economy. Washington needs a good house cleaning, and what better way to start than to return to the political roots of our nation, "the Constitution". What part of the Constitution said that the Puppet Masters behind the puppet, the federal reserve, Goldmansachs, along with a host of special czars, gets to run the country with impunity? All are non elected positions. I applaud Dr. Ron Paul' focus to save our country. All, and I repeat, all other candidates are just part of the status quo, and will advance the globalist agenda into a New World Order of a One World Government. I long for the days when we used to be just the "Good-Old USA". SequesterYacht is on high alert. I pray God shelters the innocent families, that put their trust in our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

I believe Ron Paul to be well intentioned. Sadly we know where the road paved with good intentions leads. While he is sound and correct on some issues, he would leave the protection of the unborn, the definition of marriage, and similar national issues to individual states. I suspect were he alive in 1860 he'd argue slavery was a "State's" issue. He has a niche following that is almost cult-like in their devotion to him. His recent claim if denied the nomination he'd run as an independent, re-electing Obama, should exclude any supporters.

Romney:RINO. Perry:RINO. Kiss those two off.

Herman Cain: Lots of common sense. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.

Michelle Bachman: That perpetual smile makes her appear too weak if a major international problem were to arise. I'd like to vote for her but she appears too nice and too soft to be taken seriously.

Newt Gingrich: I don't trust him. When he was speaker of the House, too often he'd vote with the Democrats AFTER speaking against a very same Democrat argument. Why? Is he a RINO too?

Ron Paul: Probably the only politician who is bluntly honest. What makes Ron Paul a good candidate is that he isn't a two-face obfuscating lying attorney politician. I'm fed up with attorney politicians playing their courtroom style word games in Washington! Can't get the raw truth out of them about any subject when asked. Everything is spun! Vote them all out!

There is simply no way to spin Mitt and his record into that of a conservative. He would almost certainly need to win more non-GOP votes than GOP votes to defeat Obama. Even if he won he would push compromises unwise and unhealthy for the republic facing its dire challenges. The current reality demands a true conservative to lead the republic back from the brink of disaster. Mitt is simply not that person.

Governor Romney is progressive light, a big government liberal republican in the same mold as Olympia Snow. His support of any position is too closely aligned to what the progressive propaganda industry defines as the moderate or independent center. We can no longer support a progressive light candidate, we need conservative right policies and candidates. Look closely at Romney, he is the darling of the progressive propaganda industry for a reason. If Romney is the nominee we have another lesser of two evils race, a contest teed up by the media for the benefit of the progressive left.

Rick Perry may sell in Texas but I don't believe he sells nationally. How, as recently as 1988, he could have supported Al Gore is deeply troubling. Like many progressives he confuses or equates legal immigrants with illegal ones. I fear Obama would destroy Rick in debates. He has some appealing qualities and positions, but he is not who we need NOW!

Seriously? This is all we've got? I'm tempted to vote for Obama this time around just to seal the deal with how horrible he is, thus paving the way for a true Reagan-like president to emerge from somewhere in the heart of the Conservative citizens left in the US after 4 more years of attempts at socialism thwarted by a majority of conservatives in Congress. If we put one of these bozos in we'll just be back to another ridiculous fight four years from now, and who knows but that Obama could use the next four years to gather sympathy. I say take a look at Warren Buffett's statement about Congressional reform and concentrate on doing something THERE, not worrying so much about the office of President as long as our checks and balances are still at least marginally effective!

Mr. Gingrich is the Republican who can most likely defeat Obama in 2012. There is no other Republican who could stay in the ring with Obama in the theatrical spectacle of nationally televised debates, and prevail. Obama is a professional Orator, (it is his ONLY attribute) and would defeat any of the other Republican candidates. In the Presidential debates, Mr. Gingrich would be Obama’s worst nightmare! Let’s face facts: The televised Debates are ‘Theater’, and most American voters don’t pay any attention to campaigns and elections until the few weeks preceding the elections. Then, they go to the polls and vote for the ‘winner’ of the debates.

Mr. Gingrich is the most politically experienced and savvy Conservative on our slate. Other candidates may well share his political views, but none have the straight-forward, aggressive ability to think and speak on his feet, to take the fight to Obama, as he does. No other candidate has the capacity to forcefully contrast Obama’s big-government, socialist, failures, with the specific, Conservative steps he would take in order to pull the country back from the precipice at which we now stand. Rick Perry is soft on Immigration. Mitt Romney is simply another slick, oily, East Coast politician; the author of socialized RomneyCare in Massachusetts. Herman Cain is a businessman…period. His ‘9-9-9’ plan is not viable: People who pay no federal income taxes won’t want to begin paying them, and will never acquiesce to paying an additional National Sales Tax. He has no feel for foreign policy. Huntsman is simply a Liberal running as a Republican. Ron Paul is weak-to-missing on National Defense, and appears to believe that national security is optional. On the stage of the National Debates, he will appear as a tottering old man next to Obama. Bachman and Santorum are nice people with some good ideas, but could not debate or win against Obama.

Mr. Gingrich 'tells it like it is', and with the ‘Bark ON’. Americans like factual, 'plain talk', not the tangential, 'Diplo-Speak', Emotional Appeal, or the Glittering Generalities regurgitated by the usual, slick, politicians. Mr. Obama needs the comfort and reassurance of friendly environments, such as the college campus or the Union hall, in which to speak. Mr. Gingrich, on the other hand, is capable of going into hostile environments and getting his message across…convincingly, in plain, American language. As a former House Speaker, he has already demonstrated strong, effective, leadership, and has shown detailed knowledge of both domestic and international issues.

I like, admire, and respect Herman Cain. However, our republic needs a president already well versed in all our challenges, foreign and domestic, and already ready with policy solutions. By his own words he will call advisers and experts together to brief him and then he will "solve the right problem." He has done much already for our republic and may do much more during his life. He is not my highest choice to be the GOP nominee. However, if he gains the nomination I will support him.

Rick Perry lacks charisma, debating skills and leadership capabilities. He inherited his present position and has done little to distinguish himself as a conservative leader who can build a team of hard nosed operatives to rein in the federal bureaucracy and ultimately dismantle failed progressive institutions. He simply does not have the chutzpah to attack the DC horde on its own turf. They will eat him alive.

Mr. Cain has demonstrated leadership and the ability to turn things around. His lack of military experience is not necessarily a dis-qualifier, Lincoln, Wilson and FDR lacked military experience yet proved quite capable of directing national military strategy. Cognitive learning is a significant tool in Herman Cain's skill set. He has demonstrated the ability to adapt his thinking when necessary to attack new problems and unforeseen circumstances. Our civil war showed that sometimes people with limited experience rise to the top in response to inconceivable challenges. Many of the men who commanded successful combat units during the civil war were political appointees or popularly elected officers with less than zero military experience who fought well and mastered the business of war to become exemplary officers. Herman Cain is just such a man.

Why would we elect a rhino again? Have we not learned yet? I wouldn't be surprised if he is financed by Soros.

The comments in this blog have been very, very entertaining to say the least. It is obvious that most of the people commenting don't understand what is going to win this election for the Republicans.

The key to defeating Obama next November will be to appeal to the middle, the independents and the undecideds. Far right candidates won't get enough of the votes from the middle to gain the electoral votes needed to win the general election. Obama represents the far left and cannot count on the middle like he did the last time around. His goal will be to convince the very people who voted for him in 2008 that his administration is the lesser of two evils and that nothing negative that has happened so far in his term is his fault. He will demonize his opponent and zero in on any faults and deficiencies he thinks will gain traction. He will engage age-old tactics of vote buying, making false promises and making threats that the country will be worse off without him to energize the electorate that voted him in last time. We are already seeing this as he cavorts with these groups.

The American people as a whole are tired of lack of presidential leadership, continual division in Congress, and an agenda of class warfare. They want mutual cooperation and decisions made for the good of the country, not for political reasons. They demand a leader with demonstrated competence, charisma and energy who will represent both sides, a leader who will ensure true transparency in government, a leader who has full confidence in their abilities and most importantly a leader who communicates very well and does not waffle with answers. They want a leader who will be on their side and do what he say he will do. They will support a leader not overly concerned about his re-election from day one.

Bottom line, first decide what issues are most important to the majority of Americans. That would be jobs and the economy this time around. If you like a candidate for whatever reason, look at that individual's skills, experience and qualifications from 360 degrees with these priorities in mind. Then, honestly look at the candidates appeal to the middle. The middle and the undecideds will elect the next president, not the decided left or right voters.

Look at each candidate's campaign managers, their established organization and their funding to go the distance through to the general election. Pay close attention to key endorsements and look for a snowball effect after the first 4 primaries. The nominee will always win at least 3 of the first 6 primaries.

Know there is no perfect candidate in the running everyone likes, and there has never been a perfect president in the White House. Finally, understand that you will either decide to reward Obama with another 4 years in the White House by supporting someone who cannot win, or above all you will support a candidate with the leader credentials, experiences, skills and qualities combined with the organization and funding required to beat Obama.

Constitutionally naive. A candidate running against the social policies of the left. And for...?

Herman Cain reminds me so much of Ronald Reagan. He can win and the best thing about him is that he is not a politician. He was an expert at turning around companies in financial trouble. He would be able to turn the country around. He's a cheerleader for our country and would help to heal it. Gov. Scott had no political experience and has done very well applying his business experience to Florida.

Very intelligent, successful and straight forward, except he continues to shoot himself in the foot. Exactly what is his position on abortion? The second ammendment is up to the states? A worrisome connection to the Federal Reserve. Please tell me he's no the best we have.

Honest and forthright, except when he's not. He walked on his wife (and he slept with her) he'll walk on you and me. Politically pricipled is not principled.

Worked for Algore, should be enough to rule out. Supported the Texas corridor, should be enough to rule out. Thinks the state has the right to force innoculations against a sexually transmitted disease, should be enough. Wants to educate children of illegal aliens on our dime, should be enough. Perhaps he should go hunt for himself, I beieve there's a nice ranch that he frequents, what was that name? Worked for Algore is enough.

Romenycare. Stop, that's enough. Almost makes Kerry look like he's got charisma. Yes, Romneycare is enough.

Exactly who is going to invade the U.S.? Just how do we afford to maintain our worldwide empire? A return to a constitutional government? Heresay, completely unelectable and the ONLY chance AMEARICA has for a resurgence. Restore the Republic, elect Ron Paul.

I see the race differently than everyone else here. There is only one way to completely defeat the Democrats and that is to completely disgrace their theories by way of their poster boy: Obama. He must be impeached. He has done enough to be impeached but there is not enough time to do so in this term. Give him a second term and we can gut him like a fish.

There is an important proviso here: we must get control of both houses of congress in order to paralyse a second Obama presidency and to control the impeachment process. If a stake is not driven through the Obama heart, someone like Obama will re-appear and we will just have to have this fight all over again. If an Obama like character ever gains the Presidency again, with the Democrats controlling congress, America, as we know it, will be finished.

Now is the time where there is a very good chance to

win both houses. If we elect a Republican president we will have not only lost our chance to snuff out the far left but we might even get a non-conservative Republican which will turn out to be only the lesser of two evils.

ANY of these candidates would be an improvement over the poser in office now...and that's the problem. With no clear frontrunner, we may be doomed to repeat a horrible mistake...

To "cons", add sounds whiny and tinny.

Herman Cain con: Past President of Kansas City branch and continuing supporter of the Federal Reserve Bank. Does not think the Fed should be audited. "Nothing to find there," so he says.

I was mislead, and thought that I was offering a response to you evaluation odf Santorum. While he would be a second choice to Bachmann, irt is he that sounds whiny and tinny, not her.

Ron Paul is the only candidate who stands by the Constitution, sound money policy, and liberty. Those who bash him, unfortunately, have no understanding of constitutional principles. His failure to express his faith is of no consequence, but he has brilliantly quoted Biblical scripture in support of his positions on all issues.

I have alwatys appreciated your posts, but I think that your ranking choices here detract from your credibility.;

Since Ron Paul is the only candidate that believes that the Constitution is the true law of the land and understands that forcing our government to once again start abiding by it is the only thing that is going to save this nation, the RINO's can say all they want to about him, but he is who I will be voting for in the primary. The rest of the field will just continue to ignore the Constitution like they have done for decades now. Republicans act just like liberals to me. They no longer believe in the Constitution!!

Newt Gingrich con: Newt is a globalist who has the same agenda as Obama. He is very intelligent and learned, but he is slick and deceptive. He knows exactly what to say to win the hearts of American patriots, but he and his pal, Henry Kissinger, espouse some frightening, communist concepts.

Perry: A Salt-of-the-Earth Family History? Lots of "ladies of the night" are saying otherwise. He socked Texans with lots of tax increases; most created TX jobs were government jobs; and the only people he wants carrying guns are himself and/or his bodyguards.

Since Ron Paul is the only candidate that believes that the Constitution is the true law of the land and understands that forcing our government to once again start abiding by it is the only thing that is going to save this nation, the RINO's can say all they want to about him, but he is who I will be voting for in the primary. The rest of the field will just continue to ignore the Constitution like they have done for decades now. Republicans act just like liberals to me. They no longer believe in the Constitution!!

I assume the lower the number the better the rating ? That is how I see it, Patriots are America First and not involved with Big Government spending, destructive trade deals. USA sovereignty is paramoiunt and they are certainly not supportive of the ongoing illegal alien ivasion or Amnesty or selling off controlling interest of Texas oil and gas reserves to Chinese companies. Whiney and Tinney is acceptable to me if they are America First and would never tread on the Constitution. Perry, Romney and Gingrich are Sorry excuses and a laughable to comparison Reagan policy. Reagan was not hell bent on building up our enemies. The Democrats want to give amnesty and register to vote 30 million people whio are in the country illegally and i will certainly not vote for a REPUBLICAN who intends to HELP them. Give me my Duncan hunter Double Wall Border fence by 2013 so give me President Bachmann. Her ideas are right on, and Obama is irritable to listen to so she would be an improvement.

I, too, wholly disagree with the ratings given to the candidates. It appears that "patriots" now come in more "liberal" stripes, with no loyalty whatsoever to the U.S. Constitution. Ron Paul is the only TRUE PATRIOT, and I will be voting for him in the Primary. I will no longer vote for "the lesser of two evils" in the General Election! This Republic is in great peril, and people better wake up to the fact that the other so-called viable GOP candidates are Party puppets, all of whom are globalists and will never cross their "handlers" to protect our national sovereignty.

I was once a fan of Rick Santorum, but now that I've seen him in the debates, he just isn't presidential. He seems like a nice "kid" but not a leader. He's also a very bad judge of character. Any friend of Arlen Specter is not a friend of mine!

Gingrich would be the best choice to lead our Nation back to First Principles and sanity. He has the right answers, he talks straight and doesn't pull any punches. Rational thinking patriots who really want to mend this broken country, will back this man for the next eight years. Those who vote for party, union, race, or emotion only, will be responsible for the downfall of our government into marxist socialism. And goodbye to Freedom and Liberty as we know it now.

Listen to Newt's message, then you decide !!

Since Ron Paul is the only candidate that believes that the Constitution is the true law of the land and understands that forcing our government to once again start abiding by it is the only thing that is going to save this nation, the RINO's can say all they want to about him, but he is who I will be voting for in the primary. The rest of the field will just continue to ignore the Constitution like they have done for decades now. Republicans act just like liberals to me. They no longer believe in the Constitution!!

How in the world can you folks at the Patriot Post list Romney as a 6??? I have been reading your essays and digest for more than 5 years. You folks really know your stuff but on the Romney issue I must strongly disagree!!!

I lived in Maine until age 42. I can go back 8 generations in the same community. Maine conservatives understand better than most anyone about MA Socialists. We have been dealing with them for years moving to Maine "to live the good life". Once they arrive they are like an infection or cancer in local and state governments spreading their Socialist poison.

I have lived in Utah since age 42, the home and cultural center of Mormonism. Mormons can be wonderful people and I have many as friends. However, the influence of the church leadership is quite un-Patriotic. I'm referring particularly to the recent "Utah Compact on Immigration". The official position of the church does everything it can to avoid "offending" anyone. They refuse to take solid positions on some of the simplest of issues. The history of Mormonism mirrors that of Romney's positions. They both "flip-flop" and change their positions to gain favor.

Romney does whatever is politically expedient, period! I do not trust the man and I cannot support him! Any of the other candidates are better than Romney, unless you are indeed looking at electability. I'm tired of voting for the lesser of two evils!!!

I would drop Gov. Perry's rating due to a con not mentioned in your analysis. Gov. Perry has,over the years, expressed his fundamentalist Christian views as guiding him. [Let me say here that I'm not objecting to his beliefs - G.W.Bush, Michelle Bachman, Jimmy Carter (although that isn't a recommendation), and Herman Cain share them].

G.W. was often attacked in the main stream press for saying that he prayed for help - but he made it clear that he wasn't looking for advice from God, he was praying for the strength to make the right decision. My concern about Gov. Perry is two-fold. One that his apparent strict views would be a negative in a campaign, the second that his Presidency could be colored by them.

I may be misjudging him, but it is my gut feeling that in exigency he would lack flexibility. By this I don't mean flexibility in principles, I don't want principles to be flexible, I mean flexibility in details. Obama may have hanged himself in his arrogance of his religion (which is the religion of self), I'm afraid Perry might do the same, although his is a different religion entirely.

Gingrich/Cain could be a winning ticket, and I mean for more than just the election.

Romney will not get my vote. I don't care what happens. Obama is just a slightly quicker route to our destruction than Mitt. If the liberals/rino's have it, let's just get it over with quickly.

Dr. Paul is NOT isolationist.He believes as many do that US involvement in the direct affairs of other countries has less to do with our security and more to do with empire building. That, we can do without. He is often accused of not answering questions because he goes into talking about other subjects-truth is very few problems are simple that they can be answered with out background understanding of their cause and effect on other areas. Just more red herring from the media. To many people, faith is a personal thing and in light of how it is used against persons is it any wonder someone would keep theirs to themselves? Dr. Paul is the most qualified by virtue of military service,experience and adherants to the Constitution and extensive economic understanding.

If Newt got elected we would have the same old politics as usual and nothing will change unless to get worse. A career politician not really helpful to Liberty or Constitutional rule of law.

Mr Cain you say is "sound bite deep". Isn't that how BHO got elected? I think his 9-9-9 plan is a poor example of a "fix" for the the systemic problems of big government. I do like his candor .

Romney Care! The only reason he is on the list is because the Liberal media wants him there. He would be Liberals first choice IF they had to pick a 'pub.

So Romney is not the "perfect" candidate. Fact is, however, he is the best in my book to defeat Obama. Every other candidate, except Perry who is an illegal advocate, looks ideologically toxic. I'm not one for pacifying fence sitters, i.e. independents, but a candidate needs them to wrestle the white house away from the current crop of socialists/communisits/marxists, etc. I sure hope the RNC keeps that in mind when they choose our candidate because if they do to us what they did to us in 2008, our country will be lost.

Wow! Mark, you really missed it this go round. If any of your writings warranted a retraction, this article would be it.

Ron Paul is the only one talking about the Federal Reserve, and how it needs to be abolished. In doing so, the IRS goes with it. Give banking back to the people, with interest free Government loans! Jackson did it, Lincoln did it, and Kennedy tried to do it. Although I like Herman Cain, he was once Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank in Kansas.

Who are the people that made up this rating???

Being from Minnesota I know that voting against the establishment is a winable stand....Mitt is more of the same.

Also, supporting a muslim shows an ignorance of their loyalities when the card are down. Even our current president stated that when having to make a choice he would have go with the muslims.

Your rating did not reflect the Tea Party stand.

Bachmann and Cain are the Conservatives I am supporting in the primary. Anyone of the candidates is better for the country than Obama, but I am not thrilled about Romney or Perry being the nomination, as the Republican Elite want to happen. If Romney is the nominee I believe there is a strong possibility that Obama will be re-elected. Perry has a slightly better chance of winning but I believe Obama could also defeat him. Perhaps I am too paranoid or my faith isn't strong enough but my gut feelings about Romney and Perry are what they are.

Cons: (His isolationist foreign policy is incredibly naïve and thus, dangerous) You need to look closer at his foreign policy. When warranted, a Ron Paul administration would act quickly, decisively and Constitutionally. Something we haven't seen since WWII.

“Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.” – Ronald Reagan

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/national-defense/

(Fails the "nut job" test with many voters) Media & Republican Establishment spin has created this mirage. He is the only one that actually gets it!

(Seems too singularly focused) He speaks constantly on the Economy, The Fed, Healthcare reform, Foreign Policy, Defense, Energy independence. What more do you want? This charge belongs on the Herman Cain assessment.

(Comes off as a crank) A crank? I would say "concerned" is a better explanation, rightly so.

(Too narrow a support base) You said unelectable was not a consideration. Stick to your guns & quit trying to brainwash the electorate! He has Repubs, Dems, Independents,& Libertarian support. That's narrow?

(Name recognition negatives) Negatives? You've stumped us here.

(Perpetual presidential candidate) Nixon, Reagan, McCain, Romney, are also guilty of this too, right?

(No clear expression of faith) Wow! This proves your research has been minimal. http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/statement-of-faith/

You statement about Gingrich being more intellectual than all the others combined would be true if Ron Paul was not a candidate. He could successfully debate Newt on any subject.

Gingrich/Cain could be a winning ticket, and I mean for more than just the election.

Romney will not get my vote. I don't care what happens. Obama is just a slightly quicker route to our destruction than Mitt. If the liberals/rino's have it, let's just get it over with quickly.

If Newt had not toured W/Nancy Pelosi re "mother earth" & other baggage, he would be "the" candidate. What can we do?

While refreshing to see so many people "get it" and wave their banners in support of Dr Paul, it is a sad commentary indeed to see that Mr Alexander, who most often is brimming with eloquence when reflecting on the state of our Liberty, completely misses the mark with this bogus ratings scheme.

Ron Paul 2012!

Wake up Mark...please wake up.

I too am very disappointed in your ratings. Romney and Perry are RHINO's. They are both Republican Establishment to the core. This is proven by the fact that the Leftstream Media is supporting them. At the debates they get more questions than the other candidates. What does that tell you? Gingrich is another McCain. Besides that he can lie with a straight face. Not to be trusted. That leaves the others and I would vote for any one of them, faults and all, before I will vote for Romney, Perry or Gingrich. My preferene is 1) Ron Paul; 2) Michele Bachmann; 3) Herman Cain, etc. Your comment that Ron Paul's foreign policy is lacking is off base. He has read the book of Isaiah -- friends with all tangling alliances with NONE.

Let's face the fact that the 2012 presidential election is one of the most important in respect to the future political, ideological and economic character of this country since the War Between the States. The next president will likely carry many of his party's legislative candidates into office with him/her. The Supreme Court and the American judiciary in general will see changes over the next 4 years reflective of the Executive and Legislative character which will have an effect on the socio-legislative environment far into the future much like the packed court of FDR did well into the 70s and, arguably, beyond. This country is politically polarized to an extent that I have not seen in my 60+ years. Electability, in this age of leftist media propaganda, herd mentality voting and the changing demographics of the electorate, is the key. I can accept a less-than-perfect (for me) choice for the GOP candidate in this Anybody-but-Obama election if this candidate has the ability to attract those fence riders who tipped the scale for BHO in 2008. The Base, on each side, will, for the most part, vote (or not vote at all) for the same party as they did in 2008, with the possible exception of Hispanics. It is the so-called independents and the disillusioned quasi-liberal centrists who will make the difference. In my humble opinion, after speaking to many of my friends who are independents and/or disillusioned left-leaners, Romney is, almost unanimously, their choice. I could spend another 1000 words explaining why but it boils down to 1) the stagflated economy, 2) fear related to the consequences of crushing debt added over the past three years, 3) perceived galloping socialism, 4) our policy toward Israel and the arab world and 5) a pervasive disgust with the anomie in government. Amongst them, Romney is the only GOP candidate with the cachet to address these issues for them. Without their votes, it's 4 more years of BHO and his cadre of 'social reformers'. Romney also knows now that 'Romneycare' was a mostly failed idea and would address those failures with respect to Obamacare (I hope). JJM.

The rest tiptoe around the illegal immigrant issue. He has the best plan for dealing with that. Build a fence and enforce the laws.

Cons: (His isolationist foreign policy is incredibly naïve and thus, dangerous) You need to look closer at his foreign policy. When warranted, a Ron Paul administration would act quickly, decisively and Constitutionally. Something we haven't seen since WWII.

“Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.” – Ronald Reagan

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/national-defense/

(Fails the "nut job" test with many voters) Media & Republican Establishment spin has created this mirage. He is the only one that actually gets it!

(Seems too singularly focused) He speaks constantly on the Economy, The Fed, Healthcare reform, Foreign Policy, Defense, Energy independence. What more do you want? This charge belongs on the Herman Cain assessment.

(Comes off as a crank) A crank? I would say "concerned" is a better explanation, rightly so.

(Too narrow a support base) You said unelectable was not a consideration. Stick to your guns & quit trying to brainwash the electorate! He has Repubs, Dems, Independents,& Libertarian support. That's narrow?

(Name recognition negatives) Negatives? You've stumped us here.

(Perpetual presidential candidate) Nixon, Reagan, McCain, Romney, are also guilty of this too, right?

(No clear expression of faith) Wow! This proves your research has been minimal. http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/statement-of-faith/

You statement about Gingrich being more intellectual than all the others combined would be true if Ron Paul was not a candidate. He could successfully debate Newt on any subject.

Cheer up, and look at the bright side... If it wasn't for Obama (McCain and all the other progressives) we wouldn't have the Tea Party! So I will not lament another 4 years of Obama, as that might provide the energy required to right this floundering ship in one fell swoop, and not some continuation of this smoke and mirrors program the establishment is so fond of.

Go Proud in 2012 and GO PAUL!

Ron Paul 2012!

And somebody please wake up Alexander.

Cheer up, and look at the bright side... If it wasn't for Obama (McCain and all the other progressives) we wouldn't have the Tea Party! So I will not lament another 4 years of Obama, as that might provide the energy required to right this floundering ship in one fell swoop, and not some continuation of this smoke and mirrors program the establishment is so fond of.

Go Proud in 2012 and GO PAUL!

Ron Paul 2012!

And somebody please wake up Alexander.

I will come right out and say that if Romney or Perry gets the nomination, I will vote for a third party candidate or write-in Ron Paul. And I would do that even if I knew my one vote would cause Obama to be re-elected. I believe we would be worse off with either of the above as President than Obama. At least the Republicans in Congress (with a majority in the House and possibly picking up a majority in the Senate) will fight to block Obama's agenda. If Romney or Perry proposed the EXACT SAME THINGS then Republicans in Congress, like sheep, would go along with them.

If Cain or Gingrich gets the nomination, it will be a difficult decision for me between voting third party or holding my nose and voting GOP. Right now I lean toward a protest vote. Either of them would have a lot to do to convince me to vote for him.

If Bachmann gets the nomination, I will probably vote for her, but won't actively campaign for her or send her any money.

If Ron Paul gets the nomination I will enthusiastically campaign for him and send him as much money as I can afford!

At this time I would vote for Cain. The others are unreliable and does not have the business sense that Cain has. Even though Cain doesn't have the world wide experience of foreign affairs, I think his common sense and integrity will bring us in the right direction. I absolutely will not vote democrat, and use to be a democrat.

Newt has strong leadership skills and a great knowledge of foreign affairs. If he was nominated I would vote for him. But I will not not not vote for a democrat. Just hope Cain or Newt get the nomination for the GOP.

I cannot believe you gave Rick Perry and Mitt Romney both a 6. Mitt Romney takes the cake as a RINO. I AM VERY disappointed. I am so upset with these two choices in their "non professional" and "non presidential" behavior in the last debate. I am not going to vote for either of these two if either one of them are the GOP nominee. I will write in my choice. The country deserves another term of Obama if either one of these two unprofessional clowns gets the nomination.

RP I have supported for years and now I'm backing off. The reason and what I have witnessed as I have covered every step is his mental recognizance is not as sharp as years past. It comes with age and that is the problem I think. All it takes is a video clip of him in 1988 and present. His wisdom has not changed, his voting record has not changed. He is has a Rutter on the constitutional boat welded in place. You can count on RP. But I say this because I have deep respect for the man. The office of the united states requires a very sharp mind and a body that is in 100% shape to handle the complex requirements of it. Watch him walk on stage and you see the swagger. It comes with old age. He has a place in high government in 2013 and on. But not President. I love the man and I want to see him go down with the respect he deserves. MY focus is now on his son Rand Paul. For I use the scripture in Proverbs "Train up a child in the way he should go and he will not depart from it." Rand Paul is our nations future leader.

Romney is essentially "McCain 2012". He is the Republican establishment "Cocktail Party" choice, and if elected would not undo the damage the current administration has done. He is basically a "DIRC" (Dem in Repub Clothing).

If you folks support Romney or Perry I guess that Obama will win again. Great job you folks are doing, just like the folks on Foxnews the media elite.

As for me and my house we are voting for Cain or Paul.

I would like to see Cain and Paul join forces they are the best and only Statesmen that are running.

To: Mark, above

Mr. Alexander is awake, and blowing his trumpet. I think someone needs to wake you up so you can get with the program.

Look at the state of our country's economy. Get the financial numbers. Look at the debt and the annual deficit, and compare those amounts to our annual tax receipts. Have someone help you to comprehend the perspective of the relative size of those numbers. I know trillions and billions are hard for most people to wrap their brains around. Look at our unemployment. Look at how our innovation and manufacturing has been on the decline while we relish our service economy (all the important stuff like nail salons and personal trainers). Consider the high percentage of our population that doesn't pay federal income taxes, that is dependent on government, that is then being supported by the taxpayers. Consider taxpayers as really TAX SLAVES because that is exactly what they are, and then ask yourself who is fostering the slave trade. And consider that the government-dependents, despite not paying income taxes, are still allowed to vote. And consider that they universally vote for pandering politicians who will give them more entitlements. Consider the fact that there ARE career politicians who stay in office by pandering for votes. And they often end their political careers more wealthy than can be accounted for by their congressional salaries. How does that happen? And consider the trend in the dependent-class percentage of our population. That number hasn't been up and down with no net increase over time. It has shown a steady ramp upwards.

What's our future going to be like? Insolvency.

Go ahead and hope for an object lesson if we indeed get 4 more years of Obama and his Democrat socialists. But I wouldn't count on it because by then, our "floundering ship" might just be at Davey Jones' locker.

You failed to mention that Perry was the Texas chairman of the Gore 1988 campaign. Without the word Texas, you are misleading your readers. Shame on you for acting like the mainstream media!

Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air.

Mitt Romney is a delusionist. He is a member of a cult. As a member of the Morman Faith, he believes he will become a God, equal or better than Jesus Christ Himself, A N D be given his own planet to be God over.

He may be a good business man, a good debater (so was Obama...) and have deep pockets - like Obama - but he has deep beliefs that are troubling.

Do we really want this for our national leader?

I believe Newt's strongest point imo is that he doesn't attack the other republicans and thus not giving the dems any fodder for next year. It frustrates me to no end when the others lambaste each other instead of enemy #1, Obama. I do like Newt and would certainly love to watch him lay to waste Obama in any debate.

Regarding the Republican candidates.

Ok, lets just consider those who scored 5 or above. That would include Cain, Gingrich, Perry, and Romney. Look at their list of "cons". Only Cain and Gingrich appear to be solidly conservative, based on the cons that are listed. Both Perry and Romney seem to have, or have had, flirtations with the immoral liberal ideology, in one way or another.

Maybe Cain and Gingrich should consider being running-mates. That might make a strong ticket. Stong or not, I still would have doubts about either of them. I'd trade them both for a solid conservative like Walter E. Williams.

Don't agree with your low assessment of Michele Bachmann. She's intelligent, articulate and a true Constittional conservative. Having said that, I would prefer to see her as the next Speaker of the House where I believe she would be most effective.

From what we have to pick from, in so far as presidential material goes, it would have to be Newt because he has the junk yard dog intellectual capacity to take opponents apart piece by piece and the Washington savvy to know how to get thing's done. He has baggage, no doubt. But nobody is squeeky clean. Jesus Christ is not available. I can overlook baggage for someone I can respect and have confidence in both domestically and in international relations, the latter of which will probably become far more critical in the very near future requiring the strongest leader we can muster, something we do not currently have. If any of the other people running become our champion I fear we're doomed to have Obama for four more years with our only hope to keep him at bay being control of the house and senate. Newt is the pick of the litter and if he selects the right running mate he'll likely be unbeatable given the unrest in our beloved country right now Obama has created. Four more years of Obama could result in our domestic unrest becoming far more hot, "hot" being a euphemism for something far worse based on my perspective. The tipping point could be the collapse of the European union, which precipates world wide financial failure where the majority of peoples' savings dissapear; Bernie Madoff on steroids. From what I see this is imminent. We're in a very pecarious situation right now, unprecedented from my view and I'm a student of history among other thing's. If what I suspect happens, comes to fruition, California's budget problems will look like a model of perfection.

Newt is my first pick. His political career is tempered by his knowledge and understanding of American History, the evolution of America to present day conditions at home and in relation to the nations of the world, and his ability to convey his convictions and ideas to the people.

But most convincing is his history of getting things done. And having served successfully and productively as Speaker of the House, he has been in line for the presidency and his nature would predispose him to thoroughly prepare for that possibiity.

It was his contract with America and the .COM bubble that balanced the budget, not Clinton's expertise. We need Newt Gingrich to restore America.

For one I'm a Tea Party supporter from day one, under the RP umbrella.

I'm not a centrist and I back that with this scripture.

"But since you are like lukewarm water, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth!

Romney is a flip flopper as he has been a Centrist.

I have spit him out of my mouth of support for his Centrist stand.

If we are to be a moral nation we can't mix oil and water and shake and expect it to be a clear vision for the nation.

I hate to say this but I think it is the truth.

We only have 2 choices at this time.

1. Socialism

2. Founding Father Constitutionalism.

That's the blend we have in America at present.

Those are hot and cold principles.

When you mix light and dark you get Gray.

Oil and water and you have a congress we have today.

That is Centrist thinking. 9% approval rating in Congress tells the story that Oil and Water don't mix and no one sees a clear vision out of congress.

We the People are spiting congress out of our mouths.

The last thing we need is to stay the course of Centrist views and leadership.

We have supported a centrist government and we got a real mess on our hands.

Romney is just adding more gas to the fire.

Founding Father Stead fastness for me.

To: Ruth Ford

Yeah, maybe our field of GOP candidates are weak. And maybe we can find some bad in all of them, but if either Perry or Romney get the nomination, as you mentioned, please don't write-in a candidate! You'd only be helping Obama. Come on, put your disappointment aside and think about what you'd be doing. America doesn't deserve another term of Obama, and considering all the damage Obama and his Democrat socialists have done and all the immoral ideology they stand for, if we all vote for the best conservative candidate out there, we shouldn't get a second Obama term.

Your editors and advisors are so far off on cons of Ron Paul that it's unbelievable. You sound like a bunch of librals. Ron Paul and Gary Johnson are the only strict constitutionalists in the bunch. Romney, Perry and Huntsman are RINOS, Santorum is a babe in the woods.

Ron Paul's intention to cut the military and ignoring other nations developing nuclear weapons is dangerous. One nation is going to be the most powerful military, economic and cultural presence in the world, and it better be the U.S. because it is the most peaceful nation and has the highest value of human life and peace. Isolationism doesn't work. Many historians believe that there was no second world war; that there was one war with a brief intermission because of the isolationist position America took in that intermission.

Rick Perry fits the description of the moral man Samuel Adams spoke of in the quote you provided. Perry has an abundant supply of the moral fiber and the passion for our country that will counteract the moral decay in Washington DC that is destroying us. Good policies are important. But without sound, moral leadership, the kind of leadership Samuel Adams yearned for, America's future isn't worth a cup of warm spit.

I can't shake the feeling that Romney is a RINO. And, I don't like his debate technique, or rather lack of a technique and don't trust his foot-stomping reactions in serious debate. Newt's my guy!

Based on Cain's consistently conservative views and leadership, I'd rate him 6 or 7, Romney and Perry 4.

I agree with the comments currently made.

Mad old man,

Ron Paul has been sheltered in a bubble much like Obama. After decades, he has not led in Congress for solutions that would restore our Republic. He simply attacks or rants about his utopian vision which appeals to youth. We need a statesmanlike leader. Paul also does not defend our national security which is one of the few federal duties he has sworn to uphold. He's the one whose views sound more left wing in that area. His following is narrow and petulant. Not a national leader. Focus on the Constitution is great. We need leaders who rally a majority via sound, practical policy solutions.

It'll be Cain or Gingrich...if we want to keep the Republic. Which is Pres is up for grabs by example. If the Republicans falter on this, finished--with the Dems and all the rest of US.

Ron Paul is a military veteran with the highest support of our military. The active military have given him more contributions that Pres. Obama and ALL the other candidates combined. He is the only candidate able to differentiate between Defense and Militarism. He is the only candidate whose record matches his strong advocacy of our constitution that protects a free people. Yes he has a problem with foreign aid in general for example that when you look at the money we give Israel, we give Israel's enemies 4 times more. Ignore him and marginalize him at your own risk.

Paul, Cain or Bachmann are your only REAL choices to unravel the mess that the liberals and Rinos like Romney and Perry have created - seems like you made a typo - should have read "lower the number the better"!

The first time I registered to vote, I registered as a Democrat for the sole reason that I hated Richard Nixon. I hated him because he was a lying, scheming professional politician.

Herman Cain is honest, even brutally honest at times, and is NOT a professional politician. His lack of political experience is a BIG plus with me and I really don't care about any candidates foreign policy. It's the economy stupid and there is none better than Cain for this.

He will be our next president and we can all thank God for that.

Newt Gingrich is precisely the corrupt man that Samuel Adams warned us against. Clearly, Gingrich corrupted the Speakership. Clearly, he betrays sacred oaths, including religious and marriage oaths, then whitewashes what he has done. Cleary, he has fabricated a life story for himself and clearly convinced many that the fabrication is true.

Gingrich's idea to establish an imperial presidency is enough to make the hair stand up on the back of my neck. He has already made it known that as president he would use Executive Orders to bypass the Judiciary. And if would use Executive Orders to bypass the Judiciary and get away with it, he will use Executive Orders to bypass the Legislative branch too. He is NOT the smartest man in the room but it is astounding how cleverly he has managed to fool intelligent people into believing he is the smartest man in the room. What Gingrich has done is simply accumulate information and, because he has no conscience, he distorts facts, warps the political history of this country, and forms his own version of facts and history to suit his own agenda. Make no mistake about it, he has a dangerous agenda.

Gingrich is the epitome of the moral decay that is now stinking up Washington DC. After all, Barack Obama is merely a Marxist and we know what Obama is doing: layering marxism atop the Constitution of the United States. Gingrich is more of a threat to our system of government because Americans are ignorant of what kind of charaltan Gingrich is. He would disrupt our government by wreaking havoc of our constitutional system of checks and balances. I tremble to think what would happen if Gingrich was president.

Romney scares me, toooo centrist too much politician, I like Cain, not a politician, would bring good strong policies smart enough to seek answers from knowledge advisors[ Military etc] think he and Gingrich would make a great team for the sake of the country and i believe that is the most importand concern we the people have at this juncture of history.

I have heard this man speck in public and he is by far the best canditate. Knows his stuff and how to put it accross. I like the fact that he does not attak the others.

Everything she says sounds good. She will never win the nomination because she is a woman.

We in Texas see Rick Perry's immigration stance as very strong. Until the feds help securing the border, we need the instate tuition break for these illegal children who came to Texas thru no fault of their own, have attended Texas schools for past 3 years and are pursuing path to citizenship. Rick is strong on everything except debating...and no, he is not the worst, George W. was. I love "W", but see him as more moderate, not conservative as Rick.

His platform of 9-9-9 hits the middle class too hard. And even those in the poverty zone. Besides, his cancer will probably return and he would die in office. I will not vote for him.

Today's quote of the day (10/28) from Samual Adams sums up exactly the reason our country is failing. We have men and women seeking and gainining public office who have no integrity, character, fear and love of God, and who are power-lust and filled with evil thoughts and tendencies which they have no fortitude nor grace to abandon.

Also, on the vaccine, it was voluntary. I know as my doctor asked me if I wanted to give it to my granddaughter who is in my care about 5 years ago. I chose not to do so, but that was a mistake. Now that she is nearly 16, I wish I had done so. It was not mandatory.

this man would be a great President and has the countries best interest in his plans, I pray he gets elected

Newt is definitely the smartest of all the candidates. I do not think his marriages should have anything to do with whether or not he gets the nomination. His stance on global warming is what bothers me. For someone so smart, how can he be so dumb as to believe in that?

Ron Paul should just take himself out of the race right now. He can save himself from embarrasement later on, because he does not have a chance

Clearly, the Republican Party can find no one who I believe ought to have the privilege and honor of being elected president.

Romney and Gingrich are terrifying. Romney as a RINO who ought to change party designation as Alan Specter did. Gingrich, as House Speaker, proved incapable of leadership and has no personal integrity.

Ron Paul is a libertarian utopian who would rather the U.S. be unable to defend herself against terrorists and invaders.

Perry is an extremeist who is a coward.

Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann haven't a chance and neither should.

Cain is really the only sensible one of the bunch. But I think he sounds tough now but when things get rough, he would cave in.

I am a Texan and wanted very much to believe in Rick Perry. Since he used to be a Democrat, I do not think he would be a strong conservative. I do not like his stance on immigration and he comes across in the debates as being arrogant. We certainly do not need any arrogancy in the office of the president of the U S.

Mit Romney's "Big government establishment Republican" con should perhaps be listed as a bigger pro than con. When looking at the big picture it is more unifying to the GOP and nation as a whole than it is detracting from being a patriot.

Mitt Rommney is not truly conservative. I am afraid of him on health care issues and he has had too many flip-flops. I would definitely not vote for him for the GOP nominee. He just does not seem like good presidential material.

Elaine: please read Todd's quote from Ronald Reagan above:

"Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.” – Ronald Reagan

You are incorrect and falling under the spell of the mainstream media to say that Paul would weaken our defense. He wants to do no such thing.

There is a difference between defense and militarism - please stop lumping it all together under "defense."

Like you say, there is not much to say about him. I can't say that I disagree with him on any of the issues; he has done well in the debates about letting people know how he feels. He looks awfully young; don't know if he has had enough experience to lead a nation. He would certainly do better than what we have. I don't think he will ever get enough votes to be the nominee. Sounds like a good man though.

All the candidates have some great qualities and as any mortal, some flaws--some large and some not so.

Bachman is energetic but at times glib and rely's too much on talking points and does not provide details.

Cain is incredibly likable but provides so little detail, and his "adjustment" to his 9-9-9 plan (9-0-9) shows a clear lack of understanding the process. He would be an asset in any administration, but not as the leader.

Paul, way ahead of everyone as it relates to "the Fed" and banking issues but is puzzling on some important policy issues--like Iran, although I strongly agree with his stance on bringing home U.S. troops from Europe and Korea. We can't continue to be the world's police force--that is part of the reason we have so much debt.

Gingrich, I agree with the sentiments of most of the respondants the he is clearly the smartest and most articulate. Smart doesn't always result in the correct answer, but at least it is an attempt to do what's right. Previous marriage issues and politcal baggage would probably prohibit his election but his intelligence and energy are enjoyable to experience.

Santorum, is strong principled, but how did he lose his last Congressional election? Hard to nominate or elect someone who last attempt at office was such farce. And his stance on reinstating "Don't Ask Don't Tell" is puzzling. How many times did we hear about many career soldiers, doing outstanding jobs, that were outed by someone--usually not in the military. Oh that the critics of that policy would have been as hard on the heterosexuals that exerted constant and repeated sexual advances and threats on female soldiers (I realize it can go the other way but the instances are very rare) and were almost never were dismissed from the military--let alone disciplined.

Perry, what a disappointment. I did not know much about the man but made an assumption that having been governor of a large state for so long was a good manager and understood what he was getting into when he entered the race for the nomination. We need a strong figure (and figurehead, unfortunately) to run against the incumbent but Mr. Perry seems to have difficulty explaining his positions.

Romney, from the standpoint of appearance and providing answers in campaigning and debates is the prototypical "Obama" of the Republican party. If the voters look at his candidacy with the same glibness as they did with Obama then Romney could easily be the next President. As for his substance, he has changed his positions on so many important issues and if he were elected I have no clue as to what our president would stand for.

I am far from making up my mind but will probably hold my nose and vote for whomever the Repubs nominate.

One general comment, the issue of whether a candidate served or did not serve in the military is a non-issue for me. I commend those who do, but serving does not provide some automatic understanding of issues of defense or of patriotism. I never served but appreciated those who did and what freedoms and protections they provided. The larger issue related to the military is not decisions whether our troops can handle the job (they have demonstrated clearly they can) but rather when is the best time and way to use them. This is a question that has become incredibly complicated due to the changes in warfare, starting with Vietnam and going forward to the current day. Standing armies of nationstates rarely attack other countries and so America as the world's police force has to end.

Mit Romney's "Big government establishment Republican" con should perhaps be listed as a bigger pro than con. When looking at the big picture it is more unifying to the GOP and nation as a whole than it is detracting from being a patriot.

Herman Cain is the best candidate I've seen in easily 12 years. He's straightforward about his thoughts and he doesn't take himself or others too seriously. The man can joke w/o being condescending and I LOVE THAT.

As far as his qualifications to lead an economically broken nation, he has a history of coming in and fixing bad businesses, which could easily be extrapolated and applied to the state of this country. He has good economic sense and that far outweighs anything else in this election.

Think he is the BEST qualified for the presidency, so far. Makes the other candidates look like a bunch of children.

Probably has no faith, as he stears away from any religion or mention of God/Christ. Think he is a fake.

His son would have made a better candidate than he.

Hey Folks, I don't understand your ratings. An explanation would be helpful or did I miss it?

Unless I missed it I'm not sure how the PP ranking system works. I see 3,4,& 6 rankings for the candidates but no 1,2,& 5 rankings. Is 3 high and 6 low or just the opposite? At any rate I will support Cain since he is smart, straight-forward, honest, self-made and doesn't insult others. Very diplomatic!

The only three that merit discussion are Mitt, Perry, and Newt. The most qualified as far as job creation but lacks the ability to articulate on national and international levels is Perry. Mitt is a scary RINO and doesn't relate to average Americans and small business owners. That leaves Newt who was also Clinton's shoe shine boy when it came to compromise. Our only hope is to draft Paul Ryan at the Republican Convention. Other than Newt who is unelectable , Ryan gives us our best chance. He to will launch a verbal assault on Obama that he cannot recover from.

Was leaning toward Cain, but when he changed his stance on abortion I changed my mind.

I have to wonder what you guys are thinking when Romney ("mirrors Democrat tax policies; ... left of George W. Bush") and Perry ("disconcerting that Perry lacks deep conservative roots") get 6 ratings. Neither is a genuine conservative. And Ginrich the other 6 rating, for all his strengths, is a moral weakling. If the best we can come up with is a 6 out of 10 for a candidate, I think Obama may enjoy another four more years in the White House.

I have to wonder what you guys are thinking when Romney ("mirrors Democrat tax policies; ... left of George W. Bush") and Perry ("disconcerting that Perry lacks deep conservative roots") get 6 ratings. Neither is a genuine conservative. And Ginrich the other 6 rating, for all his strengths, is a moral weakling. If the best we can come up with is a 6 out of 10 for a candidate, I think Obama may enjoy another four more years in the White House.

I like the one-arm tackdown of Obama; what more need be said? I'd bump Newt to 7...it's time to get together and create a winner who will also have the potential to be great.

I read your appraisel of the contenders and naturaly assumed that you rated them as you would a golf game; the lower the score the better. In that context the numbers make sense but if considered inversely none at all. This election will, perhaps more than most, call for the anti-politician with proven executive experience, indeed it must be framed that way if America is regain her position in the world. An amateur has had nearly three years and made a mess of everything he's touched. We need a statesman and not a politician to undo the damage. I think the democrats have destroyed any chance of future by-partisanship but the effort to achieve it must be made anyway. As much as I loathe what they stand for the Democrats do represent a piece of the electorate and their voice needs to be heard.

I am very confused about your rating system and disagree with it thoroughly. (Which is very strange, since I agree with most everything you say in the Patriot Posts by and large.) Romney and Perry are false and sure to prove themselves turncoats at the first opportunity. Why are they "frontrunners" when they're failing in the polls. This reminds me of last election when Obama won because somehow McCain won the primary and too many Republicans thought he was a RINO. Who cares if they have name recognition? It will be the same outcome if one of them wins the primary! What we don't need to do is shoot ourselves in the foot on this one.

I really like Cain and I think your assessment of him is fair - but your assessment of Ron Paul was not. To be completely honest, Ron Paul is the only one that will be able to fix the horrific situation our country is in. He may not have the foreign policy angle as well in hand, but he has the strongest and most concrete GOOD ideas about domestic policy that may seem outrageous - BUT ONLY BECAUSE THE SITUATION WE'RE IN CALLS FOR DRASTIC MEASURES! "Nut job"? That is truly disappointing. The only reason people may think that is that conservatives are too cowardly to speak up.

Dear “Presidential Aspirants” this is what we the "electors" want, please include it in your program if you really care about us.

Warren Buffett, in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best quotes about the debt ceiling:

"I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law that says that any time there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election.

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971... before computers, e-mail, cell phones, etc. Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.

Warren Buffet is asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise. In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.

*Congressional Reform Act of 2011*

1. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no

pay when they are out of office.

2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security. All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.

3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12. The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work. If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.

THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS

I believe Romney's cons will be his undoing. The people of this nation who are sick and tired of big government will have a tough time getting behind someone who has flip-flopped on some of the key issues of this nation. Business sense can be a great plus for a nation that is on the brink of falling into a crap hole it may never climb out of. People will have to know they can trust him before they will vote for him with his past support of issues which most Tea Party supporters do not like. These are sure to slap him in the face once the campaign gets down to the brass tacks.

let's put it this way,if you don't liberty,you lose all you have right now,I69 opens south border to mexico and north border to canada so now there's no stopping what comes next.the government has been working on this a long time,the government is going to depopulate than have a mass immigration,thinking this is the way out of this debt.

I like Newt and always have. I also like Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann. I like what they stand for and their desire to get this country back to what it used to be. A great super producing nation with a solid economy and taxation under control to the point the companies of this nation can afford research and development, thereby providing new products and more jobs. Also we were not ran nor had our lives so dictated by the environmental movement which wishes to control the world.

Michele Bachmann is solid in where she stands and lets you know it. Herman Cain is this way as well.

Newt is the man, but can he overcome his past?

If we do not get someone in there this next go around, this country is about done and we may well be wearing red stars in the future. Our politicians are selling us down the river to the Chinese, Japanese and others who have the money to loan. The U.S. who literally saved the world in WWII and also paid most of the bill to rebuild it.

We need a staunch, solid conservative as president or we are had.

even with the con's Herman Cain would run rings around Obama. His common sense straight forward way of speaking is what America needs and wants.

Mark, first thanks for this analysis and thanks for all of your service during and after the military....if America survives as a freedom loving Representative Republic it will be because of Patriots like you.

In response to your analysis, I think much of it was great and unafraid.....willing to say the hard things.

I would argue that Perry cannot be ranked even with Newt or Herman Cain. The "you have no heart" if you don't agree with instate tuition for illegals is a TOTAL disqualifier for me...in substance and tactics it is pure liberal democrat. And the fact that as you point out his debate skills are "the worst ever witnessed" in my view would have to take his rating down far more than you've done here. I'd give him a 2 or 3. (If you accept that Newt and Cain are 5/6)

Second, you say upfront that electability is not a consideration but nearly ALL of the positives for Romney go to electability....looks presidential, smooth talker, strong campaign organization, good name recognition, etc. etc. So, IF electability were part of the analysis then I'd agree that Romney would probably be about even with Newt and Cain, but if electability is NOT part of the analysis then Romney should trail Newt and Cain (and Santorum and Bachman) by a couple points at least. (Not sure why you have such a tight scale....essentially 3-6. I think if you expanded that you could show some daylight where some exists.)

I was a Paul Ryan fan....and there just isn't a Paul Ryan in this group. Would like to see him as VP though...

Michele would be a sound cabinet pick for the next president, a republican president of course.

Rick is a young, principled man of outstanding integrity whose word & convictions do not waver. He is unflappable in the debate ring & does not back away when challenged. He is unequivocally conservative & educated on all major issues. Why he has received so little atention is beyond me. Why the republicans favor those whose waffle on key issues or are only slectively conservative defies logic.

Clearly, Newt is an incredible candidate. He has everything a candidate should have, experience, knowledge, and wit.

Unfortunately, he has baggage.

Let's hope that rather than carry the baggage of a big mistake in 2008, we can swap for a winner.

America needs a leader. A leader who knows what to do.

I live on the Arizona border. Illegal immigration, drugs, fires that burned two of our forests & homes. He would not support Agent Jesus Diaz - "a federal matter". Herman Cain is my choice. Like Newt also, clear spoken, but....

Mr. Cain possesses a very important Pro with me: he's a washington outsider; I see no Cons.

Herman Cain gets my support and my money. He is a proven conservative business man who will be wise enough to surround himself with the cream of the crop of conservatives, first, politicians, second, which will be a complete reversal of the current cream of the crap surrounding BO.

"Icing on the cake!"

He will, after all, be the first Black American President. (He considers himself a "Black American," not an African American!

The facts are - Bill Clinton claimed to be the first "Black President," (don't recall him using the word American,) and BO, who is half white, even though he chose not to accept that fact, and in many of our opinions he certaily doesn't think like an American.

Enough of that - I don't understand your rating system, but in my rating system, Herman Cain, the non-politician, is number 1.

My husband and I are Texans and have lived under all of Gov. Perry's administrations. He is a good governor. Texas is the best proof of his effectiveness. He is not a smooth talker, but you can rest that he means what he says. Should some of his ideas not be popular or are proven to be unacceptable to the citizens of Texas, Gov. Perry has dropped the issues--never to bring them forth again. When he makes a mistake, he is man enough to admit it. In Texas, a man's word is his bond. That is at the heart of Gov. Perry's approach to his job as governor. What the Republican elite do not seem to understand, we do not another slick, flip-flop politicians whose modus operandi is "business as usual." We want CHANGE from bloated, interfering government to government for the people. We want God back in our public lives. We want honest, straight-forward policies without twists, lies and dishonesty. Fed Up states well what he believes and I think it outlines what he will deliver to the nation. He is smart enough to understand his weaknesses and will select the brightest and best as advisors. That means he will select people with real-life experience as opposed to east coast ivy league theorists. In short, I believe that Gov. Perry has the insight, intelligence, and honest work-ethic to guide our nation through this present quagmire to a place of national stability and international prominence.

I'll take the comment by Phil Hutson and repeat it because it's simple, TRUE, and makes the point.

He said: "NEWT GINGRICH:[Pros: Smarter than the rest of the slate, combined; incredibly articulate; straight up conservative with strong track record and leadership;] If for NO other reason than that above, this man should be President. His "pros" far exceed his "cons", and are far more meaningful when talking about the qualities of the President of the U.S.!

If given a choice between Newt and Obama in the election, Republicans will put aside their "past" feelings and vote for him hands-down! He TRULY is the ONLY one that would whip Obama's ass in any debate, and reverse the Socialist mandate now being crammed down our throats!!!

Posted October 27, 2011 at 12:50:42 PM"

AMEN. I don't give a hoot for the "perfect" candidate. We are not electing a "god"--- only one person. And that one person faces not only 535 dunderheads/cowards/traitors in Congress who are wary of upsetting the apple cart; this person CANNOT do more than start the ball rolling on a monstrous and entrenched bureaucracy where NO ONE wants to lose their gubmint job. I want the Republicans to run SOMEONE who can kick Oblahblah's behind. From the first moment I heard Newt speak, I was impressed with his ability to speak well, think well, and react as a President rather than a pipsqueak, punk, street fighter like the scum that now infects OUR white house! The GOP blew it in the last election; they darned well better smarten up along with the rest of the posters here about REALITY we face. I know you all have some great ideas and strong opinions about your choices, and you all may be absolutely right in your opinions! The only problem is that the timing is not right. This simply cannot be about single issues, a person's faith (or lack thereof), skin color, or even experiences. THIS ELECTION MUST BE ABOUT TOSSING BO TO THE CURB--- PERIOD! Now, be honest and ask yourself which candidate can WIN--- because winning THIS election is only the start of a process that will take a generation or more to repair. No, we won't change the world with one election---UNLESS we lose! Are you willing to risk that? I'd go for a Newt/Herman or Herman/Newt any day--BECAUSE THEY CAN WIN, and that is something you ought to consider as well Mr. Alexander.

You boys fail the nut job test in my opinion. Ron Paul has consistently shown fidelity to his oath to protect and defend the constitution for his entire adult life. The JBS has given him a score of 100 on the freedom index quarterly for two decades. He is the only candidate that is a strict construction constitutionalist, which is to say he interprets what is actually written and not what he can make the document say for personal gain or to drive an agenda. The 10th amendment is very clear concerning the power the national government has and Dr. Paul insist we obey the law. The constitution is very clear on many issues confronting us today and has not empowered the national government to address them. You may assign a 3 to Ron Paul but all that does is undermine your credibility . Dr. Paul is not an isolationist, he is a non-interventionist. This was the official policy established by George Washington and maintained for a hundred years after our founding as a nation. The wars our nation has fought since the creation of the Federal Reserve has served to enrich a few at the expense of the many. My uncles fought against Hitler and the Japanese. My brothers fought against the Chinese and North Koreans and the North Vietnamese. My son was killed in Iraq. Today we have a Marxist in the white house but the only alternative offered was a Republican who supported an establishment agenda not very different than Leon Trotsky or Adolph Hitler. Dr. Paul believes in a strong national defense but is opposed to the militarism used to impose an American empire on the world while simultaneously destroying our sovereignty with a crushing indebtedness . Dr. Paul is the only candidate advocating a restoration of our constitutional republic and a restoration of a free market free enterprise system with sound money as required by the constitution, the law of the land. The word patriot refers to our founders philosophy of limited government which means very few limitations on liberty. For you to assign higher ratings to neo conservative establishment shills really says more about you than anything else. Dr. Paul should receive your highest rating.

My husband and I have been very impressed with Mr. Cain's 999 plan, his very successful business background, his energetic and determined rise in the polls (when he was close to the bottom of the polls, he SAID he would soon rise to the top). He may be "short on foreign policy"; but Newt Gingrich is not; and Cain said he would like him as his VP. If Cain wins the presidency, I hope he will choose someone else who would be a strong VP, and use Gingrich as an advisor. I hope he would ask Dick Morris to be an advisor, as well. Personally, I see no reason why Bachmann wouldn't be a good VP. IMO, especially after hearing and seeing him in person today at a very enthusiastic rally, Herman Cain is the ONLY current GOP candidate for whom I would vote. Paul is too old. Perry is an egotistical show-off and he's shallow, IMO. Romney, IMO, would be almost as dangerous to our nation as Obama. Santorum turns me off with his sarcasm, arrogance, and lack of substance. IMO, none of the others are even in the race, except Bachmann; but unfortunately, just her being a woman is not in her favor. Why, I don't know. We've had 43 MALE presidents now; and Obama who was "seated" as "president" via voter fraud, and George Soros' billions. IMO, of the 44, I would say only five of them were outstanding, pro-God, pro-America presidents. So why NOT give a female candidate a chance??? Still, I will vote for Herman Cain. He's the man!

Jane Adams, with all due respect for your opinion, I must disagree re: Rick Perry. I know a LOT of Texans, and have heard those, as well as others I don't know, say they would NOT vote for him for reasons that are opposite of yours. Also, considering the times I've seen and heard him in the debates, I'm not at all impressed with him. He seems to be unprepared, too argumentative, and on the defense. He and Romney argue way too much, he comes across as being arrogant; and we've had more of that from Obama than we can tolerate. We don't need another arrogant president! The "biggie" is that I don't trust him to be conservative enough because he was Al Gore's campaign manager in the state of Texas - AL GORE, the man who has made "zillions" of dollars lying about "global warming", shaming Americans for not using our energy conservatively, while he drives two huge gas-guzzling SUV's, uses mucho fuel flying in planes, lives in a "humongous" house that is reportedly anything BUT energy-, etc.! I'm not a "green nut"; but I do believe in using our gifts from God sensibly. I don't believe in having "rules" for others and altogether different rules for oneself. The only GOP candidate, so far, who is NOT a politician is Herman Cain; and he has been an extremely successful businessman who could use that experience to implement the same plans and practices to clean up our corrupt "government"! His 999 plan makes perfect sense, and lower taxes sounds good to most Americans.

We used "the first black man to become president" to win an election, why not use the "first woman to become president" to win an election? Michele Bachmann Knows what this country needs. She knows the issues and has solutions. Make history again!!!Elect the first woman president!!! You could be a part of history by voteing for the first woman president!

Condy Rice would be a GREAT vice!!!

Actually Bachmann would be the best of the bunch but the Establishment Republicans hurt her chances just like Karl Rove and gang destroyed Christine O'Donnell's and Sharron Angle's political careers. I would love to see Cain , Santorum o Gingrich win the nomination = in that order. The rest of the candidates should make up the VP and Cabinet. including Ron Paul as Treasurer.

I disappointed and very concerned that YOU gave the two below two 6 ratings.

Romney = Big government establishment Republican is enough to eliminate him = RINO.

Perry = Once a Gore Democrat; he is NOT like Reagan who also defected from the Dems nor is he a conservative and his pro illegal alien policies disqualifies him also.

Merry Colin, you're right about Newt Gingrich being smart and articulate; but then he's had a LOT of experience along those lines. However, my guess is that you're not old enough to know the REAL Newt Gingrich. He HAS made some profound statements in the debates; but those of us who remember him from the past know he's NOT good at keeping his word. He has trouble following through re: plans he promises will be successful. Were you around, or old enough to understand, his so-called Contract with America, which fell flat? He had his chance and failed miserably. He was Speaker of the House, and lost out because of an ethics charge. One can be a genius and as articulate as they come and still fail; and Newt is positive proof of that. Also, Newt is NOT a "straight-up conservative"; and neither would Republicans "put aside their feelings from the 'past' and vote for him hands down". Republicans are not ABOUT to forget; and many have never forgiven Newt for his past mistakes that were very costly to the party; and to our country. It's one thing to have the brains, ability, and experience; but keeping one's promises is just as important, if not more so. I think he might be a good advisor to the new president, whom I hope will be Herman Cain. I love it that Cain's NOT a politician! I liked him in the debates; and it was not his fault that he was not allowed by the liberal Anderson Cooper to finish his reply after all of the other candidates ganged up on him in the Nevada debate. Cooper was giving Romney and Perry "overtime" to finish their childish arguments. He didn't give Cain even 30 seconds to explain his 999 tax plan. He didn't get past his "apples & oranges" analogy before being stopped - which was most unfair! Today, I heard him, in person, fully explain his plan to a large crowd of people who CHEERED & applauded him for a long time when he finished his explanation. Newt Gingrich had his chance and blew it. Now Herman Cain deserves his chance; and he's currently on top in the polls. Go, Mr. Cain! More power to you.

David, I don't understand your reasoning. Are you not aware that the LIBERAL so-called "mainstream media" chose John McCain as the Republican candidate in 2008? We didn't choose him! Now do you realize they're trying the SAME THING with Mitt Romney, who is probably more liberal than conservative? Do you realize Massachusetts had "Romneycare" before Obama rammed "Obamacare" down our throats, while a majority of American citizens DIDN'T want it? Mitt Romney is "bad news". Even if he could get enough votes to beat Obama (or whomever George Soros chooses to replace Obama for all his mistakes, bumbling, lying, failure, etc.) we would not be much better off than we are now. Please become informed and keep up. Herman Cain is not a POLITICIAN. He has fresh new ideas, and an actual PLAN. He's a man of character. He possesses AMERICAN values and principles. Most of all, he's pro-God and pro-America. He is even a gospel singer. He's highly and successfully experienced in the business world, which is worth more than gold if he is elected and uses that experience to clean up the corrupt mess in Washington. Why WOULDN'T any thinking, informed American citizen NOT want to have him as our president? Of course, there are those who are feeding at the "public" trough, (financed by us working taxpayers) who are still under the spell of their "anointed one". They don't even realize that "bus is headed straight toward them" if Obama is re-elected - via voter fraud and George Soros' billions, of course - like the last time.

I am concerned with our current cast of GOP candidates lack of focus on Obama. They seem to be more interested in each other rather than the goal of defeating the democrats across the board. They are alienating the minority voters which Obama already has a large base with. The group of minorities I know are discusted with Obama but scared of the GOP rederic in their direction. I do not like the liberal actions taken by law enforcement these past few weeks towards the wall street protesters. I agree they are a mixed up hosh-posh of ideas and suffer from an identity crisis of sorts but I do not like the local governments blindly sweeping these people up with violence and impunity. It is stated that freedom of peaceful gathering and protest is guaranteed. The mayor of anchorage publically annouced for example that any protestors would be arrested and fined for example. It is nationwide. I wish these people had a unified voice but the fact is that government as a whole is not doing it's job of protecting freedom, liberty and prosperity. Government is too big, too far away and too out of touch with everyday citizens. The government is involved in 40 different ways in our everyday life wether it be searches at the airport or taxes but no representation that we can truly influence. Big business has the reins to the country and we tax paying Americans are just the wheels that they roll on. Government has two real jobs. One is protect it's people from outside advances and dangers and two answer to it's people not just the wealthiest. Lobbiests are the poison in the punch bowl. Vote small goverment and vote often. Good luck and god bless

So, Elaine, whom do you suggest? A re-run of Obama, the worst "president" in the history of our nation?

I wouldn't be surprised if someone OTHER than he emerges from the DNC convention as the NEW liberal/socialist/"progressive" democrat candidate.

That's just how much DAMAGE he has done in less than three years.Can you imagine how much damage he would do in five MORE years? Perish the thought.He hasn't performed as his puppeteer, George Soros, planned. George is most likely very displeased with all of the mistakes his "chosen one" has made. Herman Cain is the only GOP candidate who is not a POLITICIAN. IMO, our electing him as our candidate would be the smartest thing to do. Then, since he actually has qualifications, & and a long list of them, including valuable, successful business experience, he could easily beat Obama, or any other liberal/socialist/"progressive" candidate. Then he could apply all of his qualifications to cleaning up the mess Obama and his minions have made. Wahla! We'd soon have our beloved country back!

Right on, Thatcher! All but one. Herman Cain is not a politician, he has fresh new ideas, and he has an actual plan! The other GOP candidates should bow out, get behind Cain, and help him help us take back our country! Cain is the man with the plan. Those who criticize it either haven't paid attention to his explanation of it, or just don't understand it. I heard it from him again, in person, today; and it made great sense to me. More power to him.

For Newt Gingrich, there are no pro's - just cons. He had his chance and blew it. He got into trouble on an ethics charge. There went his "Contract with America". He had some personal issues. He might still be a good one to consider as an advisor to the president, because he's had quite a bit of government experience, and he has hopefully matured some since his government-related failures. However, IMO, he is not presidential "material". Herman Cain is. He's not a politician, he has a plan, and he has lots of business experience from which to draw and apply to cleaning up our "governent" which has totally failed under Obama's NON-experience. Most of all, he's pro-God and pro-America! How refreshing.

My candidate is Rick Perry and I disagree that he lacks "deep conservative roots." Rick was more Conservative as a Democrat back in 1988 than Mittens Romney is today. And he was endorsing Al Gore because Gore was a lot more Moderate than the Hard Lefty, Michael Dukakis.

I really don't give a flying fig if my candidate is not a Master Debater. I want a real LEADER and what I know about Texans is they will boot your sorry butt OUT if you mess up in Texas. Rick Perry has been elected to 3 Terms as the Governor of Texas. He is doing a lot of what is right for the citizens of Texas, and will do the same for the nation.

We need a REAL Leader and a REAL Commander in Chief to boost this country's morale after our long national nightmare with Comrade Obozo. Perry will get this country going again with JOBS and common sense policies for record growth. Guaranteed!

Rick Perry - 2012 LOVE the Flat Tax!

I am a defector from the "Cain Train" several weeks ago. I decided to run him through my little "background machine" and didn't like what I saw. Herman Cain is not the man he portrays himself to be. He is a former Washington Lobbyist for the Tobacco, Liquor and Restaurant industries. He lobbied AGAINST a smoke free environment at eating places. I am not a Nanny Stater but I think this is one of the best things our inept Congress has done. I can take my kids out to a restaurant without having to choke on second-hand smoke, no thanks to Herman Cain.

He is also inviting trouble for using his Campaign money to finance his personal business, which is very unethical and has him being watched by the people who oversee campaign funds. He has been giving PAID speeches while on the Campaign trail, another violation. Herman always has an excuse for everything, and will probably cook one up for these infractions too. Frankly, his excuses are beginning to get very old. I wish he would just take responsibility for his actions and be done with it. He has lost my vote and Perry has picked it up. Perry is now my candidate and I proudly endorse him and support him for President. A REAL Leader and a REAL Commander in Chief.

I keep hearing "Herman Cain is not a politician." Well he most assuredly is now.

Why is Jon Huntsman excluded from the ratings? He may be the best qualified off all.

Re: candidate ratings.

Once again, left at the altar, where is the rating on Gary Johnson?

I dislike Obama intensely. I hate Perry.

Given the choice, Obama over Perry. At least Obama admits to being a snake. Perry pretends to be one of us, knowing full well he wasn't, isn't, and never will be.

G. Edward Griffin - The Collectivist Conspiracy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jAdu0N1-tvU

Thought provoking. Enjoyed it. However, in no way would I give the same score to Romney as Cain, Perry, or Gingrich. While probably not an evil person like we have in the White House now, he is too much of a big government flip-flopping RINO to ever get my vote. Frankly, if Romney is the the nominee, I will not be holding my nose in 2012 in order to cast my vote for him. I'll find a 3rd party candidate for whom to vote. No more big government RINOs for me. This nation is heading off the cliff at 100mph. Romney would slow our speed to 60mph. This is our salvation?

Cheer up, and look at the bright side... If it wasn't for Obama (McCain and all the other progressives) we wouldn't have the Tea Party! So I will not lament another 4 years of Obama, as that might provide the energy required to right this floundering ship in one fell swoop, and not some continuation of this smoke and mirrors program the establishment is so fond of.

Go Proud in 2012 and GO PAUL!

Ron Paul 2012!

And somebody please wake up Alexander.

I think we need someone that will challange Obama in a debate and actually beat him for the Presidency. I like Cain and if he should win the nomination he will need strong support in the WH and congress to accomplish his objectives however after that said my vote is for Gingrich. Thank you your comments on each candidate

I support Newt because of his wisdom and maturity. He also knows his way around Washington.

Obama would clean Perry's clock in debates!

To far left of center, as are most all moderates.

When given a choice would always take the political

route over Conservative Values.

Could well clean Obamas clock in debates.

And that would be a huge PLUS.

What's not to love about someone who shoots straight rather than go the "politically correct" route?

She and Palin need to join Jim Demint in the

King making process.

People are sick and tired of the double talk and lies coming out of Washington insiders. This is why Cain is gaining in populrity. I believe he will do just fine in Washington. When it comes to forign policy he will do just fine also as he is able to surround himself with those that know. Because of this he gets a 7 in my book.

What Herman Cain lacks in experience will be offset by wise cabinet choices. A president is not, and I dare say, has never been a "know it all". A statesman, as I believe Mr. Cain is, surrounds himself with men and women of like convictions of character. I pray that he will get the chance to represent the American Dream as our next president.

Gingrich is not steadfast in his beliefs or actions.

He has a tendency to please the enemy.

Romney is a mercenary elitist.

Newt is the best qualified all around candidate in all aspects of what it would take to be a WORTHY candidate for president of the United States, since Sarah Palin isn't running !! Rick Santorium comes in in second place in our book, a serious no nonsense fellow with all the attrbutes it would take to be a VERY good president !!!

Of the three candidates with a "6" rating, Newt is the only one about whom I am able to work up even the slightest enthusiasm, past picadillos nothwithstanding. We are all sinners.

From: female, senior citizen, life-long conservative.

Newt's baggage is no worse than anyone else's, and at least he is honest about his problems. Not involved with acorn or characters who wish to "change america". Knows how government works and understands world and local politics. There is no one better on the slate than Newt Gingrich.

Santorum is a passionate conservative with no real baggage. So what if he backed the establishment candidate in PA. So what if he lost his senate seat last time around as a conservative Republican in a liberal state. He has the right positions both fiscally & socially and he is a solid thinker with consistent positions. He is solid and predictable. He is not the typical politician that tells you what he thinks you want to hear. So why hasn't he gotten any traction? He is the least flawed candidate.

I don't like any of them. If I had to pick, Romney. A Perry id a grade C president, we already had a grade c president and look at the mess we're in. The problem is during the primary, they are playing, how far to the right can we go. this will kill us during the general election

Cain I despise for everything to include abolishing everything and raising my taxes to late now for a hero. His, "get a job" what job? stance. repackage the message.

My fellow American Patriots,

Each of the Republican candidates has something great to bring to the table for the benefit of America and her people. They also have failings, as we all do. Any one of them would be much better suited and more capable then that Ignorant, Arrogant, Incompetent and Highly Un-Qualified Shill that has lied, stolen, intimidated, bought and murdered(the babies who survived their "own Holocaust!" "Americas Holocaust." Gratuitous Abortion) his way into OUR White House!

What I would love to see is this... Whom ever wins the 2012 Presidency, that person should turn and say to the other candidates who ran for the position...

"I want you all to be members of my cabinet. I want you all to put aside the bickering that we're all guilty of in the past, and work with me to put OUR country back on track and restore the confidence of the Good, Decent, Legal, Law Abiding, Hardworking, Justly Retired, Highly Over Taxed, Put Upon, Abused and Ignored citizens of this great nation! OUR NATION! With all your help we CAN and WILL make the United States of America the most powerful, the most prosperous, the most generous,(to our REAL friends and alies) the most independent of foreign oil, the most respected, most feared,(by our enemies)the most productive, most commonsensed and stable country on the face of the Earth!!!"

This is what it will take to get OUR country back to where it should have been from the very beginning. But before this can take place in reality, those candidates running for this nations highest office must stop trying to discredit each other and consentrate on MAKING DAMN SURE THAT THE PERSON WHO NOW ARROGANTLY LANGUISHES IN OUR WHITE HOUSE AND INFECTS OUR COUNTRY, WILL NEVER GET A SECOND CHANCE TO CONTINUE HIS DESTRUCTIVE, DAMAGING DEATH GRIP! Lets all pull together to make sure that common sense, love of country and traditional values defeat everyone who has supported the present Tyranical administration.

J.J.B.Jr.(USN.RET.)

Romney gets the highest rating? Are you serious? If Mr. Global-Warming-RomneyCare is the best we have, we're in serious trouble.

My biggest problem with Mitt is that he is the epitome of an Establishment Republican and only associates himself with the Tea Party Republicans because he has to to win the nomination.

Cult member - disqualified! Obamacare father - disqualified! Pro-abortion, when not pressed on it - disqualified! pro-gay marriage - disqualified! Supports Al Gore's "global warming" lie - disqualified! How can you give this loser a 6 - a negative 10 is much more appropriate.

Newt is the only 'REAL' conservative who would radically change both the Republican party and the presidency. His stand up commitment would change political policy for a long time to come.

Unfortunately, he carries a lot of baggage from his prior terms in office that will hurt him with the independents around the country.

I could not wait to hear and see his debates with Obama as I believe he would bury him.

I really like Herman Cain but do not think he would have a chance as the nominee. But, how about a vice president candidate with Newt as the presidential nominee.

Wow, what a combo.

Can any of you tell me who would be a great debater against Obama. The only one that could do that and look Presidential would be Newt. Can you see Ron Paul during a debate???

We need someone that knows how to correct the mess we are in...Newt has more sense than any of the others....If we will give him a chance...........we should have one thing in mind...get our country back on the right track...Newt can do it....jhk

Almost unanimously, the conservative Texas Legislature passed legislation to allow children of illegal aliens who are living in Texas to receive in-state tuition rates at state colleges.

It was absolutely the right decision for many reasons.

Helping these children obtain a college education will prevent them from becoming part of a permanent underclass.

If the people of Texas want to spend their money in this way, it is completely inappropriate for persons from other states to criticize them for doing that. It's the right of a state to conduct its own affairs.

By showing an interest in helping Hispanics, the Texas Republican Party dominates the Lone Star State, resulting in solidly conservative government.

If you want to see what an anti-Hispanic attitude gets you, look at California, which was an unmitigated disaster for Republicans in the 2010 elections. This has horrible ramifications for many state governmental policies.

Milton Friedman supposedly once said words to the effect that he could see no possiblity of Congress reducing spending so the only way to limit it would be to reduce taxes hence reduce the amount available for spending. He was too trusting. The democrats counter strategy was to borrow and spend until taxes would have to be raised to prevent the nation going into default and bankruptcy.

Whose strategy has been more successful? So far the democrats are well in the lead. The real question is which of the Republicans will have the stomach for the fight. Newt? Maybe. Cain? Maybe. Romney? Unlikely. Perry? Unlikely. Bachman? Probably. Santorum? Probably. Paul? Probably. Anyone else? Not on the radar screen.

So far there is only one candidate that could beat Barack Obama and his socialist machine, and that is Newt Gingrich. I am sick of Romney and Perry and their rivalry. Those two are making the Republican party look bad. I love Michelle Bachman and what she stands for. She is a true patroit, as is Herman Cain, but, neither will be the nominee. From this moment on, my money is on Newt.

Herman Cain has impeccable work ethics and is a confident individual, and i'm sure he could offer a whole lot to the country as maybe Newts vice? It's true Herman, i heard you say it when you were filling in for Neal Boortz' radio program. With your business background you could work wonders for America. I love you buddy, but, here is my prediction: Newt will get the nod, and you will be chosen to be his vice president.

Former Senator Rick Santorum would be an exceptional Secretary of state, if not chosen to be the candidate for president.

When I read in the description this: "a demonstrated ability to abide by their prescribed oath "to support and defend" our Constitution" I was excited to see how you would rate the candidates on their understanding and commitment to the Constitution, but I found very little about that in your comments, for which I was disappointed. Could you do another one in which you focus on that?

ANybody who rates Rick Perry as a conservative has not done any research and has not paid attention in the debates. For instance, he says it's wrong to employ illegals but you don't have a heat if the taxpayers don't provide them with a free education while honest citizens have to pay out of pocket. What is the value of the college education if they can not get a job. He has done NOTHING to secure our border and would not as president. He has acted the dictator here in Texas an many issuse and constantly says one thing to the public and does the opposite. Only an insider way up in the Republican Party would back him. Look how much we spend on his living quarters.

I think Michelle Bachman and/or Hermain Cain are the two best choices for president. Their strengths are (1) They are not "politicians only" (2) are not always covering up how they believed before they knew better!! (3) have a strong faith and belief in the "Creator" from whom eveything originated: The triune GOD (Father, Son, Spirit)!!!

BHO doesn't look presidential either!

The Real Newt Gingrich

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWPz1Qdq1uI

Perry's Polls Drop Overnight…Perry Booed for Supporting ... A recent Rasmussen Poll released on August 23, 2011 showed 81% of Americans oppose in-state tuition for illegal aliens.

Email sent to Rick Perry in 2009 at site below.

Perry has not changed his position nor will I.

http://www2.governor.state.tx.us/contact/assistance.aspx

As other sates pass laws to make it harder for illegal aliens to take advantage of their citizens, Texas continues to welcome illegal aliens that are subsidized by hard working citizen taxpayers.

I wish to thank you Governor Perry for supporting discrimination against my fellow American citizens while using mine and my fellow Texans tax dollars to educate illegal aliens. Although federal law exist against this and many millions of Texans feel this is wrong, you stand tall for the illegal aliens getting higher education, no matter the harm done to my fellow citizens.

Not to mention that our children are suffering in their early education as more time is spent on the non-English illegal alien kids. How many billions of our tax dollars are going to support the illegal aliens education, housing, incarcerations, and health care?

Not to mention the 25 American citizens that are killed each and every day by illegal aliens that you help attract to my state. How many thousands of Americans are maimed or sexually assaulted by illegal aliens that Rick Perry welcomes?

Click here: Immigration Watchdog » Illegal Aliens Kill 9125 Americans Annually

I know your Greedy Rich corporate buddies like the fact you help provide them with cheap taxpayer subsidized labor and don't care how many laws are broken or how much We the People are taxed to support their cheap labor.

As a veteran I want thank you for selling out to illegal aliens, racist organizations (LULAC, La Raza, Reconquista), open border advocates (Chambers of Commerce) and corporate taxpayer subsidized cheap labor. How many Americans do you think died and or were maimed for life to pass this country on to future generations that you so eagerly give away to appease corporate and open border advocates?

http://www.alipac.us/article-3190-thread-1-0.html

Without question Herman Cain! We have to get it right THIS TIME!!! Would love to see a Cain/Ginrich ticket. This combiation would be solid. The media wil try to crusify whoever the GOP nominee will be, but Mr. Cain is coherent whereas The "Bomb" is incoherent.

Innitially I supported Bachmann, but have not been impressed with her since the Iowa Straw Poll.

I just DO NOT trust ROMNEY.........period!

I like Herman Cain, but Newt is the candidate to beat Obama. As far as Newt's moral issues, two words: Bill Clinton. Even if Obama was the most moral person in the world, which I doubt, how has that worked out for us? I am not excusing infidelity, but our country is in serious peril, and this is no time to be playing the "Gotcha" game.

I'm not behind any particular candidate. I find Gingrich fits my beliefs the most...but I'm not locked on him(yet).

I find this artical disgraceful. It's not a "Patriot rating", it's a "Patriot Post Rating." Before I would have thought they would be the same, but I guess I was wrong.

If i could give my own rating, this is how it would be. Judged on the PATRIOT RATING. Gingrich(9) Paul(9), Santorum(7), Bachman(6), Cain(5), Perry(4), Romney(4).

I believe that is the rating that the REAL Patriots would have given in 1776(they might have not even been that generous to Cain, Perry, and Romney)

I would like Romney/Cain ticket. Both men are accomplished businessmen. Romney has had massive experience with turning things around i.e. 400 companies, Salt Lake Winter Olympics. He understands the issues. I believe that he has matured on issues such as gun control. I also do not believe that Romneycare is a con. The plan was originally workable but has been corrupted by democrats since Romney left office as governor. This should be heavily defended and proved. I would like him to address issues not other candidates as Cain has. Herman Cain is a charismatic, genuine leader. Both men would be effective in the WH.

I agree with all your pros concerning Newt Gingrich, especially the one regarding his debate skills versus Obama. In light of the fact there will be 3 Presidential debates between Obama and the Republican nominee, Newt is, to me, the clear first choice. The audience of each of those debates will easily be over 100,000,000 people. Once everyone clearly sees how inferior Obama is relative to a really intelligent conservative Newt will win the national election, hands down. McCain and Obama were in the same league, intellectually. Obama vs Newt is no contest.

I'm hoping Newt keeps rising in the polls. I'm really wanting to see Newt "smack-down" Obama in the debate!! There would be no contest!

THE PROS IS HIS BUSINESS EXPERIENCE AND HIS BS

CONS; HE FLIP FLOPS ON TOO MANY ISSUES AS A TYPICAL POLITICIAN.

I am weary of the Rupublican Party establishment shoving the next guy in line down our throats. Mitt Romney is from the same cast as the Bushes, McCain, and Dole. Compromising for Romney is going to get us another Obama term.

EarsToHear.net endorses New Gingrich for three major reasons and as most other candidates have expressed or exhibited selective Constitutional principles: 1. He is the only candidate that can successfully confront Obama and progressives/Marxists. 2. He fully supports the principles of both the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, the Republic for which it stands, State rights and limited federal government, and America's foundational premise, "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God."  3. America's sovereignty, defense, rule of law, and free market enterprise. Which other candidate completely, without wavering, embraces fully, these founding principles?

I've been surveying the field. I'm looking for character that can do a good job delegating his philosophy to trusted conservatives. It is overwhelming what must be done in our Gov't to get it back on the right track. I give newt and Cain top marks for different reasons.

Newt has more knowledge in his head and also the ability to use it. However, he is what has been described as an ideas man. ?? He would need the trusted conservatives to get the job done as he created his plan. a 10

Herman Cain is a Hero. And that is what we need. He has a soul in him that reaches the heavens and his philosophy matches mine. He can turn around the economy faster than anyone else in a longlasting way. He is willing to discuss and amend his ideas. He is not a ruler. He empowers me. he makes me want to sing, My Country Tis of Thee. Those of us who love our neighbors and our country-we get this. It's about 70% of us, I think. Two Hoots that his foreign policy knowledge is lacking the details-that can be solved when he appoints Newt for Sec. of State. It is philosophy that counts.

On a fraction of the funds that Perry and Romney have spent in Iowa-look who won the Registered Poll.

Herman Cain. a 10+

Romney I will vote for-he is a democrat. a 0

Perry I will vote for-Possibly Cain will appoint him for Sec. of Energy. a 6

Santorum we need this man back in DC.in the Senate.Battling Harry Reid

I'm not bothering with the other two.

Newt Gingrich -- Patriot Rating: 6

His debating skills and his intelligence would put Obama to shame. I believe he should be given more positive & financial support from the conservative and republican parties. In my opinion he can be a winner given half a chance. We need intelligence in our leaders and Newt can certainly fill that requirement.

Patriot Rating is not nearly enough.

We like a Gingrich/Cain Ticket !!

Romney & Perry both don't have the strength that Newt has. He is our brightest star.........JHM

What puzzles me is that you can call yourselves 'patriotic' and rate Ron Paul as a '3'. He's the only candidate on either side who represents the true vision of America, exemplified by his voting record of more than 30 years in congress. The fact you call him an 'isolationist' indicates you must have an allegiance to the military/industrial complex. Go back and study the constitution and the vision of true patriots like Thomas Jefferson.

With regard to the immigration/"Dream Act" issue, I don't understand why Gov. Perry has not explained that the students affected are those who have been in the Texas public school system for the entire time they have lived in Texas. Maybe he thinks everyone knows that education for all Texas students from K through high school is tax-payer funded, regardless of immigration status, because Federal law prohibits asking the immigration status of students. If the Federal law does not change, one alternative is to offer a path to citizenship and in-state tuition to qualified students.

Several people and I agree that, hands down, Newt Gingrich is the smartest, most diplomatic and self-controlled of all the candidates. I like the way he focuses on solutions to our situations without attacking others. I do wish he would change his thinking on global warming, but I believe he is our best choice for getting us back to the constitution and government our founding forefathers set forth.

RE: Herman Cain - always talk of his lack of foreign experience. What experience did our current president have in foreign policy? I certainly don't believe that Herman would make an 'apology' tour around the world!

As a vet, I value military service, but question its inclusion here given that only Paul has military service (altho' he can probably count his "nights in the field" on one hand) -- is it only here to bouy Ron Paul fans?

Overall, good list. Not sure I agree with it all, but the reasoning is good.

I believe it is time that we considered lack of political experience a pro rather than a con. We know what professional politicans have done to this country. Also, Having worked successfully in the real world he will surround himself with people that will be helpful in the areas where he needs to gain experience.

The disinformation about Rick Perry is revealed at this web site

http://peskytruth.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/rick-perrys-negatives/

Suggested reading for Malinda..."As far as President Obama is concerned, it's 'What Constitution?' He has already TRAMPLED the Constitution as we know it and now he thinks he can run things without going through the House of Representatives and the Senate. I just don't understand how he and his cronies think!" --Malinda

I just finished reading "The Roots of Obama's Rage" and "Righteous Indignation". If you can't peg Obama after reading these...forget it!

I am not sure who i am in favor of at this point, i would vote for john mccain again over pretty much anyone in this bunch, heck if it were not for mccain's age and Obamas immunity amongst the press he should have easily won. I think mitt romneys strongest point is that he projects presidentialism, but beyond that he is decidedly liberal any many important issues, and i have trouble voting with a mormon, to me its the equivalent of electing a scientologist anyone who is weak minded enough to believe in the tenants of mormon is not fit to be our nations leader.

In many ways i like ron paul, hes a fighter, hes intense, he knows what he wants, i dont know that he could win the election but he would put up one heck of a fight, i like him in the mix if nothing else than speaking some wisdom into things, he is incredibly smart and well spoken.

Herman Cain has a decent shot at things and his 9-9-9 plan is somewhat promising, people like ideas to hold onto.

Before dismissing Cain, please take a look at his bio. It is far more distinguished than current commentary suggests and far more substantial. It seems to me that the single most important issue facing the USA today is private sector job creation, and this is a man who has actually created private sector jobs with his own management skills. Ronmey has as an investor but not directly, no one else has at all. For me this makes Cain deepest in the area that counts most.

So many times in History, really smart man goes way over the head of the average American citizen and today we are even more dumbed down. I think Newt would be a wonderful president, but can see that he has not gotten the support of the party. It is too bad, because the libs would have a hard time portraying him as dumb, like they do with most conservative candidates.

I find the comment "he doesn't pass the nutjob test" in reference to Ron Paul to be distasteful and offensive. Then you follow it up in your response today by characterizing many of his defenders (and your subscribers) as the same.

Shame on you.

I am still waiting for the Conservative Patriotic Candidate who will stand up and publically swear to honor the oath to defend and protect the Constitution {the original, not that constipated progressive liberal pseudo-living rendition of something constitution like).

I really don't have issues with an individual who has not served in the military as long as they honor our FLAG (scream!!), cross their heart with the 'correct hand' during the Pledge of Allegience, and haven't defected to a foreign country to avoid military service. Bringing back the DRAFT might just eliminate the issue with military service ... YA THINK? Meanwhile, my veteran brothers and sisters will continue to stand beside any president who, 1. believes in God and isn't ashamed to have God in our public places - especially schools 2. honors the divine and natural order of gender amongst all species (if the mix don't procreate - it ain't natural)

3. respects the right to life - which by any measure is the only de facto God given right, but let's not forget the blood shed for "unalienable rights" Patriots proclaim 4. swears by oath to enforce only valid and Constitutionally sanctioned laws as "privileges" and NOT "entitlements" ...when you break the law, you lose the privilege! 5. works agressively to shrink government encroachment into private lives, in CONUS and the rest of the world 6. Campaigns tirelessly to execute term limits on ALL brances of government, and includes limits on ALL PUBLIC sector NOMINATED positions (meaning no more Czars and their cronies on the perpetual payroll) 7. even better ... eliminate ALL Public sector jobs and unions by hiring and filling all 'necessary' positions with American Citizens, or legally permitted workers by posting every job on the internet - no recruiters either, if managers cannot interview and hire to their designated responsibilities, they have no business having the title 'manager' 8. requires that All public sector health benefits, pension and retirement plans must come from the same places in the market that the private sector has as options ... NO WAIVERS PERIOD! 9. by executive order (while the congress is out of session) sign into law the immediate elimination of PAC's, campaign dollars / support from any commercial source, or legally organized group of any type whatsoever 10. THIS COULD GO ON AND ON ... but -

my point is that the Patriot Index seems to be short on issues and long on attributes. Sad to say that you are probably just as guilty of participating in the 'slam game' as the GOP candidates.

Why don't you try building an index of how any candidate(s) (including all parties) measure up to specific issues? I'm sure my fellow posters can certainly provide a humungous list of issues. Then the Patriot Post can research (your strength) the factual positions taken by candidates on the issues. Shouldn't be to hard for us readers to line up who the potentially 'best of the best' might be after that sort of comparison.

I'm just me, but I'm looking for the above and to the degree I get that from a candidate .. my vote goes there.

Right now I feel like a rat on a sinking ship and you know - rats are essentially much smarter than people!

I really like Rick. He is sincere and has no wavering on the issues. I believe he has a record on exposing some corruption when he was in office, but can't remember what it was. Probably too principled for being President.

We've suffered the results of ineptitude and inexperience as a nation at the hand of Obama. We better go with a proven leader with experience. That only leaves Newt Gingrich.

As Speaker of the House, he passed a balanced budget 4 years in a row and clueless Clinton got all the glory. He delivered on the promises he made in the Contract With America, proving that he; 1-knows what America needs, 2-knows what can be accomplished, and, 3-possesses the leadership skills to bring it to fruition. Newt doesn't need the position, America needs Newt.

Personally, I like Rick Santorum... I wish he has not sided with Arlen Specter - which shows even a good man like Rick makes stupid decisions; not sure but my belief is he was improperly guided or instructed by "advisors" with another agenda! Between him and Herman Cain - I think they are the two most honorable men and currently the only two I consider voting for.

Christopher Freeberg Oct 31 2011

Mark,

This is so late you may not read this, but after your bashing Ron paul supporters today I wanted to comment. Incredibly naive? Really? No offence to you Mark, I read you and support monetarily, but on Ron Paul I believe you miss the boat. He has been a congressman for over 40 years and has been as such thru countless wars. The military industrial complex has way too much control on this country. Ron Paul would end that. Could it be you who is being naive? He is the only candidate that would bring significant change to our government. People see he wants to do away with the Dept of Ed and think he is a nutjob. If people became educated on this and other topics, the nutjob label would be dropped by many. Doug Phillips from Vision Forum would be a excellent place to go for re-educating.

Check it out.

Herman Cain - his 9/9/9 plan fails. He says will get rid of social security and medicare and "all loopholes" - plus, the 9% federal consumption tax is based on "new items" and "old items" are exempt.

This would destroy manufacturing and jobs. I think his plan is a gimmick!

Governor Romney as a Patriot, I believe should be higher due to the fact that he's running to save our freedoms and spent 2 years(along with Tea Party) supporting freedom candidates for landslide 2010. He walks the walk ...

His debate skills would also succeed against President Obama and his satesmanship demeanor would make Obama look like a child.

In the video segment where Gov Romney gives his honest appraisal of global warming both Fox and Rush then "fail" to play his entire comment which showed his strong opposition to Cap & Trade.

How can anyone who sees the draconian Obamacare, taxation, intrusion into our lives, redistribution of health services compare what Romney did in Mass -- which was to tackle with courage the out of control $1 Billion waste & corruption in the ER, remedied with private insurance reform. Obama wants GOP to equate his plan. By the way, Romney left office the end of 2006 and Obama came in January 2009 - if he copied anything from Mass it was Governor Patrick or Ted Kennedy. Romney's vetoes were overruled 8 times!

Romneys attention to middle class tax breaks is brilliant to protec and build middle class - as we see socialism removing our middle class. Much better as a starter ... both Perry and Cain have tax gimmick plans that won't work and will take too long to implement.

If flip flopping is the game then Perry flip flopped from Democrat to GOP -- is NOT a conservative, supporting illegals in this depression is not acceptable. We can't afford a president who is not a public speaker. His attacks on Romney were unacceptable, childish and show his true demeanor.

The Republican party is 1/3 evangelical social conservatives and 2/3 republican conservative values voters and Tea Party - based on small constitutional government low taxes and free enterprise. The liberal media is working to destoy our candidates ... and the GOP falls for it sadly.

Romney is their threat, as he can win. Anyone calling him a liberal should read his book ... he has changed positions for thoughtful reasons more than 10 years ago. He understands history and what's at stake!

Our founders came to American for freedom of religion ... I suspect the religious right is immoral if they vote against someones religion or freedom to worship.

Wow, where are you guys from? Mars? I just found your site and thought wow, this is pretty good. Sounds like a real consitutional advocacy, like, um, Ron Paul. Then I read your Pros and Cons of the candidates. Ugh! You people are so way off base, are you even paying attention, or are you from another planet? What you spew forth on all the candidates, including Ron Paul, sounds like it came directly from the mouths of the mainstream media, left and right sides, some truth, but mostly spin to fit your agenda. I can not take you or your site seriously. I think you people are detractors and manipulators. You definitely are not truth tellers. I see right thru your charade. You are neither patriots or constitutionalists. I will warn every one, from the left and the right to steer clear of this propaganda. If you were what you claim to be, you would have Ron Paul at a 9. Not a 10 because no ones perfect. And you know dang well that Ron Paul IS NOT AN ISOLATIONIST, he is a NON-INTERVENTIONIST. Right there is a real clue that you are a propaganda tool. For whom is not clear, but Homeland Security comes to mind and the military-industrial complex is another. Lowlifes.

I am amazed that you score Ron Paul with a 3 while you give Perry and Romney a 6. Ron Paul is Mr. Constitution. He is the only one that will make a serious effort to balance the budget. I thought that the patriot post was about adherence to the constitution. No one else comes close to Dr. Paul when it comes to the constitution. Perry and Romney would both be big government Republicans like Bush was. That discredits the conservative message. And Alexander's Reply: As for RON PAUL!, predictably, a full third of the comments posted were from RON PAUL! supporters, and a number of those provide ample evidence why I noted that he doesn't pass the "nut job" test among most conservative voters. I would have thought that you would decide if Ron Paul passes the nut job test based on what Ron Paul says rather than his followers. Ron Paul supporters are a passionate lot, but we have never had a candidate that is as perfect as he is. Ron Paul is Mr. Clean! As a Ron Paul supporter as well as a supporter of the Patriot Post, I would appreciate it if you would stop with the dismissive attitude towards Ron Paul and his supporters.

Scott in North Carolina

I heard Cain speak of some kind of militarty service he had.

anthropogenic global warming = deal breaker to get my vote

My group RattleSnakeMilitia on you tube and the Group I founded California Minutemen, as well as many in the Tea Party endorse Herman Cain as the pick to the litter. But pushes comes to shove anyone except Obama and Romney. Obama is Communist and paders to Islam and Romney has the Morman agenda and plot called "Constitution by a thred." Both scary. My wife went to BYU with Romney. Just another politico hack with a Mormon twist.

My group RattleSnakeMilitia on you tube and the Group I founded California Minutemen, as well as many in the Tea Party endorse Herman Cain as the pick to the litter. But pushes comes to shove anyone except Obama and Romney. Obama is Communist and paders to Islam and Romney has the Morman agenda and plot called "Constitution by a thred." Both scary. My wife went to BYU with Romney. Just another politico hack with a Mormon twist.

Romney as a top choice? Are you kidding me?

Start at 10:

-1 for being establishment GoP beltway insider.

-1 for RINO-ism.

-1 for AGW support.

-2 for Romneycare

-1 for flip-flops

and the list could go on.

There is no one who is distinguished at this point. A year away? Wake me when it is May.

I don't think you've done your homework on Congressman Paul. My husband used to dismiss him as a "nut job" or a "crank" until he actually read more about and listened to Dr. Paul explain his views fully. He CLEARLY expresses his Christian faith at every event/rally and is unabashed in his "pro life" views.

I STRONGLY suggest you revisit your attitude about him. It's very narrow and very unenlightened.

We evaluate their record of defending Essential Liberty, and their support for restoration of constitutional limits upon government -- including the judiciary -- the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values.

If you were being honest in that statement of how you evaluated the candidates, Mitt Romney would have gotten a 1 or 2. He has no respect for constitutional limits on government. His judicial picks would haunt us for decades. His big government inclination would do nothing to reverse our national slide away from the Essential Liberties and free enterprise. His statements do not show a desire to promote traditional American values, whether the issue is the Second Amendment, abortion, DOMA, or immigration. Low taxes and strong national defense are not enough to garner my support in the primary: This is what George W. Bush brought to the table, and he was a disaster for the Republicans and conservatives. No thank you on a repeat of 43. Electable is not enough. We can do better. While I personally think Cain is the best of the bunch, I would have no problem supporting Bachman, Santorum, Gingerich, or Paul. Even Perry seems a better choice than Romney, based on your own criteria for the evaluation.

And I really do get it, that the President is an executive office, and governorships are a better training than Congress for executive positions. It is just that the person in the executive position must be implementing conservative, consitituional positions -- or the advantage is for naught. For a principled evaluator, a candidate's experience cannot trump his or her core beliefs.

Patriot Post has consistently promoted the conservative, constitutionalist position. For the life of me, I don't understand how you could give Romney a 6 and claim with a straight face that it was based on your criteria and not some notion of who would be most likely to beat Obama. Trust me, if Romney is nominated, the Tea Party will stay at home and Obama will win.

So basically you are saying I am a nut job for my belief that the only real choice for the GOP is Ron Paul? I will admit it now that RP is not electable from a GOP establishment point of view. Several of my friends say the same thing about RP as your piece espouses (Nut Job,Anti war). I have asked them if they can name me one person in the current GOP field besides RP who has voted against unconstitutional laws, wars and liberty destruction. The problem with the modern "conservative party" is that a majority of these folks actually support the wars and spending on the military complex.They also support the freedom detroying patriot act, bank bailouts,currency dilution through the FED, mandates for dangerous vaccines, NAFTA corridor dividing the country, liberty destroying drug war (as they pop another anti-depressant), dead public schools, debt for my grandkids to infinity and beyond, making deals with the Dumbassocrats, repairing Obubbacare instead of killing it, thwarting WTC 7 truth, GWB, Dick Cheney, Cain the ex FED Governor, Romney the closet liberal, Perry the GWB clone, Newt the contract on America, Global Guv as long as they are in charge and anyone but RP. If the modern "conservative" is so intent on anyone but RP then stay home on election day as it will not matter who is elected. I honestly cannot tell any difference between the GWB presidency and the new BHO regime accept the new boy can talk. I will not post here again as I will be deleting this so called patriot site from my small list of true liberty minded sites and of course the Ron Paul 2012 site. So one parting question. If the grassroots rise up and get RP to the door will the establishment GOP follow? See you at the convention.

I like Rick (alot) and the only thing holding him back is not supporting Toomey, thus, belying a compromiser of principle.

I've been reading the Patriot Post for a very long time... I must, hovever agree with the Nov. 1, 2011 3:29:39AM posting of 'Bristled'. And to go a little further than Bristled... for you to state that Michele Bachmann (or any other Citizen, for that matter) "doesn't look presidential"... my jaw dropped... and I began to give second thoughts as to how much credibility to give your publication, from now on.

Ron Paul has a much larger and more diverse base than he is given credit for. He is getting his message to people despite the media - both main stream and conservative - that consistently ignores and/or belittles him. He is the only candidate who will actually make a difference in Washington. We need that difference if the country has a chance to survive.

"There can be no homeland security without border security, and there can be no higher priority than protecting our citizens.

While our focus begins with preventing the worst of the violence currently raging in northern Mexico from spilling over into the United States, the violence is only part of the destruction that can result from a porous border. The free flow of drugs, weapons and people resulting from inadequate security can undercut economic development, education and trade. As such, they can hurt Texas families in every way imaginable, from loss of jobs to the loss of family members to addiction, imprisonment or death.

Border security is a federal responsibility but a Texas problem, and Texas has invested hundreds of millions of state dollars in efforts to support and supplement security forces already in place. Still, this is a problem that will only be solved with more federal accountability and involvement." ~ Governor Rick Perry .... http://governor.state.tx.us/initiatives/border/

I think he is more qualfied than most of them running and he would be a better president than the nut we have now.

If one could cobble together the best qualities of each into a single candidate, then there might be someone worth looking at. As it stands now, I only wish Jim DeMint would run. I think we may witness a replay of Dole v. Clinton or McCain v. Obama in 2012, with Obama securing a second term--God forbid!

Conservatives either need to seriously clean out the liberal wing of the Republican Party or form a new one. We don't need a GOP-Lite, we already have Democrats for that.

Michelle Bachmann does not look presidential?

What does a female United States President look like?

Think about what you know that you want for our country and then compare that to what Ron Paul says he will try to do for it. Its going to take a lot of tea - party electees to accomplish what a conservative president can do. GOD save America!

I figure I'm voting for Michelle Bachmann or Rick Perry. Unless Someone better shows up.

Ron Paul rated a "4"?? Seriously?? Are you kidding me??? Have long suspected the name of this publication, "The PATRIOT Post" to be a misnomer as Republicrats in general in this day and age lean towards principles of communism and tyranny as much as the Demopublicans do. That's right, face it, the GOP is chock full of American communists. Think about it, if the GOP is going to support ANY candidate that feels it's OK for government to STEAL the fruits of a private citizens' labor under threat of violence, be it income tax, property tax (as in a COMMUNity property state) or whatever, regardless of the so called "reason", then the GOP supports communism and oppression. I, as a long time, card carrying Libertarian (remember, The Founders espoused libertarian principles) and a TRUE American Patriot, want nothing to do with the GOP and tyranny. Ron Paul is an American Constitutional STATESMAN and apparently this publication wants a statist politician who will continue the corrupt, oppressive, shameful governmental policies of the last century master minded by international bankers and corporatists. If Ron Paul does not end up on the ballot for president this November, then I will again vote my conscience and vote for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for myself and all my fellow citizens by voting Libertarian and I once again will hold my head high knowing I did not vote like a sociopath by endorsing some traitor candidate like Romney or Santorum. Furthermore, I will no longer read this publication and will send it where it belongs, to my SPAM bit bucket. Then again, since the current traitor du jour has signed the NDAA, perhaps I'll be forced to read this publication in a US gulag. Cogito ergo sum Libertarian!

I would give Romney a 3, not a 6, for being such a Liberal!

Newt is like voting for McCain -- both have backed too many democratic ideas that were wrong for the country.

We have no choice today or tomorrow, if we as a Nation is too survive, for the Obama Administration is not a friend of democracy or of the American Constitution.

It is important for our future and for our Country that we elect a new President and return this Nation "Under God" back to its foundation.

For the famous quote "divided we fail" is today at our very door steps, will we as a country come together and elect a President that will honor and respect the Constitution. Or will we continue on the road of destruction, for socialism will not succeed.

God Bless the United States Constitution

Not my view at all. Ron Paul is only hope we have left. This view is more like Fox News "Fair and Unbalanced".

I do not understand a few things:

1) several comments about ratings, well its on a rating scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest. I've seen mixed comments on the candidates ratings. Correct me if I am wrong, but with Santorum having a rating of 7 down to Paul having a rating of 4, doesn't this mean that Santorum has a higher rating?

2) I am seeing comments about Cain's ratings. Is my internet so screwed up that I do not see him in the ratings? I do not see him posted here.

3) Why would it be naive of a candidate to pull back and limit involvement globally when our own country is in an economic crisis? We are spending lots of time and energy on wars, and focusing on relationships with some of these countries, but I don't fully understand why.

4) We want someone to be tough in standing up for the foundational, or fundamental beliefs of the "majority" of the people in this country, yet know when to negotiate a fair deal to meet in the middle of 2 extremes. We have that idealogy of being fair to all so why do we make mountains out of mole hills. With such a gray society, we need to stop being so sensitive to the small stuff.

5) We have moved towards making big issues of the issues of small groups, not saying we shouldn't acknowlege the issues, but there is a bigger picture of what the majority is dealing with.

6) I do agree that while the article stated this rating system will not be using "electability" be a part of this rating, some of the pros or cons do resemble "electability."

I believe this country would never vote in an older looking candidate who maybe speaks slower, because he/she would not fit into the mold of what we find pleasureable to watch on TV. It is not right, but is the truth, which I find sad. I love my older professors at college way more than the younger, because of their wisdom, not "look." Isn't this a fundamental we are taught as youngsters: to not "judge a book by its cover." If we are Republican supports, then we should stand up to the media and it's coverage as well!!

With that being said however; Santorum may not have the most experience, but he is a wise youngster and not scared to take on the older, more established, "oldies" of what exists now and that takes a lot of gutts which I think would serve this country well!!

My biggest (maybe naive) complaint, if you will, about Romney would be that I do not feel comfortable supporting a candidate that for one has big money in his pocket, and two where on live TV during a debate several months ago, actually dragged out a conversation about the exact words he wrote in his book with Perry because Perry caught the contradictions. To add, he actually, on LIVE TV bet Perry $10,000 as to what he actually wrote. This is a particular concern because here the majority of our country, that represents the working class that produce what makes us money, are having financial troubles due the economy, are maybe lucky to make much more than that in a years time, and last time I checked that is gambling and gambling is illegal in some places here in our country, or is looked down upon because of the problems that arise from the addiction of it etc.

I do want to say thanks for this article and I appreciate your info!!